Should the Magnificent Berry School Meet the Wrecking Ball?

BERRY SCHOOL

A "SELECT" FEW HAVE DECIDED THAT BERRY SCHOOL HAS TO GO!  

Take a long hard look at this magnificent building.   This school has a tradition with Lebanon citizens.   I haven't spoken with one person that believes that this building is ready for the wrecking ball.   In fact, the people in charge thought the school was worthy of investing millions of dollars in renovations.

When power is "taken" by a few determined people they will run roughshod over the rest of us.   They will make decisions that they do not have to pay for.   They will force the rest of us to pay higher and higher taxes for decisions that they made arbitrarily.    Those people will be long gone, leaving the property owners with the long term debt.

The school board has spent millions and millions of our tax dollars to improve and update Berry School.   Very recently, a major investment was spent in the heating and air conditioning system.   They spent huge amounts on a local consultant to advise the district the on implementation of the new system.   Additionally a consultant came from Columbus to help plan the new system.     The consultants were questionable and their services extremely expensive.   I was told that a decent heating and air company would have given their expertise free if the contract had been put out for bids.

A few years ago the district spent $1.5 million dollars on an unbid "energy savings plan" for Berry.   The district recently obtained $3 million by obligating the taxpayers to even more debt that we did not vote  for.   Where was this money spent?      Newer windows can be seen to help insulate the building.   The school is blessed with a beautiful auditorium.  There is a huge addition that can be seen in the photograph.

  

Children and parents love the school and are quite comfortable with this school.   But it doesn't seem to be "good enough" for the few that are determined to destroy the traditions of Lebanon.   This small group will be long gone and we will be left with the debt.  We know that Mark North signed a contract with Beaver Creek  and was on his way out of Lebanon.   Somehow he was given (our tax money) an incentive to stay.   So we can surmise that he will go,  just as Bill Sears left.  They all leave when the debt gets out of hand and these incompetents just can't figure out to fix or hide their messes.    As long as there is a surplus of cash, they will hang around.

Remember that none of those involved in the decisions are professionals.   The superintendent was a teacher, he was not a financial or construction expert.  He was not a professional manager of construction, finance and other million dollar corporate style projects.   He isn't even an economist or CPA accountant.  Neither was Bill Sears.    Multi-million dollar projects need the steady hand of an experienced financial adviser.  They have to pay consultants for everything. They even pay thousands and thousands for consultants to perform  surveys of one sort or another.  A simple survey can be made by anyone.      

We saw the mess that was made with the new  high school and Bowman projects.  The people that, (Bill Sears, Donna Norris (payroll clerk) and ?????),  ran those projects.  What was their expertise?  They didn't have a clue.  They wasted a lot of money (millions) along the way.   

First of all, there is forty acres available at the old high school (now the junior high school) .   Instead of planning a nice campus, the board and Sears bought the Drake Road acreage.  This property did not have any of the necessary requirements of infrastructure for the building.  Knowing this, they went ahead and paid a greatly inflated price for the property.  

Secondly, Bill Sears had meetings with a few people and questioned them about the possibility of building single grade level schools.   Most of the people, including the teachers, advised him to build a normal elementary school.  That it would be better for the children, the parents and save money in busing.     They were shocked when he went ahead and did it "his way."

That same board and Mr. Sears decided to contract with "Laidlaw" to perform the busing of the students.    This was done against good advice from others that had gone that route.   The district tax payers footed the bill for the millions and millions of dollars that was paid to Laidlaw.   The buses were given away.  The district paid the drivers and mechanics.    What did Laidlaw do?   Well, they had a computer program to figure out the bus routes.

Now they have decided to return to "in house" busing.   That means they have to buy new buses.   Remember they gave away the buses.     

It simply doesn't make sense to demolish Berry School.   Our tax dollars have been spent by the millions to improve this Berry School.   Now the board (five people) and Mark North have decided to borrow even more millions to tear it down.   

The proposed levy is for 37 years.  Our great, great grandchildren will be paying off the debt that these few people have decided to impose on us.  That will not be the end of their "wants."   They will be back for more.  They always come back for more and more.

The school board: Donna Davis Norris, Chip Bonny, Esther Larson, Ryan Patterson and Laura Doughman.   Call these people and ask them a few questions.    Mark North says on the cards to call him.   I suggest that you do that.    Chip Bonny is an executive with LCNB.   Does anyone think that he has a big conflict of interest?

SHOULD THE TAXPAYERS REWARD INCOMPETENCE AND FAILURE?

