So our School Committees are rethinking expensive legal services for the four-town Regional High School (Amherst, Pelham, Leverett and Shutesbury) and Amherst Schools (comprising over 75% of the Regional) and, you know, wish to seek proposals for their lucrative "business" which state law requires for any supplies or service over $5,000--except of course for attorneys or superintendents who coincidentally all seem to cost taxpayers well over $100,000 annually.
The current firm, who has been handling legal advice forever, balked at the idea of entering a competition to maintain their lucrative contract; attorney Regina Tate sent (12/4/09) an "I object!" insubordinate letter to at the time newbie Region Chair Farshid Hajir, who apparently rolled over like a beaten puppy.
"I received your emails dated November 19,2009 in which you indicated that the school Committees are engaged in the periodic review of the services and costs of legal counsel, and you asked for the submission of materials. In view of the fact that none of the School Committees has ever engaged in a "periodic review" of legal counsel services and costs during the entire time this firm has represented the school districts, I have assumed that the School Committees are actually searching for new counsel.
On behalf of Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane, I wish to inform the School Committees that the firm will not be applying to continue as counsel."
She goes on (and you gotta hope she did not bill us for her time producing this insubordinate missive): "It is clear to me that the positive relationship which I have enjoyed in the past, and which enabled me to produce excellent results for the Committees, is probably not possible."
A small business owner would not have gotten beyond the first paragraph before picking up the phone and bellowing Donald Trump's patented line, "You're fired!"
Friday, July 23, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Shake up in the Regional School Committee
Sir Richard Hood (rt) Baer Tierkel--the Wizard behind the curtain (left)UPDATE: Friday 7:15 AM
So Mr. Hood (guess I can't call him "Ricky Boy" anymore) is now Regional School Committee Chair after only a few months as member of the venerable Amherst School Committee (and by extension a member of the Region) thus culminating the fastest rise to power since Princess Stephanie assumed the throne of the venerable Amherst Select Board. Must be the power of their blogs.
The vote was 5-4 so Mr. Hood voting for himself made THE difference (all his colleagues on the Amherst School Committee voted for Irv Rhodes.) Catherine Sanderson was voted to remain as Vice Chair by the same 5-4 vote.
##################################
Original Post early Thursday evening
So Regional School (Amherst, Leverett, Pelham, Shutesbury) Chair Farshid Hajir, after only a year at the helm, is about to be replaced because his fellow Leverett School Committee members did not reelect him as representative to the Region this past Monday; although he will stay on--as Chair of course--until tomorrow night when a new Regional Chair will ascend the throne, quite possibly Amherst School Committee newbie Rick Hood, who was recently by cited the Northwester District Attorney for using email to violate the Open Meeting Law.
Apparently Amherst's most seasoned representative and current Regional Vice Chair Catherine Sanderson, is a tad too uppity.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Save the trees, damn the bike path
So the illustrious town Select Board voted last night to oppose a waiver from, you know, the state on widening--but mainly repairing/rehabilitating--the Norowottuck rail trail which produces flat tires way quicker than those industrious beavers build dams.
Years ago the state built the bike path using recycled glass. Except they forgot to grind up the glass. Did not take long for shards to work their way up threw a thin layer of asphalt and wreak havoc on tires that require air pressure. Gotta wonder if it was the same engineering firm that designed the $10 million Umass heating plant that never threw a BTU of heat.
Finally, they want to make amends and do the job right. And since it is kind of a sunk cost getting construction equipment into out-of-the-way areas, they figured why not expand the width of the bike path by 25% creating a safer travel experience for more people.
Not in the People's Republic of Amherst. Losing trees is just too much to bear. So we will have more delays, more expenditure of tax money and eventually the job will get done--beavers and trees notwithstanding.
As usual the 45 minute meeting with this item the only one on the agenda was almost entirely one-sided, although Princess Stephanie did allow 45 seconds for another viewpoint. Hardly fair and balanced.
Years ago the state built the bike path using recycled glass. Except they forgot to grind up the glass. Did not take long for shards to work their way up threw a thin layer of asphalt and wreak havoc on tires that require air pressure. Gotta wonder if it was the same engineering firm that designed the $10 million Umass heating plant that never threw a BTU of heat.
Finally, they want to make amends and do the job right. And since it is kind of a sunk cost getting construction equipment into out-of-the-way areas, they figured why not expand the width of the bike path by 25% creating a safer travel experience for more people.
Not in the People's Republic of Amherst. Losing trees is just too much to bear. So we will have more delays, more expenditure of tax money and eventually the job will get done--beavers and trees notwithstanding.
