The recent revelation that School Superintendent, Dr. Christopher Martes, had retired while the community had been kept in the dark, has raised public interest and awareness of school matters. Different stakeholders have risen to comment on the matter in various fora. We will take a close look at their statements as those statements are revealing and enlightening to those interested in the issues and the governance of our schools.

The School Committee’s discussion of the status of the Superintendent of Schools during the October 18 meeting can serve as focal point. In a departure from the typical bland dialogue, the exchange was full of emotion that helps to build a more detailed picture of the system.

The video of the discussion is available, in its entirety, at the Foxboro Cable Access web site. The part of the video corresponding to the Committee’s discussion is available at our web site.

Let’s examine the expressions of members of:

 

The Public:

At the Meeting

Mr. Arthur Balduf addressed the Committee regarding his concern for this issue at the end of the October 18th meeting. He stated he went to Town Hall the day after The Foxboro Reporter published the story of Dr. Martes’ deal and retirement. Mr. Balduf was looking for information regarding the SC members contact information, “not available.” He called the Superintendent’s office, but the secretary was not available at the time. He then “stopped at the Reporter’s office.”

Several Committee members suggested he could have gone to the web site of the School Committee. He stated he does not have a computer.

Mr. Balduf stated that he had no information coming at him and that was the reason he attended the meeting.

Dr. Martes apologized and said he “didn’t see…” Dr. Martes asked for Mr. Balduf’s phone number to have a phone conversation with him and explain the matter. Mr. Balduf responded that he had left his phone number but “no one ever called me back.” Ms. Spinelli interjected and confirmed Mr. Balduf’s statement. She stated a staff had taken the message and delivered it to Dr. Martes’ secretary.

Mr. Balduf reiterated that the only information he got was from the [newspaper]. “So you have to think about that in your condemnation of the newspaper, they were the only one giving out information. So you cant really blame them, if no one else is telling you anything.”

Reflection and questions

Mr. Balduf spent a great deal of time and effort on this matter? He was looking for information. However, using the channels of communication provided by the Committee and the administration did not result in answers for him.

The response of several Committee members was that he should have gone to the web site. However, many people who pay taxes, have children or grandchildren in the school district, and are members of the community, may not have computers. Those same people deserve attention, information, and services from the governmental agency that is the School Department.

Is the Committee or Administration going to treat those that do not have computers as second-class citizens?

To the Administration’s credit, we have noted that for the last three School Committee meetings, the agenda notification has been sent one day earlier, on Thursdays. We are grateful for this. However, it does nothing to help others in Mr. Balduf’s situation that want to follow matters within the School District, which may be of concern to them.

What impeded the Superintendent’s office from answering Mr. Balduf’s call? Does it require the visibility and attention of speaking at a televised meeting for the Superintendent’s office to return a phone call? Some may suggest that the Superintendent’s office does not have the time or personnel to answer all phone calls received.

The solution to this particular barrier in communication would have been to disclose the information regarding the Superintendent’s contract amendment, retirement, and financial deal when there was no longer a need for secrecy, just as the law requires.

Was Mr. Balduf offended by the way the Committee had treated the press, which he described as “condemnation”? His comment came after listening to the Committee and Dr. Martes’ discussion during the agenda item. Was Mr. Balduf persuaded to change his stance after listening to the discussion?

Of note, the video of the meeting shows the audience in attendance and suggests Mr. Balduf was present from the beginning of the meeting. This level of dedication, courtesy, and interest is rare for those attending SC meetings, including the school’s staff that attends. Is the Committee capable of instituting changes that would encourage the public to attend and participate during the meetings? Is the Committee back to the train of thought expressed by Mr. Frank Spillane, if the public does not attend it is because they agree with the Committee? Are we seeing the result of the work of the Communication Subcommittee that existed between 2004 and 2005?

In the Press

In support
In a letter to the editor, Ms. Janet Fisher highlighted: ” In Stephen Covey’s bestselling book, ‘The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People’ the fifth habit is ’seek first to understand.’ Habit #5 has been on my mind over the past week…”
(Fisher, J. Great respect, admiration for Superintendent Martes. The Foxboro Reporter. October 21, 2010.)

Ms. Fisher wrote is support of Dr. Martes and the School Committee and asked that the community would “seek first to understand” the matters around the Superintendent’s retirement disclosure.