An interesting post card arrived at our house.  It wasn't the usual Lebanon School District's propaganda card.  This card was sent by a group that is worrying about America's future. The large headline on the card says, "OUR COMMUNITIES ARE IN CRISIS."  Quotes on the card were from several newspapers in Ohio.  

Cincinnati Enquirer, "CINCINNATI'S PROJECTED DEFICIT RISES AGAIN."

Toledo Blade, "CITY INCREASES DEFICIT ESTIMATE."

Dayton Daily News,  "CITY OF DAYTON FACING LAYOFFS; MAY RAISE FEES AND 
                                                      CUT SERVICES."

The Columbus Dispatch, "LANCASTER TO CUT SAFETY FORCES."

The card asks for the unions to restore fairness, to respect the taxpayers and require accountability.   That's not asking a lot, but it would make a big difference to our communities and for taxpayers.

Our school district, and all school districts,  return to the taxpayers over and over again asking for higher and higher tax rates.   Many districts push for levies to support the construction of newer schools.  The building sprees often seem to be to unnecessary and only a means to  feather the nests of the superintendents.   It really looks good on their resumes to say they led construction projects. 

Some districts build schools that would compete with Versailles.   In Los Angeles the district spent $578 million on the Robert F. Kennedy School Complex.   The complex will serve only 3,700 students.   It is the most expensive school ever built in U. S. history.   Will this construction improve the intellectual ability of the students served?   It is doubtful.  Other districts have spent similar money and test scores actually went down.

There is plenty of  empirical evidence that proves that fancy buildings and escalating dollars spent do not relate to the quality of education received by the students.  The United States spends more money on education than any other nation in the world.   Yet, our students are not competitive with the students in the rest of the world.   The students in the U.S. placed 32nd among the 65 nations that participated in the latest international tests.  We placed between Portugal and Italy and far behind South Korea, Finland, Canada, and the Netherlands.  We were far behind Shanghai, with its 75 percent proficiency rate.

The percentage proficient in the state of New York (30 percent) is equivalent to that achieved by students in debt-ridden Spain and Portugal.  California, with Silicon Valley, has a math proficiency rate of 24 percent.  This rate is the same as bankrupt Greece.  New Mexico and Mississippi scores compare with Bulgaria and Serbia.  If money would solve the problem we would have the most highly educated population in the world.

A Buckeye Institute report states that approximately 80% of school expenditures are concentrated in teacher salaries.  The salary is determined in large part by seniority.  The seniority policies tend to allow teachers to choose their assignment.  Seniority-based assignment policies allow higher-paid veteran teacher to serve fewer problem and low achieving students.  The Lakota contract guarantees the teachers 78% of the budget.

The teacher's unions do control every facet of the educational process.   Their contract determines the school day, the early dismissal day for union activities (which cheats the student out of a half day of education), who can bid on supplemental positions, and 161 pages of rules regulating the school district.   Of course the guidance for the local district originates at the national level.  Education will never improve until the control by the union is removed and that all students can choose the school that they attend.   Competition will be the best medicine to cure the education problems in this country.

It is almost impossible to fire a teacher so the districts pass the really horrible specimens on to other districts.   This is true for administrators too.   It is called "the waltz of the lemons." New York City has an entire building for teachers that are too unfit to even pass on.  One Ohio district had a cross dresser that stirred problems and that guy was traded for a problem teacher in a suburban district.    As soon as the gossip starts, the person is quietly moved to some other district.

The Lebanon City School District does not have a good record of properly spending our tax dollars.   They do not have a good record of communicating honestly with the citizens of the district.   People who ask questions are not welcome.   They are called out at board meetings with vengeance and vindictiveness.   The police do barricade the door to meetings.   Police cars do patrol the parking lot of the meetings.   Citizens are told to remove their car from the parking lot.    There is a long delay in receiving requested documents.    At least one parent was asked to leave the board meeting and had to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court of Ohio for justice.   That court ruled in her favor.  There is no transparency of public information.  They have been planning to destroy buildings and build new buildings and the citizens do not hear a word of their intentions until they put it on the ballot.  

Lebanon does have a record of not following through with the administration of the district. A case in point is the series of treasurers that could not/would not work with the board or the superintendent.     The current treasurer is the sixth treasurer since Bill Sears was the superintendent.   Sears replaced two competent CPA treasurers with Mary Beth Kemmer,  who took the blame for the mismanagement of the board and the superintendent.   Then Carey Furniss was given the position and he was replaced with Randy Bertram.    Randy went to Northwest School District and Eric Sotzing moved into the position from Middletown to replace Randy.    A well managed district would not have had to change treasurers that often.   As far as I know Bertram, Furniss and the original two treasurers are all at the same district that they left Lebanon to manage.    I was told that Mary Beth Kemmer went into another line of work.