As usual the 45 minute meeting with this item the only one on the agenda was almost entirely one-sided, although Princess Stephanie did allow 45 seconds for another viewpoint. Hardly fair and balanced.
Media relations: scorpion and the frog
An Anon source used Public Documents Law (although they would have had to I.D. themselves in the original request) to acquire email exchanges from public officials in the venerable Amherst Regional School system.
Yeah, you would think by now they would know better.
I suspect it was the same Anon who asked me a while back how to do such a request (and they wondered if only bloggers and print journalist are entitled to such a magic wand). If so, I'm glad I gave them the exceedingly simple 'how-to' instructions.
They anonymously snail-mailed the results to a friend who, in turn, snail-mailed them to me. And I kind of wish I had them a week ago, so I could have incorporated them into a "final paper" for my online journalism ethics class.
The infamous A-Rod affair:
As some of you may remember, I broke the story of highest paid School Superintendent Alberto Rodriguez taking abundant time off (with pay of course) by publishing the document he casually tossed to the School Committee at the 2/9 School Committee meeting outlining his upcoming days off, vacation and sick time; and then only 8 days later, I broke the story of his sudden departure.
And yes, journalistically speaking I only had one solid source--but it was ultra-solid (and a secondary, slightly squishy, source for corroboration.) The Gazette eventually caught up four days later and they too only had one solid source for their front page story.
But they beat me cold turkey on the A-Rod strikes back front page above the fold story a few months later, moments after A-Rod picked up his final check from the taxpayers of Amherst, where he wanted to "set the record strait" by lambasting the town and highlighted his "accomplishments" over a very short, expensive, tenure.
The June 9 article headlined "Ex-School chief fires on Amherst, questions commitment to diversity, change" by Nick Grabbe, played the classic he said/she said with A-Rod hammering the schools, Regional School Chair Farshid Hajir defending the schools honor and transparently loquacious School Committee member Catherine Sanderson agreeing with the former Super's important points.
All very interesting in a Peyton Place sort of way. No wonder it made the front page, above the fold and was jealousy guarded by the Gazette during production. It also stimulated some fascinating behind-the-scenes emails.
Michael DeChiara, chair of the Shutesbury School Committee (yes, the same one who wants to shut down public officials who blog--mainly Catherine Sanderson) emailed the Gazette:
"In the on-going coverage of Amherst schools, I along with others have come to wonder about the objectivity of reporting by Mr. Nick Grabbe. Today's June 9 article give further rise to speculation that the Gazette has become a mouthpiece for one particular view from the Amherst school committee. This is concerning given the responsibility newspapers have to reasonable coverage and the Gazette's role in the community. I would hope internally there is some discussion about how to address serious issues in a way that promotes public discourse rather than ends up fanning flames by promoting one-sided stories."
And if that was not a mouthful, he continues. "Why was a statement from a possible disgraced Superintendent who held the position for only 8-months receive 'front page, above the fold' coverage if not to highlight issues that promote one side's agenda?"
And then of course we get to the real source of his irritation: "Why is Ms. Sanderson repeatedly quoted rather than the Chair of the committee, Irv Rhodes? While it is known that Ms. Sanderson is a regular source for Mr. Grabbe, given that this is an article about the Supt. one must wonder thy the Chair was not asked to respond."
Yeah, like committee chairs are right up there with God.
Mr. DeChiara also forwarded the missive to Regional School Chair Farshid Hajir who instantly responded:
"Here are some facts I plan to include in a letter to the Gazette to be published; if they don't do it, I will send it to the Republican.
Grabbe sent me the Alberto polemic only under the condition that I would discuss it with nobody, he specifically said if I discuss it with the school committee he would refuse to quote me in his article and he would refuse to allow me space to respond to the article."
He continues, and once again we get to the crux of the irritation: "At no time did Grabbe drop any hint that he had shown it to Catherine Sanderson or any other member. He told me that he had shown it to me as chair of the region so he could get an official response, that he trusted my word."
Although in closing Hajir does admit, "In retrospect, I dropped the ball on this: I could have secured a promise from Grabbe that he would not talk to anyone else, but I just didn't think of it because he was being so secretive and because she is not the chair of anything. I should not have underestimated the coziness of their relationship."
Let's hope Mr Hajir has learned a valuable lesson: never play poker for money until you know the rules of the game.
Mr. Grabbe's article
Yeah, you would think by now they would know better.
I suspect it was the same Anon who asked me a while back how to do such a request (and they wondered if only bloggers and print journalist are entitled to such a magic wand). If so, I'm glad I gave them the exceedingly simple 'how-to' instructions.
