Superintendent of Schools Dr. Judy Palmer will hold that post for at least the next two weeks.
During a rare Friday evening special meeting, the Board of Education voted to continue Palmer’s employment until at least Aug. 13 to give the board time to review its evaluation of her performance and vote on her future with the district.
The board voided Palmer’s contract in May for what it said at the time was a legal problem with the wording of her contract. But since then the board has put off deciding whether to extend it past its June 30 expiration date and has now twice extended that deadline.
That has infuriated some residents, including former school board members who had worked with Palmer. They held a rally in June to show their support for the superintendent that attracted a large crowd.
Board member Michael Macchio made the motion to extend Palmer’s employment two weeks with “the understanding that the board may extend her employment beyond Aug. 13.”
Board chairman Rose McKinnon said that each board member has now filled out Palmer’s evaluation, and the board’s attorneys will compile those evaluations and release a summary for the board and Palmer to review.
Palmer was not at Friday’s meeting and is currently on vacation, McKinnon said.
“The law firm will synthesize the information,” she said. “We felt that is the best way to do it objectively.”
The full evaluations total more than 100 pages, McKinnon said, which is the reason for the distribution of summaries rather than the full evaluations. Some of the nine board members submitted evaluations of more than 20 pages, she said, but did not elaborate on what information the evaluations contain.
The summaries will be distributed next week, she said, to give Palmer and board members time to review them before the Aug. 13 meeting.
McKinnon also distributed Friday a letter from state Education Commissioner Mark K. McQuillan dismissing a complaint against the board filed by resident William Schmitt.
Schmitt’s complaint alleged that the board failed to schedule a public hearing on Palmer’s contract after a petition was submitted that triggered one. The board had three weeks from receipt of the petition to hold the hearing, but narrowly missed that deadline. But because it did ultimately hold the hearing on July 14, “it has rectified the matter,” McQuillan said.
Schmitt also claimed the board violated the state Freedom of Information Act and the Town Charter, but the state Department of Education has no authority in those areas, McQuillan ruled.
Finally, Schmitt charged that the school board “acted in a manner detrimental to its children” by extending Palmer’s contract temporarily while it performs the evaluation. That, McQuillan said, does not violate statutory requirements, and Schmidt’s complaint “does not rise to the level of a violation of the educational interests of the state” based on the information provided.
Schmitt did not attend Friday’s meeting but his wife Nancy — a former school board member — said he has filed a revised complaint with the state board.
strung along again for another two weeks…
This Board, if you want to call it that, is absolute nuts. Extending a contract one month, then another, then two weeks…they are costing the taxpayers of Oxford a lot of money because of incurred legal costs which could have been better used to hire a new teacher if they simply corrected the error in the contract.
Now we have a summary of evaluations, instead of complete evaluations. How can this Board, most of whom were not seated until December, know anything about this Superintendent or her performance over the 8+ YEARS she has been in place? If they fire her, it will be because the REPUBLICAN PARTY IN OXFORD wanted it. Each of the Republicans on the BOE is a PAWN of the REPUBLICAN PARTY IN OXFORD!!!
Who are the three OFFICERS of the BOE? Rose McKinnon, Bill Neary, and John Lavin.
Rose McKinnon – alternate on the REPUBLICAN TOWN COMMITTEE and continuous rumors about her running for 1st or 2nd Selectman of Oxford.
Bill Neary – member of the REPUBLICAN TOWN COMMITTEE.
John Lavin – member of the REPUBLICAN TOWN COMMITTEE.
This is a POLITICAL action by the REPUBLICAN TOWN COMMITTEE because it has been their goal to get rid of Judy Palmer for over 4 years.
When all is said and done, even if the BOE keeps Judy, the BOE’s actions WILL BE remembered by us and will be used to educate the rest of Oxford as we move forward to the election in 2011.
To DadinOxford
Mrs. McKinnon sat on the previous Board of Education, and by now must know Dr. Palmer very well. If you attended BOE meetings with the previous BOE, you will find that she often spoke up on issues that she felt the Board should address concerning the needs of the children, staff, and facilities in the district. I am not a political person, but my observation was that the BOE was very partisan and disregarded every point she made. The recording secretary (MS) also showed disrespect for her. During her entire tenure on that Board, Mrs. McKinnon always conducted herself with dignity as she continues to do. We have been asking this BOE for information on the Superintendent’s contract. They are giving us what we want, and in a thorough manner. Attorney’s are necessary during this age when distributing any document that has become such a controversial issue as this one has. Perhaps all of this would have been unnecessary, if before we started to cry “SOS” we found out the facts and whether she was worth saving.
