by Thaddeus Flint
An email exchange forwarded to the Eastwick Press provides an alarming look at the Berlin Central School Board’s actions in their attempt to hire a new Superintendent of Schools for the District. The emails contained statements not normally heard at meetings between Board Members Alan Webster, Jr., Bev Stewart, Board President Gina Goodermote and Board Vice President Jim Willis.
From the emails it appears that of the two finalist candidates for the new District Superintendent, Stephen Young and Virginia Keegan, the Board voted 7-0 to offer Young the position. Goodermote, as Board President, then contacted Young. “He was not offered the position…… I asked him 3 questions…He asked me if he was being offered the position, and I said no. We still had to check references and meet before any decisions were made,” wrote Goodermote in an email to Webster and Stewart with a copy to the rest of the Board on July 19. She continued, “This note is confirming my original thoughts that this search is tainted. And unless I am assured differently, as far as I am concerned we can start a whole new search.”
The next email is a reply from Stewart on July 20. “Gina, The board had a 7-0 vote to hire Mr. Young and this would be contingent upon his references checking out. Sometimes as board president you will need to follow through and do things as a board officer even if you don’t fully agree with it. The process is not tainted as Frank stated a few meetings ago…We have 2 very good candidates and it would be extremely harmful to our district to let them go. The district has waited a very long time to find a permanent leader so we can have some stability as we move forward. The actions discussed in your email will only further divide this district and create more anger.”
Willis also seemed surprised that Young had not been hired. “I guess I am a little confused. My understanding was that the vote we took was to HIRE Mr. Young as long as his references checked out. From the feedback I have heard, his references have checked out. At this point, we need to communicate with Mr. Young and negotiate a contract. This needs to be done NOW not later. If there is some other reason why we should not hire Mr. Young, we need to know right now,” wrote Willis on July 20.
Webster wrote back around four hours later. “Members of the BOE, Failure to contact Mr. Young and to offer him the position is a dereliction of duty by BOE President Goodermote. I find her questions to Mr. Young offensive and inappropriate. She is ignoring a BOE directive.” Webster went on to detail what should be done next to save the hiring of Young. He ended his message with the following, “Vice-President Willis immediately call a special meeting for BOE Re-organization to remove President Goodermote from position for dereliction of duty.”
Stewart probably summed up the one thing everyone on the Board could agree on, “I don’t want this to turn into another press nightmare,” she wrote. Their nightmare might now be real.
Goodermote’s News Release On Lead Criticized
Add to this that a press release written by Berlin School Board President Gina Goodermote on the lead paint problem at the Berlin Elementary school has come under criticism by Board Member Webster who stated in an email last week separate from the exchanges above, “I had no knowledge that a press release of any topic was to be delivered from the Berlin Central School District. As an individual BOE member I do not support the contents within this ‘Long Term Lead Solution For BES’ press release.”
The press release, dated July 20, outlines the two stage process which has already been undertaken as of September 2010. “A very strict and regimented cleaning procedure approved by the State Education Department and Department of Health was followed. It ensured students safety. In December 2010 the second stage Lead Stabilization project was completed. It STABILIZED THE LEAD and gives the district time to work with the community to develop the final project that will be a long term solution,” states the release. Continuing efforts to address the lead problem have been hampered in the last six months by, amongst other things, “a divided Board of Education.”
One of the priorities of Board of Education this year, according to the release, is putting together the capital project that will be “a permanent long term solution” for the lead problem. Goodermote is quoted in the release itself, saying “The Board of Education will work together and with the community to design a project. We want everybody to pitch in!”
The release then goes on to place blame for the stagnation of the project so far on a “small group of individuals” who are not named. Responsibility for the current state of affairs has thus fallen onto this shadowy faction who “do not want the community to come together to address the important issues because it does not fit their single issued agenda.” This “single issue agenda” is not expressed in the release. According to Goodermote, they are not without power as this is the same group “that tied the district up in controversy and contributed to the delay in addressing the long term project.”
Webster could not sit by and remain silent with what he saw as the “unbridled commentary” in the release. “The press release is also misleading, inaccurate, and discordant,” stated Webster, who explained that these observations are his own and do not represent the Board of Education.
Webster wrote that the release is misleading when it states that two stages of the lead project have been completed. A cleaning program was first implemented “but it was inadequate due to the high volume of lead concentration at BES.” After this setback, a lead stabilization program was subsequently implemented during the Christmas Break of 2010. The press release goes on to say, “Here are the facts. The Lead Stabilization Project made the building safe…” But according to Webster this fact is not factual. “The facts show that BES wasn’t safe and continues to harbor health risks for the students,” he wrote.
Webster also finds the release inaccurate when it places blame on other factors for the District’s inability to implement a long term solution to the lead problem after so much time has passed. The Board at one point this June even voted on approving a Request For Proposals (RFP) for Pre-Architectural Cost Estimates For Multiple District Footprint Options. “The ‘long term solutions’ were defeated with 4 NO votes (Finney, Goodermote, Miller, Zwack) and 3 YES votes (Nash, Stewart, Webster)” stated Webster. And this was after they voted unanimously in November of 2010 to allow the District’s Leadership Advisory Committee to develop parameters for a facilities cost out. “The BOE has chosen to sideline the LAC and not approve their requested RFP,” wrote Webster. “The BOE has currently no intention to allow the LAC to present their findings on the instructional, parent and community surveys.”
Finally, Webster takes issue with the general tone of the release, an attitude he finds “discordant.” “Nearly a third of the press release is divisive…the intent of the press release is confusing,” he wrote. “The author’s motive may have been reassurance to the public that the BOE is continuing to work on a solution to ‘take care of our school.’ However, I believe this press release fails to comprehend the gravity of its claims and simultaneously insults community members who have questions and concerns about the health and safety of the district’s facilities.”
Webster’s personal comments as a single member of the Berlin school Board are not the first to be publicly voiced concerning problems from within the Board itself. The previous Acting Board President, Bev Stewart, had contacted news agencies on her own to express problems she felt were being overlooked with the last school board election in regard to a violation of election law on the correct amount of signatures on candidate’s petitions. Board Member John Nash later took exception to a press release issued by the District which stated that the Board would overlook these election problems. “I politely disagree,” said Nash at the June 21 meeting.
Divisiveness certainly exists. The previous Interim Superintendent, Dr. Brian Howard, addressed this in his departing words to the Board. “If you want a good school,” he said, “it starts with the Board of Education. Come together. The adults have to get it together…get your act together,” he said. Dr. Howard is gone and his words seemingly forgotten, and the search for his successor itself is apparently once again full of the same issues.