Dear Friends of the Foxborough Public Schools,
AGENDA
October 18, 2010
| Time |
|
Topic |
| 7:00 p.m. |
- |
Visitors |
| 7:05 p.m. |
- |
Approval of Minutes |
| 7:10 p.m. |
- |
M.A.S.S. Award of Academic Excellence Presentation — Dr. Christopher Martes |
| 7:25 p.m. |
- |
Burrell School Playground Committee Update — Ms. Karen Connolly, — Ms. Margaret Hassman, — Ms. Wendy Fowler, — Ms. Cathy Rongione |
| 7:50 p.m. |
- |
Superintendent of Schools Status — Dr. Christopher Martes |
| 8:05 p.m. |
- |
October 1st Enrollment Report — Dr. Christopher Martes |
| 8:15 p.m. |
- |
First Reading of Policies — Ms. Kate Kominsky, — Ms. Beverley Lord
- IJNDD – Facebook and Social Networking Websites
- JICFB – Bullying Prevention
|
| 8:45 p.m. |
- |
FY 11 Budget Summary Statement — Mr. Paul Jackson |
| 8:55 p.m. |
- |
Other Matters for Consideration by the Committee |
| 9:05 p.m. |
- |
Executive Session — Discussion of Union Contract Negotiations |
Superintendent of Schools Status
A recent series of articles in the local press have brought to light a private agreement between the School Committee and the Superintendent. Here are excerpts from the different articles and some questions that, when answered, would help understand the actions of our public officials. Links to the full content are provided and we encourage readers to read the full text before engaging the discussion that follows.
“Martes deal a secret
Now a consultant, ‘retired’ chief draws pension; will leave post in July 2011“
…
In a secret deal with a school committee pledged to openness, Martes retired last August and now runs the Foxboro Public Schools as a consultant superintendent with reduced work days while drawing a combined annual pension and town fee package of about $260,000 through June.
Four school committee members denied this week that Martes has retired, claiming he is merely "retirement eligible."
Martes confirmed he did, in fact, retire last August, after working out an agreement with the committee to take $40,000 less in town compensation this school year, along with his full pension.
…
Martes said he and the school committee decided not to announce his retirement at the start of the school year to avoid creating a distraction or undermining the district’s initiatives.
- How and when did the School Committee decide to conceal the changes to the Superintendent’s contract from the public?
- The Open Meeting Law provides 10 purposes for which a governmental body is allowed to meet first in public followed by an executive session. Which of the 10 exceptions to the Open Meeting Law was the School Committee claiming to justify this meeting and action in secret?
- Could it be that Dr. Martes anticipated his retirement would adversely affect the initiatives in the school district and the great work being done today?
- Dr. Martes has quoted frequently from the book Good to Great (Collins, 2001) where top-level leaders are described as those who "channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company. It’s not that Level 5 leaders have no ego or self-interest. Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious - but their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves."
- Dr. Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, wrote: "Level 5 leaders want to see the company even more successful in the next generation, comfortable with the idea that most people won’t even know that the roots of that success trace back to their efforts."
- Has Dr. Martes been unable to create a system capable of greatness without his own presence or intervention to the extent that he needed to conceal his plans for departure?
- What has prevented Dr. Martes from creating an educational system that can survive and thrive even in his absence?
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
The arrangement came to light Tuesday, when The Foxboro Reporter sought to compare the new town manager’s and the superintendent’s earnings and learned that Martes and the school committee privately agreed to a change in his contract last spring. The school board never took a public vote or issued a statement.
Told that the newspaper’s story would be published Thursday, Martes decided to notify staff Wednesday of his retirement. He held morning meetings with his central administration and principals, and said he would send his email statement to staff that afternoon.
…
Martes’s new pay arrangement was negotiated by board member Martha Slattery and chairman Katie Adair, and signed by Adair and Martes on June 22.
The actions of the School Committee require a majority vote once the quorum has been assembled. However, only two members are listed here. When did a majority of the School Committee vote to approve this change to Dr. Martes’ compensation?
The minutes of the open session of the School Committee on June 21, 2010, stated the reason to go into executive session as:
Foxborough School Committee Minutes of Regular Meeting June 21, 2010
“Slattery moved; Gardner seconded:
Go into executive session for the purpose of discussing union and non-union negotiating strategies and not return to open session.
Vote: Gardner-aye; Adair-aye; Slattery-aye; Kominsky-aye.”