They anonymously snail-mailed the results to a friend who, in turn, snail-mailed them to me. And I kind of wish I had them a week ago, so I could have incorporated them into a "final paper" for my online journalism ethics class.
The infamous A-Rod affair:
As some of you may remember, I broke the story of highest paid School Superintendent Alberto Rodriguez taking abundant time off (with pay of course) by publishing the document he casually tossed to the School Committee at the 2/9 School Committee meeting outlining his upcoming days off, vacation and sick time; and then only 8 days later, I broke the story of his sudden departure.
And yes, journalistically speaking I only had one solid source--but it was ultra-solid (and a secondary, slightly squishy, source for corroboration.) The Gazette eventually caught up four days later and they too only had one solid source for their front page story.
But they beat me cold turkey on the A-Rod strikes back front page above the fold story a few months later, moments after A-Rod picked up his final check from the taxpayers of Amherst, where he wanted to "set the record strait" by lambasting the town and highlighted his "accomplishments" over a very short, expensive, tenure.
The June 9 article headlined "Ex-School chief fires on Amherst, questions commitment to diversity, change" by Nick Grabbe, played the classic he said/she said with A-Rod hammering the schools, Regional School Chair Farshid Hajir defending the schools honor and transparently loquacious School Committee member Catherine Sanderson agreeing with the former Super's important points.
All very interesting in a Peyton Place sort of way. No wonder it made the front page, above the fold and was jealousy guarded by the Gazette during production. It also stimulated some fascinating behind-the-scenes emails.
Michael DeChiara, chair of the Shutesbury School Committee (yes, the same one who wants to shut down public officials who blog--mainly Catherine Sanderson) emailed the Gazette:
"In the on-going coverage of Amherst schools, I along with others have come to wonder about the objectivity of reporting by Mr. Nick Grabbe. Today's June 9 article give further rise to speculation that the Gazette has become a mouthpiece for one particular view from the Amherst school committee. This is concerning given the responsibility newspapers have to reasonable coverage and the Gazette's role in the community. I would hope internally there is some discussion about how to address serious issues in a way that promotes public discourse rather than ends up fanning flames by promoting one-sided stories."
And if that was not a mouthful, he continues. "Why was a statement from a possible disgraced Superintendent who held the position for only 8-months receive 'front page, above the fold' coverage if not to highlight issues that promote one side's agenda?"
And then of course we get to the real source of his irritation: "Why is Ms. Sanderson repeatedly quoted rather than the Chair of the committee, Irv Rhodes? While it is known that Ms. Sanderson is a regular source for Mr. Grabbe, given that this is an article about the Supt. one must wonder thy the Chair was not asked to respond."
Yeah, like committee chairs are right up there with God.
Mr. DeChiara also forwarded the missive to Regional School Chair Farshid Hajir who instantly responded:
"Here are some facts I plan to include in a letter to the Gazette to be published; if they don't do it, I will send it to the Republican.
Grabbe sent me the Alberto polemic only under the condition that I would discuss it with nobody, he specifically said if I discuss it with the school committee he would refuse to quote me in his article and he would refuse to allow me space to respond to the article."
He continues, and once again we get to the crux of the irritation: "At no time did Grabbe drop any hint that he had shown it to Catherine Sanderson or any other member. He told me that he had shown it to me as chair of the region so he could get an official response, that he trusted my word."
Although in closing Hajir does admit, "In retrospect, I dropped the ball on this: I could have secured a promise from Grabbe that he would not talk to anyone else, but I just didn't think of it because he was being so secretive and because she is not the chair of anything. I should not have underestimated the coziness of their relationship."
Let's hope Mr Hajir has learned a valuable lesson: never play poker for money until you know the rules of the game.
Mr. Grabbe's article
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Satire is hard, stupidity is easy
I think satire and parody require their own special font. Once again we have a "conservative" commenter--Mark Williams-- jumping into deep shit with an idiotic attempt at satire by posting on his blog a letter from a "colored person" to President Lincoln that he penned somehow thinking it was a creative way to counterattack the NAACP that accused his (now former) political organization with being "racist". Yikes!
Be careful how you use the term "colored person," careful how you use President Lincoln and even more careful how you combine the two.
I'm reminded of my young friend Max Karson getting arrested three years ago for comments made the day after the Virginia Tech massacre about how he could see himself doing that. Of course Max made these comments in a "woman's study" class and Max had previously distinguished himself by getting suspended from Amherst Regional High School for writing about masturbation and gayness and god knows what else.
