Another Multi-blog

Hello folks! We have had another BOE meeting, and I have to again split this up in several small blogs.

First:

There seems to be ongoing confusion about who is entitled to information about the decision-making process and recommendations of the BOE.

Let me explain what type of BOE we have in Fort Lee. It is a BOE of committees; it is not a "whole committee" BOE. Now what that means is that there are smaller sub-sets of BOE members that break away and are responsible for different tasks. For example, there is a Finance committee, a Curricula Committee and so on. This is where the research and development of the BOE’s work is done, and the committee brings back recommendations to the whole BOE, which acts upon the recommendation or discusses it. It works well when experts, like accountants, can use their knowledge to develop a budget or maybe a teacher to work on curricula, etc. It is most effective when all members of the sub committee participate, offer their knowledge, perceptions, experience and debate on what would be the best recommendation for the district. The information the sub committees discuss and use is not public. It is not for public consumption; they are not required to keep minutes for several reasons. There are often student issues, personnel issues, litigation and debate that must be protected to maintain the integrity of the BOE function. These members are the same people we elected to carry out the responsibilities of the BOE and represent the community. We need to have faith that they are capable and that we (as a voting community) made the best decision by voting for them. When the sub committee has decided what is the best possible scenario for the task, it is responsible for and is ready to recommend its findings. Then it gets presented to the whole BOE for review. This is when the recommendation is ready for public consumption--only the recommendation, not the decision-making process or details of the how’s and why’s the recommendation was settled upon. (A Thank You to Mike at the NJ Board Association for some of this information)

I think my point in all of this is that there cannot be transparency to the point the public is looking for it. We are not privy and should not be privy to the discussion that happens at executive sessions and sub-committees. We should ask the BOE to discuss these recommendations when they are presented, and we must be aware that there is an element of trust that the sub committees did their job, and made the best possible recommendation. It is much more productive to ask the members about the supporting evidence for the recommendation rather than the details that were left behind (during sub-committee debates, sometimes weeks before) and continually being derailed by the speculative and assumptive accusations we often feel we need to state. Some acceptance of what their decisions is needed; not everything is challengeable. I would be interested in knowing what your definition of transparency is. What does the public think it should be?

Just a quick point: It needs to be understood that the superintendent manages the schools through his staff and makes recommendations to the BOE but does not run the BOE. They are a separate entity responsible for protecting the best interests of the public the serve. The BOE members need to be held accountable for their own behavior and decisions. I do not want the BOE members trying to educate our children. Leave it to the experts, but make sure you are knowledgeable about why and what is being managed and that it is best for our community.

Second:

Moving the election to November: yay or nay? I say YES! We catch more participation with voters. The representation of the community as a whole is wider and more accurate than the usual school board elections. It also will require the BOE to make it in under the cap of 2% increase of the budget every year, and that is great motivation. But my favorite thing is that it saves approximately $35k per year, and that is a good chunk of change if you know that the average school supply budget is under $50k for the whole year…. So essentially $35k back to the kids is a good thing.

Will it be easy? No. Change never is. Will there be problems? Yes. Will it alleviate some others? Yes. So let’s make some progress. We are smart enough to get over the partisan support and can entice the normally lackluster voters to get interested in local BOEs.

Third:

The superintendent search continues………????  IDK why.

This is just becoming a mockery of process instead of a matter of process. By the time, the BOE can be ready to make a recommendation, any recommendation, for a permanent Superintendent, Mr. Engravalle will have been here 10 months as the Interim Superintendent (alone!!). He has three years as a superintendent at another district, has been our Assistant Superintendent for over a year and in any reasonable assessment has done a great job for us – who else are we going to find that is better? I think we should be trying to keep what we have and get the supporting administration in place. Why would we not stand by someone who can get national recognition via technology forums and cooperative agreements with massive corporations to bring in new technologies to our children? Take a look at this, and this is just a fraction of what is available: 

http://superintendent.flboe.com/modules/groups/integrated_home.phtml?gid=1565665&sessionid=49900b18f61ee9d0cdcbbdb2d21213b2&t=

and

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012302050012

The update to the search: The BOE is trying to get together to create an ad for the papers and sites, etc. Just do it! Isn’t there a template?

Then there was a motion proposed by a BOE member to have the stakeholders meetings reinstated from the search firm contract. It had been removed because the BOE felt it had enough examples through the meetings in October, letters and articles to be able to provide a substantial amount of data to the search firm. These stakeholders are administrators, PTA members, teachers, community leaders and they would be asked what they want in a superintendent. What I have come to find out is that it is an initial supply of cursory information, which does not go too far beyond the massive "wish list" in developing the requirements  for a superintendent. (I called the NJ School Board Association to find out what a stakeholders meeting means and its implications).

So if this happens, and people seem to need it to happen, I formally request that I be invited to voice my opinion (with anyone else who wants to do so) and provide the requirements that I think are invaluable to our district and what I think we need to move forward.

Now I am left with this: I really thought after Monday’s meeting and writing this blog that I would be okay with a decision about reinstating a stakeholders meeting (people want it; they want to feel valued. Okay; not a real big deal. Facts speak for themselves), but the continued acquiescing on decisions is interrupting the BOE’s processes, productivity and undermining credibility and then  this thought keeps creeping in:

This stakeholders meeting was part of the process in past searches. Search firms have been engage in the past, but has this process really been successful for Fort Lee? How many superintendents have we gone through in the past 10 years? 20 years? So are we really  expecting different results from doing the same things? Maybe change  is needed.

Save the $15k- give it to the kids!