The stated purpose was to discuss "negotiating strategies." We presume that the Committee would discuss and agree on a strategy before the actual negotiations. It is possible that the Committee had strategized and pre-approved an agreement that, if Dr. Martes would agree, the chairperson or the negotiating subcommittee would be authorized to sign?
However, when did Ms. Adair and Ms. Slattery have the negotiations with Dr. Martes? When was this subcommittee formed?
Where is the posting of the notice to the public of the open meeting that would precede the executive session of the negotiating subcommittee to meet and negotiate the change to the contract and compensation with Dr. Martes?
Where are the minutes of the open session and the minutes of the executive session of that meeting? As a sign of good faith, the Committee could approve and release the executive session minutes, making them available at tomorrow’s School Committee meeting.
Ms. Martha Slattery knows of the requirement to post notices of subcommittee meetings. During the October 4 School Committee meeting, she reminded Ms. Lord of the obligation to post subcommittee meetings in order to comply with the Open Meeting Law. The School’s website has the agenda for the Policy Subcommittee meeting of October 14. However, there is no indication of a subcommittee meeting to negotiate with the Superintendent.
How does Ms. Adair or Ms. Slattery explain that there is no indication of the required notice for the negotiating subcommittee meeting?
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
Martes noted he has taken a cut from his previous salary of $175,000.
If Dr. Martes’ compensation is now $260,000, as stated in the local press, how can Dr. Martes claim that he has taken a cut? A full explanation would benefit the community’s understand the multiple modes of compensation available to a superintendent. Those interested may find background information in the James Vaznis’ article from the Boston Globe, Perks climb for region’s school chiefs.
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
At the newspaper’s request, Martes provided a copy of his contract, which was to run three years, through June 30, 2012.
Martes initially did not say that the contract’s financial terms were no longer in effect, and that he and the school committee had renegotiated the terms.
We do not know why the specific mention in the article that Dr. Martes did not say that the contracts financial terms were no longer in effect. Without the original request for information from the newspaper, it is difficult to ascertain if the documents Dr. Martes provided were responsive to the request for information.
However, Dr. Martes’ obligation is not limited to fulfilling the letter of the request. According to the Public Records Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s
Guide to the Massachusetts Public Records Law:
“A records custodian is required to use his or her superior knowledge of his or her records to determine the precise record or records that is responsive to the request.”
Is it possible that, however possibly unintentional, Dr. Martes’ actions constituted a breach of the Public Records Law?
We encourage our readers to become familiar with the Guide, a valuable document that prepares citizens to become better informed about government information thereby facilitating their participation in the democratic process.
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
Slattery blamed the press for prematurely airing the matter.
"It would have been nice if we could have discussed this openly and presented it to the public," Slattery said. Asked why the committee failed to do in the 16 weeks since the committee amended Martes contract in June, Slattery said some "details" still need to be worked out, such as how to go about a search for his successor.
"We need to make the public aware of it, which we were about to do," Slattery said. "We did not want to panic anyone. This is so annoying."
But Adair said she’s unsure that Martes will even need to be replaced next year. Adair said she was unprepared to discuss the details or effects of the one-page contract addendum she had signed.
"Did that (addendum) mean he was going to leave the district? I honestly don’t know," Adair said. "I’m not trying to be cryptic."
…
"I did not know of the superintendent’s intention to retire until this morning," Gardner said Wednesday.
"To me, somebody who is retired sits at home — he’s not sitting at home," Slattery said.
Ms. Slattery’s complaint is similar to the complaints heard from those who operate in the dark and are upset that someone has turned on the lights. Now that the newspaper has shed light, the Committee seems to be scrambling to the different exits, providing conflicting explanations, and everyone is saying nothing wrong was being done.
Why are they afraid that the public might "panic"? If Dr. Martes has instituted safeguards and controls to guide the system, why would there be any need to "panic"?
If the administrative team was as good as we believed it was, why would the public "panic"? Is there a reason to "panic" that Ms. Slattery and the Committee knew and the public had been kept uninformed?
Was Ms. Adair prepared to discuss the details of the addendum when she signed it? If Ms. Adair was prepared to sign the addendum in June 22, why is she not prepared now to give her rationale? Did Ms. Adair sign the agreement with Dr. Martes without knowing whether he was planning to leave the district or not?