Naturally the Daily Hampshire Gazette (a puppy to the powers that be) editorially supported the draconian reaction of Boulder, Colorado officials, rather than defending the rough and tumble world of the First Amendment.
But yes, if I were in the Tea Party establishment (and it may come as a surprise to some of you that I'm not a card carrying member) I too would have ejected this idiot for what he wrote on his blog. And if it was just fine, why did he delete it--a cardinal sin for bloggers.
The BIG difference is that Max was arrested and faced jail time from government officials in Colorado for exercising his First Amendment rights, this nitwit Williams was axed by the privately run Tea Party.
I'll drink to that.
NY Daily News (a conservative paper) reports
Max Karson retrospective
Be careful how you use the term "colored person," careful how you use President Lincoln and even more careful how you combine the two.
I'm reminded of my young friend Max Karson getting arrested three years ago for comments made the day after the Virginia Tech massacre about how he could see himself doing that. Of course Max made these comments in a "woman's study" class and Max had previously distinguished himself by getting suspended from Amherst Regional High School for writing about masturbation and gayness and god knows what else.
Naturally the Daily Hampshire Gazette (a puppy to the powers that be) editorially supported the draconian reaction of Boulder, Colorado officials, rather than defending the rough and tumble world of the First Amendment.
But yes, if I were in the Tea Party establishment (and it may come as a surprise to some of you that I'm not a card carrying member) I too would have ejected this idiot for what he wrote on his blog. And if it was just fine, why did he delete it--a cardinal sin for bloggers.
The BIG difference is that Max was arrested and faced jail time from government officials in Colorado for exercising his First Amendment rights, this nitwit Williams was axed by the privately run Tea Party.
I'll drink to that.
NY Daily News (a conservative paper) reports
Max Karson retrospective
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Open Meeting violations continue...
The District Attorny once again rebuked chatty Amherst public officials for using email to deliberate in violation of Open Meeting Law. The email in question from School Committee member Rick Hood opens with "I know this email is bordering or across the line on Open Meeting Law, but I will also say this tonight..." No wonder the Gazette figured it out and passed it along to the DA.
I have a better one, however, but I'm not going to bother the DA--or these days--the Attorney General, since they don't seem to do much. It concerns the same issue which brought Mr. Hood over the line: the Union 26 affair, where Amherst School Committee members are considering leaving the 100+ year old alliance with Pelham because the balance of power is tipped exceedingly in Pelham's favor.
From: Maria Geryk
To: Tracy Farnham, Kathy Weilerstein, Nora Maroulis (Pelham School Committee)
Date: 4/9/2010 11:13 AM
perfect!
Of course the School Superintendent, who obviously benefits from the Union 26 status quo, was responding to the ENTIRE Pelham School committee about an email from Kathy Weilerstein to Nora and Tracy (there's another violation) suggesting wording of a possible PR response should a reporter call concerning the Amherst School Committee meeting to discuss leaving Union 26.
Now I'm sure if a blogger/reporter called to ask about this they would try to use the old "housekeeping" exemption, whereby a quorum or the entire committee can discuss among themselves "procedural" items.
But since the Pelham School Committee did not have a meeting scheduled and they were simply chatting about a possible Public Relations spin response for the media, it clearly crosses the line.
In fact, Kathy Weilerstein writes to Nora and Tracy (4/9/2020 10:20 AM)
"This looks great, I just have a few small comments. I have put my suggestions in ( ). Are we posting this or sending it somewhere?"
Chair Tracy Farnham responds: "Thank you so much! Wonderfully done! I will keep this on hand in case I receive any questions."
The resolution/statement they finally arrived at after trouncing the Open Meeting Law:
"Unfortunately, we the Pelham Elementary School Committee were not formally notified about the Amherst School Committee's decision to review it's participation in the Union 26, the governance structure that articulates the partnership between Pelham and Amherst elementary schools which has functioned successfully for years. Nor are we fully aware of what prompted the decision to review the partnership at this time. Naturally , it would be our hope that the spirit of fair and balanced partnership with which the Union was created, rather than the politics of the day, would inform any discussion of the Union and its continued success."
I have a better one, however, but I'm not going to bother the DA--or these days--the Attorney General, since they don't seem to do much. It concerns the same issue which brought Mr. Hood over the line: the Union 26 affair, where Amherst School Committee members are considering leaving the 100+ year old alliance with Pelham because the balance of power is tipped exceedingly in Pelham's favor.