Lebanon has a record of using school employees and school facilities to promote levies.  They were caught handing out signs at the bus garage, they were caught using the schools, the district paid for an expensive system to contact parents and had the records copied so that they could use that information to promote levy activities.   They hired consulting firms with stated agendas, but that provide information that can be used for levy promotion.  They called employees on election day to make sure they voted.  (A teacher told me her principal called her and asked her why she had not voted.)   Do they use paid time or take a vacation day to work on levies?   They do not clock in or out so who knows?

The worst thing they do is use the children to promote levies.   They encourage them to use that time as part of their "community service requirement."   Isn't that grand?   Students get to campaign for the union.    Remember at least 78% of the money goes toward raises.
  

SURVEYS, POST CARDS AND TAXES

ADD TO THIS THE COST OF THE “NOT SO AFFORDABLE  CARE ACT.”

ADD TO THIS THE ESCALATING COSTS OF FUEL, ELECTRICITY, FOOD, CLOTHING AND OTHER TAXES.

Your federal taxes are going to escalate to the above rates.   Make no mistake about it.    The federal government is approaching the $17 trillion deficit mark.    Most of the states and local governments are in an impending deficit condition.   Detroit and California are already in bankruptcy.  All levels of power are willing to take your hard earned income and redistribute it to where “they” think is a better use of your income.   School districts are run by people who think in the same manner.    

The Lebanon school board paid for a “community image study” that states that Strategic Visioning, Inc. interviewed 400 people via phone on April 2 and April 12, 2013.  Much of the information on this study can be obtained on line.   I’m sure any one of us could have called 400 voters and produced a similar “survey.”    As with graphs, surveys are designed to give the people that pay for the survey the results they are looking to receive.

In this case, the powers in charge of the schools in Lebanon, have decided that the current schools are just “not good enough.”   We need to go on a building spree.   Never mind that enrollment is stagnant, never mind that the condition of the nation is perilous and never mind that so many people are working two jobs to make ends meet.  

Of course, this “survey” consists of one graph after another.   One amazing statistic is that so many people have no idea what is the condition of the schools.   For example 42% of those surveyed have no idea of the condition of Louisa Wright Early Childhood Center.   Could that be because the district has a lease with the YMCA to use part of the school for Head Start?

I had an opportunity to view the kindergarten rooms a couple of years ago.  We were given a demonstration of the $15,000.00 whiteboards that had recently been installed in the rooms.    One teacher worked the computer and the principal worked at the board to show how special this system would enhance the “curriculum.”   After a few tries a butterfly appeared on the board.   My thoughts were that it was too expensive and a waste of money for kids that probably watch too much television.  The former kindergarten teacher that was with me agreed. 

Bowman is a new school and 29% “didn’t know” anything about that school.  What the study does prove is that people with children in school seem to believe that it is important to have beautiful new buildings.   People who do not have children in school seem to think that the current facilities are satisfactory.

The same goes for the length of time the person has lived in Lebanon.   Many who have lived here five years or less are far more willing to add more taxes (80%) in order to have new buildings.   These are the people that have no idea of the history of the management of the system for the past fifteen years.   They weren’t here when the “mismanagement” scandals broke out.  So nothing the district proposes would be out of line for most of these newcomers.

The survey tells the board that most of the people who have children in school would support a levy.   The younger the person, the more willing they seem to be to support new construction.

A very small percentage of people believe that Berry Intermediate needs to be replaced.  Only 29% of the people that have children in school believe that Berry needs to be replaced.   Yet that school is the target of the board.  

They asked how the people received information about the district.  Most said the postcards (45%).   In my opinion they don’t get much information from those postcards.   Every word on these postcards (there are very few words) are directed toward establishing favorable public relations.   If people seem them in a favorable light, they will be more willing to pay more in taxes.

The public relations of a school district should be established by the quality of the education that the students receive.   It should not be based on levy campaigns and propaganda.    A few examples of these cards:  July, 2011  speaks to the $6,500.000 levy that the board  and administrative team “worked on for several months.”  Shouldn’t they be working on academics and programs for the children?  Most people expect the schools to provide students with an education that provides a person to be able to critically think for the rest of their lives.   This board and administration are on a constant levy campaign; one levy after another.

