"It's déjà vu all over again." Yogi Berra

The September 10th BOE meeting had several things going on but much of it was taken up with a discussion about our favorite topic: Conflict of Interest! But before we jump into that kettle, a few other topics were covered.

There was a Work Session with WASB representative, Pam Rewey, that was held from 4 to 5 p.m. to discuss the Superintendent Search Process. I was unable to attend this meeting and I do not think any minutes were taken to record the discussion. Anybody else attend? Please fill the rest of us in! The only thing that was left on one of the chairs was a calendar outlining a two day schedule of Focus Groups that. I assume, will be involved in the interview process. It was basically "The Usual Suspects" including members of the Parent Advisory Council, teachers, administrators, local government and service club representatives, the unions, BOE members, etc... I guess that the one thing that struck me was that out of 132 interview slots the Business/Chamber and Service Clubs had 19 spots, PTO/PAC parents had 14 slots, teachers had 24 slots, students had 4 slots, and Administrators had 22 slots. Maybe this was revised? Anybody?

The regular meeting got underway and G. Butler was on the agenda to give an enrollment report but there were NO COPIES available for the audience. I asked him to make copies before the meeting so that the audience could follow along. He was incredulous to be asked for such a thing and not pleased at the request. But he did comply.

The Little Red Study Committee will be chaired by Comm. Craig and other appointees to be: G. Butler (groans from audience), Mike O'Brien, Mike Bollinger, William Henning (a LR parent), Kim Way (from UWEC Foundation), and Mike Falch and Kathy Attermier from PAC. Other community resources will be utilized as necessary. First meeting was scheduled for Sept. 24th at 3:30 p.m. If anybody in attendance at these meeting would like to enlighten the rest of us, that would be great. I simply can't attend all meetings! I am willing to have a blog topic be the LR discussion but I would like it to be as informative and balanced as possible. Please e-mail me if you want anything posted.

Dr. Butler gave his presentation about projected and actual enrollments. The final data will be available later in Sept. but it seems projections were good, overall with a total of about 60 students higher than projected. He then shared information by school building but without the number of sections it is hard to know how big classes have gotten. However, incoming Kindergarten students are fewer than HS seniors so a decline will be anticipated.

Comm. Cummins asked for information about SAGE classrooms and requested it be an agenda item as well as the topic of specialized instruction for Kindergarten. Note this was approved by the BOE more than a year ago but has yet to be implemented!!

D. Butler also gave accolades to Dr. Leary for his interactions with the staff prior to the first day of school. (See topic of Int. Supt. on this blog for lots of specific and happy comments.) Several new principals and asst. princ. were introduced.

The presentation about Board Docs (paperless, board governance and communication tool) was delayed as presenter missed his flight. I gave input that I was hopeful about the Board Docs technology to help disseminate information but, as will all technology, it is no substitute for leadership and planning. I again reiterated my concerns about compliance with Open Meeting Laws regarding ALL BOE committees and asked for a reply. As of today (one month later): NOTHING.

As part of the Regular Meeting there was a special presentation by Kirk Strang from the Davis and Kuelthau firm about Conflict of Interest. Par for the course: NO COPIES available of the information for audience members so it was a BIG STRUGGLE to follow a complex issue without. I have since gotten electronic copy from Mr. Strang and it is posted under Conflict of Interest topic in this blog. I recorded the BOE meeting at home to follow the discussion with the handouts but did not get to it in time before my husband recorded "Baseball Tonight" right over it! (Some people have NO PRIORITIES at all!)