TTG…Are you aware that McKinnon missed almost 50% of the last BOE’s meetings, having the second WORST attendance record and the only person with more absences is current BOE member Karen Kelly, wife of BOF member Tom Kelly, with almost 75% of meetings missed!
The MAJORITY of the BOE has ZERO experience with Dr. Palmer, so they cannot evaluate her fairly with only 6 months of experience, unless of course they are doing it because of the things I mentioned above.
As far as giving us information, I don’t know what planet you are on but they have not given us or said anything. They are hiding behind their lawyer because they don’t want to answer for their actions. They are a disgrace to those who served previously as well as the Town of Oxford and they have tarnished Oxford’s image by their antics, which are being directed by the OXFORD REPUBLICAN TOWN COMMITTEE.
TTG, do not even attempt to put facts to Dad (Brett) – he has been partisan for many years and does not care about facts.
What facts has TTG put forward, that McKinnon was on the BOE? Big deal, even a corpse takes up space and this is all either of them (McKinnon and Kelly) were good for because neither contributed any value except to cause a distraction for the BOE.
If you or anyone wants to talk about facts, then put forward the real reasons for this witch hunt on the Superintendant. You and the BOE are acting like cowards hiding behind a lawyer and your afraid to answer questions.
Just wait until we FOI the evaluations and see what each of you have said because those are public documents created by a public agency with public funds, so they will come out and will show that people who don’t even know or have experience with the Superintendant surely do have an opinion.
It is all too obvious that McKinnon is just a puppet of Kelly, Neary and Lavin. She is obviously not the brains of the operation. She is just doing what she is told and she is fool enough to go along. Her strings get pulled and she goes in that direction. The bad part about it is that she doesn’t even know it.
Could any of the current BOE members possibly tarnish the reputation of the Oxford School System more than those of the previous Board? We have one former BOE member who often submits letters to the editor boasting of her teaching degree in English. I have yet, however, read a letter by this member that contains a complete sentence. Another BOE member was subject to a police investigation while he served on the BOE. The Chairman of the BOE did not appear to be attentive at most of the meetings. He voted along with the rest of the crew without expressing opinions on most issues. BOE members were rude to parents when they voiced concerns during audiences of citizens,one example I recall specifically was when parents spoke on behalf of a teacher who was being let go at the high school. They voiced disrespect for the staff in the district at meetings and in the press. I don’t know about you, but I think these examples tarnish our district. I would rather my children would not have had to be aware of them. I wonder what all of the people so critical of this BOE are going to say when the evaluation is released. If it is a poor evaluation that is substantiated, are they going to apologize to these individuals? We know what we lost in the last BOE, but we haven’t even read the evaluation before we’re making judgments on the current one. I have to wonder what the purpose is of such a few people stirring up a whole community? Who does it benefit…certainly not my children
Be careful what you wish for.. I heard the evaluations were over 100 pages. Sounds like the BOE did a pretty comprehensive job this time around. More than the one page puff pieces from the previous boards. I don’t know what it will reveal but it probably will explain some underlying details that will show what is really happening – good or bad or both…
I also hope that the BOE gets involved in hiring the new Principal at OHS. But, then again maybe Dr. Palmer has another friend or should I say past acquaintance in Winsted looking for a high paying job, and she can put them on our payroll.
Explain how a BOE, whose members are mostly new having only 6 months of experience, could have 100+ pages of an annual review? The only way possible would be if they were basing their review on information not related to only the current year and if this is the case, then this is not an annual review.
It appears to me that the BOE is being very thorough. If they have compiled over 100 pages of information that constitutes a poor evaluation based on the budget over the fiscal year and her performance as they have observed it, then she needs to go. This deficit/surplus situation in the education budget each year overseen by the Supt. is a huge issue. Our children are being shortchanged each year when the budget is frozen as the Supt. announces no funds, and then suddenly “finds” money in May or June. I would love to see other parents in the district speak up and let the SOS talker’s know that they are not all ready to string up the BOE, and they do not all think Dr. Palmer is the best Supt. Oxford has ever had.
ChickenFarmer, I think you are wrong in your assessment. In my opinion, the ORTC is just as political and power hungry as the ODTC. From what I’ve heard the ORTC has done little to support the BoE despite its republican leanings. Thankfully, the folks on that Board are doing what they think is best for the town and are not intimidated by the ODTC and ORTC politicians. McKinnon and company seem to be working hard at repairing some of the damage these so called bi-partisan politicians and their cronies did. So don’t give credit to the ORTC but to the BoE Board members.