They “work for months” to put another levy on the ballot after an 8.2 mill levy failed in May of 2011.  Put this fact under your hat, they couldn’t live without 8.2 mills in May, but were willing to drop to 3.78 mills in November.  Did they find $3 million somewhere?  They come to us over and over.   They say that it will be ONLY $115.75 additional on a $100,000 home.   What about the additional on business property?   Is $115.00 so insignificant to these people.   Well, it is a lot to some people.   Ask all of those who lost their homes.

In September of 2011 the postcard from Mark North is a brag piece about the ACT scores which were very mediocre when compared to districts over the country.   They never mention on their graphs that 36 is the top ACT score.  They never mention who takes the test.   They don’t mention on their postcards that a 33% is passing on the 8^th grade reading test.    Hard to imagine anyone bragging about a 33%, but most districts do put out P.R. about how well their district did on the 8^th grade test.  When they tell you they met “the state indicators,” do they give you the actual scores?  The state tells the Average Yearly Progress.  Lebanon didn’t meet all of those indicators.    In fact Lebanon didn’t pass the progress for the gifted and the handicapped.  This is unconscionable.   The gifted will be the leaders of tomorrow and the special children need special attention to survive in this world.   

The January, 2013 card complains about the new state standards.   Where were they when the congress and Department of Education were pushing Common Core?   They are saying that the Third Grade would have “higher standards.”   They should have always had the highest standards for reading, writing and arithmetic.   Critical thinking skills are a matter of surviving.    

This card had a few words about teacher evaluations.  “If the expectations were not met, educators were no longer employed in the district.”   Wow!  Those are fighting words.    We all know that Lebanon bows to the LEA.  Does anyone really believe that the board has the power to fire a teacher?  I know of a few that were allowed to move to another district.  The legal bills to fire a teacher would far surpass those that took the district to the Supreme Court of Ohio against a parent who asked them to abide by the “Open Meetings Act.”  

WHY DID LCSD TAKE A PARENT TO THE OHIO SUPREME COURT?

The majority of the taxpayers of Warren County, specifically the Lebanon City School District taxpayers, probably believe that their hard earned money is being used to educate our children.   People want to believe that the primary consideration of “their” government schools really is in the best interests of “the children.”  Nothing could be further from the truth.

Does anyone know about the case of the school district going after a taxpayer and mother of Lebanon students?  The case proves that the Lebanon school board and the superintendent do not want the public to know what they are doing with your tax dollars.

The “Ohio Sunshine Law” or the “Ohio Public Records Act” is summarized as follows, “The Ohio Public Records Act is built on centuries of American legal tradition that the records of government are “the people’s records.”  The Public Records Act provides the public with procedures to request records from any public office in Ohio, while protecting certain specific types of records from release.  It also establishes a legal process to enforce compliance when a requester feels that a public office has failed to satisfy its public records obligations.

The “ Ohio Open Meetings Act”  requires public bodies in Ohio to conduct all public business in open meetings that the public may attend and observe.  This means that if a public body is meeting to discuss and decide public business, the meeting must be open to the public.

A little history is relevant to the saga of how the Lebanon School Board reacts to citizens attending their meetings.   The venue for the meetings was changed to a “room” at Holbrook Elementary.   Previously the meetings were held in a large conference room at the high school.   This room had audio-visual equipment, long tables and plenty of space.   The small space now used curtails the number of people that can attend the meetings.

Secondly the minutes used to be kept verbatim.   Donna Davis-Norris made a motion to cut the minutes down to a rephrasing system that was general and basically covered the topic.

The board rarely discusses, in depth, any policy, purchase, or levy in public.  Usually the vote is 5 – 0 with very little discussion.    One would have to conclude that these expenditures are discussed privately.   

The case of the parent is as follows.  

On January 17, 2011 the parent attended a “Special Meeting” held by the school board.   She was the only “member of the public” attending this meeting.   The purpose of the meeting was to review a presentation by a hired consultant from “Strategic Visioning, Inc.”  (I will report on this report in another essay.)  The company had called 400 people to obtain the opinions of the community pertaining to a new levy proposal.

At this meeting the superintendent walked up to the mother and asked her to leave the room or he could escort her to the exit.    The board had decided to go into “Executive Session” and the public would not be allowed.  

“Certain” people were invited into this meeting.   The mother felt threatened by the attitude and demeanor of the superintendent and left.

 

The “Executive Session” was not announced until the board saw a member of the public (a taxpayer and mother of students) in attendance.   It was pretty obvious that the board did not want the lady to know what was being discussed.  

