School Board Thinks

It’s A Private Company

To the Editor:

Why did you want to be on the Board of Education?

I attended the BOE meeting this past Tuesday and fumbled my opportunity during the public participation segment to clearly communicate my frustration with the manner in which the board is operating. The BOE acts as if it is a private company that has no responsibility to the people of Newtown. I will provide examples that led to this conclusion.

Hovey/Liddy Special Education investigation. These are our state legislators who have been elected to be our advocates in all manners that involve the state. I do not know why the superintendent chose to have a confrontation with them, but ignoring a state representative’s inquiry and consulting an attorney does not build a working relationship. Does anyone expect Representatives Hovey and Liddy to be happy after being ignored by the superintendent and disparaged in The Bee? The comment by the BOE chairman that maybe the town could do things better is a clear signal that some of the complaints are probably true. The reality is that parents and citizens of Newtown felt as if they were not being treated fairly and complained to the state representatives. Instead of working through the issue, the superintendent with the knowledge of the BOE chairman consulted an attorney. If the money for that legal advice had come out of their pockets, I bet they would talk first.

Board of Education reporting of transfers. On September 7, 2010, the BOE voted to switch to an encumbrance-based reporting system. In response to criticism, Mr Hart sought the advice of a well-known lawyer, Tom Mooney, who specializing in school finance matters. Mr Mooney, had advised that the school board return to a formal practice of reporting transfers. But Mr Hart said nonetheless, “I don’t see us moving away from encumbrances because they are much more detailed than transfers.” Some time prior to December 2010 an auditor’s report was issued indicating again that the board was in violation of state statue. In February 2011 the BOE returned to reporting transfers in accordance with statutory requirements. What a waste of time and money.

The BOE seems to have a deaf ear to parents’ complaints about scheduling at Reed or the fact that there have been only 134 full school days out of 182 scheduled. Mr Hart’s contention that the operation of the schools must be left to the administration is an attempt to shed responsibility. It is the BOE’s responsibility to protect us from poor performance. Here is a benchmark: Put out a survey and ask the parents to grade the BOE and the school administration on performance, accessibility, and helpfulness. You may be surprised with the results.

If you do not want to help the people who have elected you and you do not want to work with other parts of the town and state government, why did you want to be on the BOE?

Larry Garner

6 Forest View Drive, Sandy Hook                                  June 8, 2011