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 Press

The Foxboro Reporter

The real concern over secrecy, as expressed by the editorial published, is that some government insiders (present or past) with access to information may secretly gain personally and that the public would be less the wiser while footing the bill.

“This comes at a time of intense public scrutiny, and widespread criticism, of the compensation package negotiated with incoming town manager Kevin Paicos. In fact, staff writer Frank Mortimer this week uncovered details of the school board’s clandestine arrangement only while reviewing compensation for other senior town officials in an effort at providing context for the Paicos’ contract. More broadly, it also comes amid the final weeks of a political campaign season which has channeled voter anger and resentment at the perception that government benefits political insiders who use knowledge and connections to game the system in their favor."
(Editorial. A shroud of secrecy. The Foxboro Reporter. October 14, 2010.)

The editorial response to the Committee’s October 18 discussion was exquisite and to the point:

”
At the conclusion of Monday night’s emotional school board session in response to recent stories detailing superintendent Christopher Martes transition into the state retirement system, school board member Bruce Gardner challenged listeners to move forward and make the controversy “a blip on the radar.” We concur with that sentiment, and with much of Gardner’s lengthy public statement (which is reprinted at right). However, we also believe that further explanation would be a good place to start.

Beyond simply venting their collective spleens - an understandable reaction under the circumstances - school board members did not challenge the fundamental accuracy of any information published in last week’s paper. Members did make a forceful, if superfluous, case for Martes’ integrity - superfluous only in that the superintendent’s integrity, to our knowledge, has never been at issue.

What was, and remains, at issue is process - more specifically, the committee’s continued resistance to disclosing information about critical discussions and decisions related to the superintendent’s job status and succession planning until members were good and ready. Not only was such an approach unnecessary and even counterproductive, it contradicts assertions that changes to Martes’ contract were a “routine” matter - unless one also believes that other routine matters should routinely be handled with similar evasiveness.

We don’t. Nor do we believe for a second that sharing this information with the public in last week’s newspaper has compromised the town’s ability to extend Martes’ contract beyond this year (though he seemed to think it unlikely), attract future candidates for the job or successfully mount a search for a replacement.

We do happen to agree with Martes’ observation that this story by rights should have been a positive one - how the school board saved $40,000 in compensation while retaining the services of a “favorite son.” But let’s be clear: until last week, the school committee and not the newspaper controlled this narrative and opted to keep matters under wraps. They could have shared details of this very positive story with townspeople at any point during June, July, August, September and into October, but chose not to. We still don’t understand why.

In fact, members waited until Monday night before formally releasing minutes of the June executive session - minutes that consist solely of the five separate votes taken that night: to open the session, to accept the minutes of a previous executive session, to release the minutes of that prior session, to approve the addendum to Martes’ contract “as presented,” and then to adjourn the meeting. Since these minutes were devoid of any detail whatsoever, it’s hard to understand the necessity, or desirability, of a four-month delay in releasing them.

On Monday night, committee members were not entirely wrong in portraying the fallout over Martes’ contract as a bit of a tempest in a teapot (even if their language was considerably stronger). But before townspeople shut down their radar screens, they deserve a fuller image of what transpired here and why. A good place to start would be during a discussion of the search process tentatively scheduled for the board’s Nov. 1 meeting." (Emphasis added.)
(Editorial. Off the radar screen?. The Foxboro Reporter. October 21, 2010.)

We applaud the local press for boldly deviating from the usual stance of protecting the status quo (or even the gamed benefits) to leading in investigative reporting. This is the greatest contribution that a newspaper can offer its community, to promote an informed citizenry.