The board is obligated to approve the minutes to their last meeting at the next meeting.   Often requested minutes are not “available.”  

The parent retained legal expertise and took the complaint to the local court.   As is usually the case, with school issues, that local court ruled in favor of the district.

The mother subsequently appealed her case to the Twelfth District Court of Appeals.  That court ruled in favor of the parent and against “the district.”  The district refused to accept the verdict and appealed the case to the Ohio Supreme Court.   The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled in favor of the parent and thus against the “policies” of the LCSD.

Some of the points of the case discuss that the parent requested minutes of the January 17, 2011 meeting on January 25, 2011.   The treasurer did not respond to her request until March 22, 2011.   He told her that the minutes to the “Special Meeting” were not taken and were not available.  He called the meeting a “workshop.”   The treasurer later testified that the meeting was not recorded with their audio equipment.   The meeting was recorded with “notes” that were not approved until April 18, 2011 – three months later. 

The court said, “We consider all of the issues raised in this appeal mindful that public records are the people’s records, and the custodians of those records are merely trustees for the people.”  “One of the strengths of American government is the right of the public to know and understand the actions of their elected representatives.”  “This includes not merely the right to know a government body’s final decision on a matter, but the ways and means by which those decisions were reached.”

The open meetings act of R.C. 121.22 provides that the statute shall be liberally construed to require public official to take official action and to conduct all deliberations upon official business only in open meetings unless the subject matter is specifically excepted by law. R.C. 121.22 (A).  All meetings of any public body are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and the minutes of a regular or special meeting of any public body shall be promptly prepared, filed, and maintained and shall be open to public inspection.  R.C. 211.22 (C). 

Further in the court’s decision was the fact that an Ohio  school board was removed for nonfeasance with regard to a number of matters or grounds. The were removed for alleged gross neglect of duty, misfeasance, malfeasance and the trial court found that board had violated the open meetings act and the public records act when it delayed formally approving meeting minutes.

Executive Sessions are only allowed for seven specific purposes, R.C. 121.22 (G).  These are:

1.      The appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion,    demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official, or the investigation of charges or complaints against a public employee.

2.    The purchase or sale of property for public purposes.

3.    Conferences with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public bod that are the subject of pending or imminent court action.

4.     Preparing for, conducting, or reviewing negotiations with public employees concerning their compensation or other terms and conditions of their employment.

5.      Matters required to be kept confidential by federal law or regulations or state statutes.

6.    Details relative to the security arrangements and emergency response.

7.      Issues involving a county hospital.

The minutes of the meeting of January 17, 2011 stated purpose was to “discuss negotiations with public employees.”  But, the superintendent asked the board to enter into an executive session to discuss “time lines.”  He also stated that no board action would be taken.  

The Lebanon City School Board seems to prefer to carry on the public’s business in relative secrecy.   I have attended the board meetings for several years and found our representatives on the board unwilling to  openly answer any questions.  This forces the taxpayer to dig and delve into reams of papers to find an answer to a simple question.   I'm of the belief that they hope no one will bother to take the time to read and translate all of these documents. 

Maybe even they do not know the answers to any financial question or they don’t want us to know what they are doing with our tax dollars.   My conclusion is that they DON’T WANT US TO KNOW.  Although I do have an opinion on the intellect of some of them.

This board is willing to take a parent to the Ohio Supreme Court in order to keep her out of a meeting.   They had other people in that meeting that had no right to “negotiations.”    The survey taker was even invited.

Imagine the money, time and effort that was taken from school business to take this case to the highest court in Ohio.   The district can spend as much money as it wishes against parents and taxpayers.   After all, it is not their money – it is our money.    That was money that we intended to produce literate American citizens.

In my opinion, the Lebanon school board should have been removed a long time ago.    A court case should not have to take place just to prove the way the Lebanon school board treats members of the public.  It is evident that they are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of your tax dollars against anyone that tries to expose their actions and the way they spend your tax dollars.

   

Some of us did manage to expose their abuse of power.    At that time the treasurer, superintendent, cafeteria director, athletic director and others escaped from prosecution and full exposure by leaving.    The board allowed this to happen.   Sadly one of those board members still sits on the board. 

Jackson Hedges, Katie Poitinger, Orville Robinson and Lee Wiederhold are no longer on the board.   (Poitinger, Robinson and Wiederhold are teachers)  The other member, Donna Davis Norris is working for SWOCA (a school supported consortium) and her husband was the president of the teacher’s union.    So, at least four members of the board had some loyalty to the teacher’s union and not the taxpayers, students or parents.