From: Maria Geryk
To: Tracy Farnham, Kathy Weilerstein, Nora Maroulis (Pelham School Committee)
Date: 4/9/2010 11:13 AM
perfect!
Of course the School Superintendent, who obviously benefits from the Union 26 status quo, was responding to the ENTIRE Pelham School committee about an email from Kathy Weilerstein to Nora and Tracy (there's another violation) suggesting wording of a possible PR response should a reporter call concerning the Amherst School Committee meeting to discuss leaving Union 26.
Now I'm sure if a blogger/reporter called to ask about this they would try to use the old "housekeeping" exemption, whereby a quorum or the entire committee can discuss among themselves "procedural" items.
But since the Pelham School Committee did not have a meeting scheduled and they were simply chatting about a possible Public Relations spin response for the media, it clearly crosses the line.
In fact, Kathy Weilerstein writes to Nora and Tracy (4/9/2020 10:20 AM)
"This looks great, I just have a few small comments. I have put my suggestions in ( ). Are we posting this or sending it somewhere?"
Chair Tracy Farnham responds: "Thank you so much! Wonderfully done! I will keep this on hand in case I receive any questions."
The resolution/statement they finally arrived at after trouncing the Open Meeting Law:
"Unfortunately, we the Pelham Elementary School Committee were not formally notified about the Amherst School Committee's decision to review it's participation in the Union 26, the governance structure that articulates the partnership between Pelham and Amherst elementary schools which has functioned successfully for years. Nor are we fully aware of what prompted the decision to review the partnership at this time. Naturally , it would be our hope that the spirit of fair and balanced partnership with which the Union was created, rather than the politics of the day, would inform any discussion of the Union and its continued success."
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
ARA update
Yeah, we met again this evening (at least Town Hall is air conditioned) and Jeanne Traester was MIA, but the rest of us troopers reported for duty--that evil duty of development. And of course we four were outnumbered 2-1 by "concerned neighbors."
Former Amherst Redevelopment Authority member Nancy Gordon, who was elected to the ARA a few years back (when we were dormant) could not make the meeting but sent along a letter of concern. We are trying to schedule a "field trip" to Storrs, CT. to view "Husky Village" which is a development project along the lines of what we are considering for the Amherst/Umass Gateway project.
She writes: "Although I have never been to Storrs, CT, both my sons have so I asked them for their opinions of the proposed "model" being talked about in Storrs. Here is what they had to say:
Son #1: Although he had not been there often, he recognized the part of the Storrs campus being referred to, and he told me that he understood that was the area of Storrs where most of the student unrest has occurred. Is this perhaps "Hobar Lane #2?
Son #2 has been to Storrs on more than one occasion, I suspect in connection with his band, and he laughed when I mentioned the area. That, he said, is where "all the strip joints are." Is that what we want in Amherst?"
Back when I toiled in Town Meeting the ultimate boogeyman used to sabotage any zoning change was "gas station." Folks would "rise in opposition" saying if we change this zoning now for the current owner with this lovely plan to open a flower shop or veterinary clinic they could suddenly drop dead and some evil republican robber baron could absorb the property and turn it into a, gasp, GAS STATION.
Well I guess we've come a long way. The boogeyman has morphed from a "gas station" to a "strip joint." Heck, that sounds like progress to me.
Former Amherst Redevelopment Authority member Nancy Gordon, who was elected to the ARA a few years back (when we were dormant) could not make the meeting but sent along a letter of concern. We are trying to schedule a "field trip" to Storrs, CT. to view "Husky Village" which is a development project along the lines of what we are considering for the Amherst/Umass Gateway project.
She writes: "Although I have never been to Storrs, CT, both my sons have so I asked them for their opinions of the proposed "model" being talked about in Storrs. Here is what they had to say:
Son #1: Although he had not been there often, he recognized the part of the Storrs campus being referred to, and he told me that he understood that was the area of Storrs where most of the student unrest has occurred. Is this perhaps "Hobar Lane #2?
Son #2 has been to Storrs on more than one occasion, I suspect in connection with his band, and he laughed when I mentioned the area. That, he said, is where "all the strip joints are." Is that what we want in Amherst?"
Back when I toiled in Town Meeting the ultimate boogeyman used to sabotage any zoning change was "gas station." Folks would "rise in opposition" saying if we change this zoning now for the current owner with this lovely plan to open a flower shop or veterinary clinic they could suddenly drop dead and some evil republican robber baron could absorb the property and turn it into a, gasp, GAS STATION.
Well I guess we've come a long way. The boogeyman has morphed from a "gas station" to a "strip joint." Heck, that sounds like progress to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