So based on my notes, a copy of the handout and a review of the "official" BOE minutes (which I am quite confident were written and/or dictated by Pres. O'Brien!) this is the scoop according to me:

In considering a Conflict of Interest (COI) Policy a School Board should consider the state law which has a Code of Ethics for Public Officials. Under this code, public officials are not allowed to use their office to obtain financial gain or anything of substantial value for themselves, their immediate family or an organization with which they are associated. This is defined to be $15,000/year. Also, under the Code of Ethics if a public official or any governmental body requests an advisory opinion from legal counsel about an action and receives an opinion that it is proper, they are assumed to be in compliance and can act in good faith. HOWEVER the 2 caveats that are in the handout that are NOT IN THE OFFICIAL ECASD minutes of the meeting are: (1) that the request for an advisory opinion must be in writing AND (2) that the assumption is that the material facts are correctly stated in the opinion request. These 2 things are UNDERLINED in Mr. Strang's document and NOT EVEN MENTIONED in the BOE minutes. (And what about that grassy knoll by Flynn School??)

In my opinion, this is where the ECASD, former Supt. Klaus and the Weld, Riley firm got themselves all balled up this Spring when questions were being asked about Mr. O'Brien and possible COI and nothing was ever written down between Klaus, O'Brien, Steve Weld and the State Ethics Board. The State Ethics Board was replying with several caveats that there appeared to be no conflict when nothing was written down about what were the circumstances, specifics and material facts.

Mr. Strang then discussed the applicability of the Open Meetings Law which has a statutory guarantee that elected officials can carry out their elected office and not be excluded from the meeting. However this must be balanced by individual and collective board member responsibility to balance their participation in circumstances where it could be perceived that they are "biased decision-makers" or that there is "too much of an interest to participate." So statute forbids exclusion of elected persons but, in such cases, he would "recommend recusal from voting and participation." Other board members can encourage recusal and voice their condemnation of a board member participating and/or voting but it is ultimately up to the individual elected official.

Another statute (946.13) bars elected officials from having "private interest in a public contract." Again, the $15,000 amount is a Class 1 felony violation but Mr. Strang also indicated that the concept of "anything of substantial value" could be triggered sooner and would include a lot of activity just beyond "coffee and a donut" .

Comm. Cummins asked Mr. Strang about the WASB recommendations to not have any BOE members or their spouses employed by the district they serve. Mr. Strang indicated that that is an "Incompatibility of Office" situation and that was not addressed in his discussion at all. (NO MENTION of this in the ECASD minutes.) There were several specific questions asked by Pres. O'Brien which Mr. Strang deferred judgment on since he was not familiar with the facts. Comm. Craig indicated her discomfort with these kinds of questions as being definitive or not. Mr. O'Brien indicated that they had already received an opinion from the State Ethics Board and it is his understanding that he has a right to rely on that opinion and act in good faith. Mr. Strang pointed out that that opinion is just an advisory opinion and as such "does not reach the level of "good faith" as that from your own counsel." Comm. Craig pointed out that that was only based on the info that was presented to the State Board and there were questions about that information. (NOTE: my notes and recollection are DIFFERENT than what is recorded in the ECASD minutes.)

BOTTOM LINE: The BOE still needs a policy. It should be based on state statute. Individual BOE members must rely on their own "Navigational Compass" (Bollinger). The BOE needs to define WHY they are developing the policy. Mr. Strang did not have an one size fits all template for this process. Dr. Leary said he could NOT at this time prepare a policy for the BOE to review based on the information presented. I am not sure what the next step will be. Mr. O'Brien's preference, I am sure, is to ignore it and hope it goes away and attempt to proceed on the "case-by-case" basis that he has been operating under for all this time.

Comm. Wogahn launched into one of his wandering analogies about architecture that involved his experience in designing and building medical centers and the need to start with a good "foundation" then add the "2nd story later" but if there are too many "ideals" that results in lots of "towers" that never get built. It is always a mystery when we will be treated to Comm. Wogahn's interjections, but I can assure you, that it is always worth waiting for.

Other: Dr. Leary is still revising the Philosophy Statement and will give an update next week. The Needs Assessment process is moving along to Administrators and the PAC. Dr. Leary said he was quite humbled by the warm reception from the staff and is looking forward to visits to the schools.

ADJOURN!