Chairman Adair’s claims of not knowing are confusing. Was she acting in fulfillment of her duties as steward of the Foxborough Public Schools and upon whom the trust of the community had been placed to look after the best interests of the schools when she signed the contract addendum? If she knew what she was doing when she signed the addendum, what has affected her memory that she now claims not to know? Alternatively, was Ms. Adair coerced or forced to sign the contract addendum against her will?
Committee member Bruce Gardner stated that he did not know if the Superintendent intended to retire. Did Mr. Gardner approve the changes to the Superintendent’s contract without knowing the reason to change the compensation scheme? Did Mr. Gardner ask the reason for the change in compensation before approving the change? What reason, if any, was given to Mr. Gardner?
Committee member Slattery stated that a retired person "sits at home." Is that the extent of Ms. Slattery’s understanding of the term “retired”? Is that the image Ms. Slattery has of Ms. Beverley Lord, a retired teacher?
Was Ms. Slattery unaware that ” Retired FHS science teacher and department head Allan W. Warsing had been covering the [physics teacher] position since the start of [the 2006-7] school year, also as a long-term substitute”? (Mortimer, F. Physics teacher is hired for FHS. The Foxboro Reporter. November 16, 2006.) Did Ms. Slattery forget that Mr. David Sweeney was interim principal at the Ahern and later at FHS after retiring? Ms. Slattery worked with interim superintendent Peter S. Capernaros, who worked for the district as interim superintendent in 1997, after his retirement.
Is Ms. Slattery’s memory slippery or influenced by convenience?
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
Martes said retired educators are allowed to earn money in addition to their pension up to a certain limit, and his agreement with the committee complies with that limit.
He said other area superintendents have likewise drawn their pension and a consulting fee while continuing to lead their school systems.
If this is allowed, why the efforts to keep it secret? What did they fear? What was more important than being open and trustworthy?
Our community has seen precedents in the cases of Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Capernaros, and Mr. Warsing. Why was this case kept secret?
More recent examples are the cases of Fire Chief Roger P. Hatfield and Town Manager Andrew Gala.
New Fire chief a breed apart
“Foxboro’s new fire chief, who started work Wednesday, seems to have arrived with just about every professional asset except his own Dalmatian.
And even at that, Roger P. Hatfield, a 47-year old retired chief of a 187-member Nashua, N.H. fire department, comes with a special love of dogs as a hobby breeder of German Shepherds.” [Emphasis added]
(Mortimer, F. New Fire chief a breed apart. The Foxboro Reporter. January 15, 2009.)
Foxboro process criticized
"Retired Town Manager Andrew Gala, now serving in the post on an interim basis…” [Emphasis added]
(Mortimer, F. Foxboro process criticized. The Sun Chronicle. September 10, 2010.)
What was special in Dr. Martes’ case? Why the need for secrecy? Did this arrangement represent some risk for the School District?
“Martes deal a secret…“
…
Referring to himself, Martes said, "What I hope people don’t spin this into is that ‘he doesn’t care about the community and that he’s in this just for the money.’ "
(Mortimer, F. Martes deal a secret. The Foxboro Reporter. October 14, 2010.)
As underscored by recent published reports, (Schools want to spread the good news, School board equating image to achievement, Gardner shares more thoughts on image, student achievement, Policy Subcommittee meeting) the concern of the Committee has been centered on the image the public has of them.
We are reminded that a "key trait of Level 5 leaders: ambition first and foremost for the company and concern for its success rather than for one’s own riches and personal renown." (Collins, 2001)
Dr. Martes claims to care about the community. Indeed, his leadership thus far has brought the District back from the poor District leadership of Mr. Frank Spillane and Dr. Kathleen Tyrell. However, these actions with the School Committee show that the level of care was not enough to prevent them from deceiving the public.
The Foxboro Reporter published and update to the original story on Friday, October 15. Here are some excerpts from the article:
“Martes defends compensation, school board’s decision“
“Superintendent Christopher Martes said Friday that his almost $260,000 combined pension and town compensation for this fiscal year complies with the rules of the teacher retirement system, and that his and the school committee’s decision to keep mum about the deal for nearly four months breaks no law.
Dr. Martes is quick to grant himself absolution without offering any supporting evidence. Unfortunately, Dr. Martes has lost credibility by keeping this matter in secrecy. Moreover, Dr. Martes’ personal interests in this matter are intertwined with his responsibilities as public official. To restore the public’s trust, the determination of whether the actions in this matter constitute a breach of laws or regulations should come from an independent authority.