Anyone that attends a board meeting can quickly ascertain that Ms. Norris is pretty much in charge.   The current board does not welcome “we the people” to their meetings.   We are the people that pay the bills, but any questions are not wanted.   They limit a “member of the public” to three minutes at the beginning of the board meeting.   That is before the board discusses a subject on the agenda. They never answer your question.   The standard response is, “We’ll get back to you.”   They never do.   At least, I don’t know of anyone getting a response from a board member.

I do thank and support the parent that had the courage to take her case to the court system.    It was an extremely brave action on her part.   After all she had children in the Lebanon school system.  The district has the power to take action against her children and her family.

I do not mention her name because I do respect her privacy.

My questions for the people think about are:   “What are they hiding?”   

“Why are they willing to be so openly hostile to the people of Lebanon?”   “Why doesn't the local newspaper report the facts?”   

See Where The School Taxes Are Spent

From eagnews.org

NEA Spending

The following article is an example of how school districts from all over the nation spend tax dollars that are supposed to used for educating our children.   The waste and abuse is in virtually every school district.

I have been reading school district financial reports for over thirty years.   I have helped people from many districts obtain and understand the financial reports.    The people in charge of these districts are able to waste the money meant for education because very few people bother to hold them accountable.

Yes, there is a state audit, but the district is allowed to choose the accounting firm that performs the audit.   In the case of Lebanon, I heard board member Donna Davis Norris say at a financial committee meeting that  "Clark, Schaefer and Hackett" was the only firm that she felt comfortable with.   What did she mean by that statement?    Maybe that they marched to her drum. 

I do know that Clark, Schaefer and Hackett did perform a "Forensic Audit" that they read to the board in "Executive Session."   I repeatedly requested a copy of that audit and was told over and over again that "you will never see that audit."    A high ranking official told me that the audit would never be in the district's files.   No one will ever see that audit.

The taxpayers are entitled to see that audit.   We paid dearly for that audit.   What are they hiding?

I don't know her real reason for choosing Clark, Schaefer and Hackett, but I do know that when Ms. Norris was at the helm Lebanon had to go under state control.   I do know that the district was spending so much money that they had to go to court and have a judge give them permission to transfer money from other accounts.  (This request is an extremely rare occurrence.)    LCSD didn't have enough money in the General Fund to pay their bills.  They had no one capable of managing the funds.  An interim treasurer was amazed at just how sloppy the financial situation was managed.  He said he found past due invoices in the drawers, purchase orders (when they were executed) were being post dated and all the time the treasurer kept telling the board how serious the financial situation was.  (Read the minutes. I did.) 

The superintendent was allowed to hire a novice treasurer.   He then blamed her for every problem that occurred.  When the treasurer left Lebanon, she was never interviewed by the paper and no member of the public could speak to her. 

The same routine happened when the cafeteria director, the athletic director and others were allowed to quietly leave Lebanon City School District.   These kinds of of incompetent people all move on to other districts or jobs without suffering the consequences of their actions.

Please read what happened in Patterson, N.J.          

PATERSON, N.J. – Here’s one way to sum up the situation in the Paterson school district: The rich (school administrators and lawyers) keep getting richer while a large percentage of students aren’t getting the education they deserve.

EAGnews recently completed an inspection of spending in the Paterson school district, at least to the limited degree that secretive school officials allowed.

The inspection was part of our ongoing national effort to publicize spending patterns in selected public schools and bring more transparency – and hopefully public awareness – to the process.

We learned at least 23 administrators in the Paterson district made more than $100,000 per year in salary in 2012-13, before the value of any benefits were counted. The list included a superintendent, six assistant superintendents, one deputy superintendent and a chief of staff.

We learned that the district’s lawyers also made out well, to the tune of $657,290 in legal fees in one academic year. A big percentage of those fees were the result of legal work related to the district’s dealing with the labor unions.

And we learned that the district spent $647,663 on tuition reimbursement, presumably for teachers who took advanced level college classes that year. That’s a major investment considering numerous studies have shown that teachers with advanced college credits are no more effective than those without them.

We hoped to highlight other union-related labor costs – which we have reason to believe are very high – but the district would not provide them.

The district’s total operating budget for the year was $473 million. Per pupil spending in 2009-10 (the last year available) was $22,015. So what did all that money buy?

Twenty-five of the 45 schools in the district are struggling to meet state academic standards. Nineteen are classified as “focus schools” due to low graduation rates and low academic performance, while the other six are classified even lower.

