A town man has filed a complaint with the state Board of Education asking for an investigation over why a public hearing on the superintendent’s contract was allegedly delayed.
William Schmitt said the Oxford Board of Education should have held a public hearing three weeks after it received a petition from more than 300 local residents on June 17. By law it should have been held on July 8, Schmitt said.
The board instead will have a public hearing Wednesday, July 14 at 8 p.m. in the media center at Oxford High School. The petition asked the board to enter into good faith negotiations with Superintendent of Schools Dr. Judith A. Palmer.
On May 19 the board abruptly voided Palmer’s contract and extended it to June 30. On June 30 the board extended Palmer’s contract to July 31 so that an evaluation by the board can be conducted.
The petition asks for the retention of Palmer and asks the board to propose a new contract for her based on the similar terms and conditions of her original contract which was voided by the board.
As of late Tuesday the state Board of Education’s Office of Planning, Media and Constituent Services had not received the complaint.
“The Board of Education is failing to resolve a situation of direct concern to Oxford citizens in failing to schedule this hearing as required by law,’‘ said Schmitt, who has also filed a complaint against the school board with the state Freedom of Information Commission.
“The board needs to follow the law,’‘ Schmitt said.
Board member Michael Macchio said it is “unfortunate and disappointing,’‘ that the board could not have a meeting during the time frame. Several board members were on vacation and one was unavailable because of a death. Board member Paula Guillet did not respond that she was available, Macchio said.
“I believe this is an attempt (the complaint) by the Democratic party and former BOE members who are disgruntled, to make an issue where there is none,’‘ Macchio said.
He said the board did its best to schedule a meeting.
“We are talking about a couple of days here, not weeks or months, and this was due to extraordinary circumstances,” Macchio said.
Macchio said under the law, the time frame for a hearing on a petition refers to town meetings — and does not apply to the Board of Education.
Schmitt, whose wife Nancy was a former board of education member and now sits on the Board of Finance, denied his complaint was political.
“I went to one Democratic meeting 15 years ago. This issue has people upset from both parties,’‘ he said.
Guillet also denied charges she was unavailable for meetings.
“They never set a date for a meeting and I’m always available. I’ve only missed two meetings in more than seven years,’‘ she said.
Why did Paula not return emails or phone calls from the Chair to tell her if she was available? Her lame excuse was that if she didn’t respond it meant she was available. Anybody buying buying that one? Ok, some of you loyal party dems and former BOE people might…but anyone else?
Sec. 10-238. Petition for hearing by board of education. The board of education of any municipality, upon written petition signed by one per cent of the electors of such municipality or fifty such electors, whichever is greater, the signatures thereon to be verified by the clerk of the municipality, shall hold a public hearing on any question specified in such petition. Such hearing shall be held at a time and place to be designated by such board, not later than three weeks after receipt by the board of such petition.
This is CT GENERAL STATUTE Mr. Macchio.. It was not created by the democrats or the former BOE members you are always so quick to criticize. Much unlike the current BOE chair and Mrs. Kelly, Ms. Guillet according to my review is correct on her attendance. This board continues to act outside of the state statute. Rather than play the blame game, why not fix the problems your board has created. The public hearing on this petition should have been held on a timely basis. You mean to tell me that this board from June 17 to July 14 could not find 5 members to sit for this hearing. Or was it just the wrong members who could attend.I also have reviewed the people who have written letters, signed the petition and attended meetings, and they are not just democrats as alleged. They are across political parties. Quick to blame others, this board needs to do things in accordance to state statute. Mr. Macchio, you tag name on this page.. stopthelies… it exactly what you need to do!
At last night’s board meeting the hiring of recommended candidates was tabled so they could review the files. I have no problem with the BOE wanting to be involved in the hiring process, many boards are. However, did it just dawn on them last night? Why didn’t they express their intentions at the beginning of the process not the end? It is down right cruel to have good people go through the stated process only to have the rug pulled out from under them at the 12th hour by an overzealous Board. Is this just another power trip they are taking at the expense of Oxford’s reputation? And would anyone be surprised if Ted Oczkowski is named new principal at OHS for his loyal support to this board?
About time,
Macchio said under the law, the time frame for a hearing on a petition refers to town meetings — and does not apply to the Board of Education.
This is NOT what I said – it has been misquoted and I have tried to have it changed to what I actually said – which is that the 5 day posting in the newspaper was for town meetings and not BOE hearings. I was not speaking of the hearing timeframe.
We can also talk about who doesn’t show up for meetings – that includes important sub-committee meetings as well. Hmmm. Wait a minute Paula never held any for Policy when she was Chair. Hmm..Did Schwab ever show up at those Finance Sub-Committee meetings he Chaired? I know the previous BOE Chair was physically at the meetings but you wouldn’t know the difference.
Ahh…another “I was misquoted” excuse by a BOE member. Macchio is connected to the Chair like a suckling newborn. Excuse after excuse from these rank amateurs, which is why they are in the trouble that they are in. Just look at what Macchio did at their subcommittee meetings, recommended a budget that is already in a deficite because they did not know how to research and budget properly for insurance. Excuse after excuse…
What in the world are you talking about? The budget we put together was for 10-11 school year not 09-10. That was put in place by that lame previous Board you liked. Deficit or Surpluses for 10-11 won’t be known until May or June of next year. Of course, lying is the only way you can get your agenda across – don’t let facts get in your way.
This is my exact email to Joanne (anybody but OR who is obviously not interested in the truth can see what I was saying):
I believe this is an attempt by the democrat party, and former BOE members that are disgruntled, to make an issue where there is none. We tried our best to get a hearing and have scheduled it as soon as possible (for Wednesday July 14) and I believe the complaints know our intent was to hold it ASAP. We are talking about a couple of days here not weeks or months and this was due to extraordinary circumstances. Furthermore, they are trying to state that state statute requires 5 day prior notice in a newspaper for this and have tried to reject the meeting be held on Wednesday. So, they are not so interested in the timeframe period after all but just making waves in town. The state statute they cite does not even apply to BOE hearing but town meetings. We needed to speak with our attorney to verify this and spend unnecessary costs. These people will be the first to criticize the Board when we spend money on legal fees but these frivolous claims of theirs force us to seek legal counsel to protect the Board from such claims.
Your 2010-2011 budget had a lot of assumptions, such as the number of teachers who were going to retire and they didn’t, so your budget is now inaccurate and one of the line items is the insurance costs, which will put you in a deficit.
The only people lying and making excuse after excuse are the BOE members such as yourself and McKinnon. The problem you have is that all of your lies have been caught, well probably not all of them yet, and you guts are having to dig yourself out of the hole you created.
Paula Guillet should not have even been called because she voted “no” against voiding the contract! The people who voted “yes” to void the contract are the ones who need to answer to the people, not the ones who voted against it! Her attendance at regular BOE and special BOE meetings is exceptional!
How many “Curriculum/Technology” subcommittee meetings did Karen Kelly hold when she was the Chairman? ZERO! Any time she was asked for an update she said “nothing to report.” Maybe if she held her subcommittee meetings, we wouldn’t have the old textbooks. How many BOE meetings has Karen Kelly missed since she was elected in November, 2007? I think she made 23 meetings out of 46 meetings last time I checked. She should be ashamed of herself, resign already!