Ms. Slattery was quoted in the original article as having stated "We need to make the public aware of it, which we were about to do."
“Martes defends compensation, school board’s decision“
…
The board met publicly on July 22, Aug. 30, Sept. 20 and Oct. 4 without mentioning that Martes’ contract had been changed.
What prevented the Committee from informing the public of their decision during subsequent meetings?
- At the July 22 meeting?
- At the August 30 meeting?
- At the September 20 meeting?
- At the October 4 meeting?
“Martes defends compensation, school board’s decision“
…
Disappointed in the press coverage this week, Martes said many school teachers and some administrators in the area have — with little or no fanfare — taken their pension while continuing on the job in some capacity.
Is it possible for Dr. Martes to see that the community that saw him as an improvement over the previous Superintendent, Dr. Kathleen Tyrell, may be disapointed by the failure of the School Committee and of him to keep the public informed? The need for intentional secrecy has not been substantiated.
To the extent that there is "negative press," the negativity is a reflection of the poor performance of the School Committee and Dr. Martes by keeping the matter secret. If the press reports are erroneous, Dr. Martes and the Committee are free to point out the inaccuracies. If the reports are accurate, Dr. Martes and the Committee should accept responsibility for their actions and begin to rebuild the public’s trust upon which they have trampled.
“Martes defends compensation, school board’s decision“
…
Earlier this week, school committee member Kate Kominsky said she believes the board has no obligation to actively notify the public that it changed Martes’ contract. She said after the board votes to approve and release the minutes of the June 21 closed meeting, anyone can request a copy.
(Mortimer, F. Martes defends compensation, school board’s decision. The Foxboro Reporter. October 15, 2010.)
Ms. Kominsky’s beliefs would seem to run contrary to the mandate of the Legislature as expressed in the Open Meeting Law and the Public Records Law. Ms. Kominsky should explain how her actions, and those of the Committee, meet the letter and spirit of the law. Specifically, which of the purposes of executive session secrecy was she (and the Committee) invoking?
Moreover, Ms. Kominsky’s beliefs seem ephemeral and not lasting as would be desired to build a stable government. In 2006 she had a different perspective:
” School Committee member Kate Kominsky charged in a statement this week that other committee members engaged in unauthorized ‘back room negotiations’ leading to superintendent Kathleen Tyrell’s sudden departure Sept. 18 in a $175,000 contract buyout. “
…
“The community has the right to know that certain actions taken by a few members of the School Committee, regarding the superintendent, were done without the authority of the School Committee,” Kominsky wrote in a statement she hand-delivered to the newspaper Tuesday." [Emphasis added.] (Mortimer, F. Fallout over Tyrell continues. The Foxboro Reporter. September 28, 2006.)
It is important for many people to know whether the Superintendent has retired or not. The taxpayer provides funds that will be used to compensate the Superintendent. The taxpayer has a right to know how tax funds are allocated and therefore is entitled to know of changes in the compensation for the Superintendent.
“The Open Meeting Law was intended to promote the public’s understanding of government operations by eliminating much of the secrecy that frequently surrounded deliberations and decisions upon which public policy was based. The Open Meeting Law and related statutes arose from the principle that our democratic process depends on the public having knowledge of the considerations underlying governmental action. Without this knowledge, citizens are unable to evaluate the merits of the actions of their representatives.”
(Keating, W. R. (2002). Understanding the Open Meeting Law)
Whether or not the Superintendent has retired has repercussions in the professional and life plans of many people. The professional careers of teachers or employees are dependent in greater or lesser form on the leadership and philosophy of the school authorities. The implementation or removal of services or curriculum initiatives may depend on the support of the superintendent. The people that work for the School District need to know how dependable or stable the leadership is as they make plans and choices for the future of our educational system. If one retirement arrangement was carefully kept under wraps, how do we as a community know that others are not secretly preparing to leave as well? Is this the beginning of another administrative exodus?
Therefore, it is important that actions of the School Committee and the Superintendent, our custodians of the school district, follow the Open Meeting Law and Public Records Law as designed to protect the integrity of the process. Unfortunately, the Committee chose to keep the public in the dark about these important matters. The Committee’s actions have resulted in the loss of their integrity and in the loss of the community’s trust.
Respectfully,
Andres Navedo
Deborah Navedo
Foxboro Education Organization