The graduation rate in 2012 was an embarrassing 66.3 percent.

It seems like that amount of money should purchase better results.

Administrators and lawyers

The top salary on this top-heavy administrative team went to Superintendent Donnie Evans, who made $205,000 in 2012-13.

Also on the well-paid list are Assistant Superintendent Susana Peron ($142,650), Assistant Superintendent Michelle James ($140,700), Assistant Superintendent Brenda Patterson ($167,984), Assistant Superintendent Aubrey Johnson ($140,000), Assistant Superintendent Eileen Shafer ($164,507), Assistant Superintendent Joanne Riviello ($147,350), Acting Deputy Superintendent Marguerite Vandenwyngaard ($175,000), Director of Communications Teresa Corallo ($115,000), Accounting Manager Daisy Ayala ($104,676) and Fiscal Monitor Antoniette Scholing ($104,414).

Also bringing in the big bucks were Project Manager Anthony Infante ($112,512), Interim Site Coordinator Benjie Wimberly ($111,826), Director of Non-Traditional Programs Carol Smeltzer ($115,851), Food Services Director David Buchholtz ($149,760), Technology Director Emilio Barca ($117,865), Chief of Staff Jacqueline Jones ($140,961), Safety Director James Smith ($121,049), Network Technician Jihad Saleem Jr. ($101,601), Project Engineer Kim Ky ($103,397), Risk Management Officer Laureen Maloney ($121,367), Labor Relations Director Luis Rojas ($110,058) and Purchasing Supervisor Neville Williams ($100,595).

The total salary for those administrators alone – and there are probably more we didn’t find – was $2,809,123.

The administrative team was not overworked, despite the inflated salaries. They each were scheduled to work a contracted 233 days per year, with 37 paid leave days allowed.

If any of them used all of their eligible paid time off, they worked less than 200 days per year.

Another massive expense for the school district were legal fees, which totaled $657,290.

About $543,000 of that total was spent on legal services labeled by the district as “general” or “risk management.” The remaining balance of the legal costs – about $114,000 – were the result of attorneys working on district labor union issues, including work-related grievances and arbitration.

It’s well documented that union collective bargaining (and associated controversy) is a huge distraction from the education process. Hopefully the public will also start to understand the financial burden of having organized labor in public schools.

Teacher union contract costs

EAGnews asked the district to answer a series of questions about the costs of various provisions in the teachers union collective bargaining agreement.

They only answered one, having to do with tuition reimbursement, presumably for teachers, which came to $647,663.

We’re not surprised the Paterson district refused to divulge the other costs. We were able to secure similar information several years ago, for the 2009-10 school year, and the dollars spent were outrageous.

For instance, the district spent $16.8 million that year on compensation for teachers who were not working for one reason or another; $445,527 on an attendance incentive program; $2.4 million on reimbursement for unused sick days; $6.4 million on automatic, annual raises for teachers, regardless of performance; and $1.2 million in extra pay for teachers to monitor student lunch rooms.

How much have those costs grown over the past few years? Perhaps the district would tell parents or local media outlets, if they cared enough to report this stuff.

Unanswered questions

As indicated above, Paterson school officials offered few details about most of their expenditures.

The basic records they provided gave a few skimpy details in a couple of categories.

The district spent $68,015 on travel, and nearly half of that total was spent at some type of conference at the University of Maryland, where the district dropped $26,700 for travel expenses, registration, meals, lodging and other items.

We were also offered a few details about the district’s $10,041 restaurant tab. A total of $4,095 was spent at La Neve’s Cedar Cliff on Dec.16, 2011 for the annual “Parent of the Year” breakfast. Another $2,000 was spent at the Jacksonville Cafe on June 29, 2012 for what the district described as “other services,” while $1,680 went to Frank’s J & D Pizzeria on May 15, 2012 for lunch for High School Proficiency Assessments at Eastside High School.

Fewer details were included with the hotel tab, which came to $12,199. One charge, for $2,090, was with Trump Plaza Hotel Reservations for “travel-conventions/conferences MEA.” Another entry on the hotel log, a charge of $6,932 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, is described as “travel; other objects.”

The district spent $127,829 on cell phones, but wouldn’t tell us how many employees get the phones or why they need them.

We’re left to guess the reason for other types of spending, including $416,037 on “moving and storage,” $6 million on “leases,” $436,310 spent at the Paterson Mall Shopping Center and $50,000 at Barnes and Noble.