The text of Ms. Fisher’s letter also included:

” Under the leadership of Dr. Martes the positive changes have happened and have happened quickly.

…

It seems that there was a very unfair rush to judgment that makes no sense based on recent experience with the Foxboro School committee and with Dr. Martes…

Hopefully many in the community watched the school committee meeting on 10/18 and have a better understanding of Dr. Martes’ true motivation in delaying communication about the timing of his future retirement until after the start of the school year and will also appreciate the payroll savings to the town this year.”

Reflection and Questions:

It would be difficult to find voices in our Town that would not agree with the great improvement in the climate of the District since Dr. Martes’ arrival. It is precisely this high regard for Dr. Martes that makes it difficult to understand the actions he and the Committee took around the June 21 executive session meeting and the subsequent discoveries.

Mr. Covey’s recommendation has been demonstrated in our community.

The published report in The Foxboro Reporter included statements from the different Committee members in attendance at the June 21 executive session. No one has alleged being misquoted.

Mr. Balduf’s actions present an exemplary attempt from a member of the public who was seeking to understand.

Our own effort has been to ask questions seeking to understand the actions and rationale of the Committee and Dr. Martes and bring attention to the matter.

Does the invitation of “first seek to understand” apply only to the public? Are public officials exempt from trying to understand the public? What attempts have the School Committee and the Administration taken to understand the public? Why did Dr. Martes offer to have a phone conversation with Mr. Balduf if having the conversation in public would help other members of the community understand the issues being discussed? Why would Dr. Martes reserve the explanation only for Mr. Balduf?

As we will see later, Ms. Slattery stated she had not received any phone calls about this issue from October 14 until October 18. However, there were no invitations for comments or questions to the audience present during the School Committee meeting. The Committee missed the opportunity to make Mr. Balduf feel welcomed and help him understand.

Contrary to Ms. Fisher’s concern, the issue may not be a lack of willingness of the public to understand but a lack of willingness of the Committee to disclose. Ms. Fisher has encountered this situation before. It was not long ago that she stated, "I read the recent article about the superintendent of school’s contract and was pleased to see that the school committee is interested in bringing this issue up for public discussion." The fact remains that the current School Committee kept the issue of the Superintendent’s contract secret and issued denials when questioned by the local press.

Ms. Fisher’s long standing advocacy for educational matters is documented, in small part, in the following articles:

In dissent
In another letter to the editor, Mr. Bill Fox, called on Dr. Martes and the School Committee to rescind the “contract.”

Mr. Fox wrote:

” While the contract may have complied with the rules of the pension system and the secrecy may not have violated any laws (maybe), I see it to be immoral.

I call on Mr. Martes and the School Committee to first, rescind this contract. Instead, the committee should appoint the Assistant Superintendent as Acting Superintendent. Then they might enter into a [consulting] contract with [Dr.] Martes for a maximum of one day per week to give guidance to the Acting Superintendent. Finally, they should immediately start the process of finding a new superintendent. (Would it be correct to assume this process has not been started in order to maintain the secrecy, thus losing four months?)”
(Fox, B. Martes, School Committee should rescind contract. The Foxboro Reporter. October 21, 2010.)

A follow up letter to the editor from Mr. Fox pointed out that Part 1 of the Retirement Application from the Massachusetts Teachers’ Retirement System ask for the intended date of retirement. The application also asks for a copy of the letter of resignation, according to the printed text.

Reflection and Questions

According to published reports, Dr. Martes has stated that the current compensation agreement for his services "complies with the rules of the teacher retirement system…" (Mortimer, F. Martes: Deal breaks no rules. The Sun Chronicle. October 16, 2010.) However, Mr. Fox looks at a bigger picture.

Is it possible that while it is true that the agreement fulfills the requirements of the teacher retirement system, the agreement and its consequences do not comply with other existing and equally applicable regulatory requirements from other organizations or agencies? We still need to find the answer.

It seems reasonable for the Retirement System to ask for a letter of resignation as documentation that the retiring teacher has ceased employment. This letter would constitute a public document. Dr. Martes, or the current custodian of public records, would benefit the community clarify the confusion by releasing a copy of the resignation letter.

 

A view of the School Committee will follow.