The Superintendent's Contract Information

The salaries listed in the previous post were for 2012.   Currently the 2013 salaries are not available.   Some of the employees listed for 2012 are no longer employed by the district.   For example Sam Ison is now employed in the Middletown School District and I was told that Becky Hill is no longer an employee of Lebanon City School District.  

An important factor in any discussion of salaries is the additional perks that go along with the contract.  For example, Mark North’s contract was written in and signed December 21, 2009.     It will expire July 31, 2014.    His salary is listed as $127,749.00.  (Was he given a raise during that period of time?  We will ask.) 

The board pays his retirement benefits and his share of his retirement (pick-up on the pick-up).  That is a total of around $30,000.00.  

The board retained the right to increase his salary at any time prior to the expiration of his contract.  Did they?

The board pays his Medicare contribution. 

The board pays for $500,000.00 life insurance policy. 

The board covers 100% of his family major medical, dental and vision coverage. 

The board covers his family membership to the Countryside YMCA.   

He is entitled to accumulate and retain all accrued, but unused sick leave while employed as superintendent. 

He shall receive an allowance of sick leave and severance pay in an amount equal in accordance with the amount of days granted to other certificated employees immediately upon retirement.

He shall receive $650.00 per month ($7,800.00  annually) as additional salary allowance for the use of his personal automobile for school purposes.

He shall receive $50.00 per month for a cellular phone.

The Board shall purchase a tax-deferred annuity program of the superintendents choosing in the amount of $7,500.00 per year.

His contract year is 260 days with twenty days of vacation each year.

He is entitled to all holidays provided to the certified staff.

He shall receive the same number of personal leave days each year that are provided to the certified staff.

The board shall pay his dues for membership in American Association of School Administrators, Buckeye Association of School Administrators, Association for the Supervision and Curriculum Development and local Kiwanis and Rotary Clubs. 

He is permitted to attend one national conference annually with the actual expenses reimbursed by the board. 

He shall be encouraged to become an active participating member of organizations pertinent to his position and to attend appropriate professional meetings, the actual necessary expenses of said attendance to be approved by the board.

He may take special leave to engage in consulting, lecturing and conference speaking engagements and research without a loss of pay or a charge up to five days annually.

The board shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify up to the amount the board has provided insurance for this purpose. 

The board shall provide $1,500.00 annually which shall be utilized for college tuition reimbursement and may be carried over to the next fiscal year.

*In the interest of brevity, this information is paraphrased from his contract.

 

I believe you will remember that on July 9, 2009 Mr. North “had a sudden change of heart” and left Beavercreek "without leadership."   Mr. North had signed a contract with Beavercreek for $139,000.00 per year.  (See the Western Star article by Christopher Magan.)

His contract, ending July 31, 2009, with LCSD was listed as $108,000.00.   His car allowance at that time was $350.00 per month.  He had another contract ending August 20, 2007 at $111,240.00 per year. 

Some questions to ponder are, why would he accept a decrease of $3,240.00 from his 2007 contract to his 2009 contract?    The numbers, for public consumption, just don’t seem to be reasonable.   Also, why would he take such a huge cut in salary to return to LCSD?    These are questions that were never answered.

Many believe that Donna Davis Norris negotiated with Mr. North to return to LCSD.    The media reported that she did not give him a raise to entice him back to the district.   Since these things were negotiated in “Executive Session” or privately, the public will never know the facts.

Property owners and business owners pay huge taxes to support the school system.   Yet, we are kept in the dark as to where our money is actually being spent.   Often the board meetings are rigged with union members occupying most, if not all, of the few seats that are provided in the small room that is currently being used for the board meetings. 

 

The meetings used to be held in a large meeting room at the high school.  In fact that is where the board was meeting  the night Mr. North and his family were introduced. That facility was perfect and offered plenty of space for the public, the employees and the board.    In the event of an overflow crowd,  the cafeteria could be used and is conveniently located.

Obviously, the board does not want to be observed conducting the district’s business.   They do not want the public to have even a small voice in the way their tax dollars are spent.  In fact, I was told that they did not have to notify the public of their meetings other than a "post-it-note on the door.

It is interesting that the Lebanon City Police Department has been  guarding the board meetings.   I can verify this because I was not allowed to sign in to speak and threatened with being arrested if I tried to sign in to speak.  A person with a "Vote No on the Levy" sign on her car was told by the police to get off the parking lot and the street.   He said by orders of Mark North.

This is a sign of the times for school board meetings nationally.   In fact very recently,  a parent was arrested in Maryland for trying to speak at a “Q & A” board meeting.    Strange!   A “Q & A” meeting and you are not allowed to speak.