Another one bites the dust. This was the rumor at yesterday's BOE meeting but there was no announcement during the meeting. Looking at what is left of the ECASD Administration during the meeting was pretty sobering. In just a couple of years the departed include: H. Hart, L. Hitman, T. Beardsley, D. Johnson, G. Butler, J. Leary, and, I hope (SOON?!?!), W. Klaus. My understanding is that some of this may have been planned, but where is Succession Planning? Again, more failure of leadership to do even the basic level of planning! Maria
Updated: 7/21/2008 11:42:01 PM
John Wallace was appointed Monday as the interim executive director of administration, filling the renamed deputy superintendent position vacated earlier this month by Gregg Butler. Wallace currently is South Middle School principal.
School official linked to Klaus case resigns
By Julian Emerson and Christena T. O'Brien By Julian Emerson and Christena T. O'Brien
Leader-Telegram staff Leader-Telegram staff
A series of telephone conversations between former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus and Personnel Director Jim Kling last fall foreshadowed Kling's resignation as a district employee Monday.
Those conversations reveal that while Kling - whose resignation is effective Aug. 15 - was following up on questions about whether Klaus was eligible to begin receiving retirement stipend payments totalling $267,209 even though he hadn't retired, the personnel director appeared to back Klaus receiving that money, according to records obtained by the Leader-Telegram.
During discussion of Klaus' stipend on Sept. 28, records show, Kling told Klaus, "I don't think there is going to be an issue (with Klaus receiving his stipend), but I'm going to find out and make sure everything is OK for you and how it impacts you ... I'll see if I can get some answers."
Twelve days later, records show Kling again seemed to back Klaus receiving his stipend. In a reply to a phone message from Klaus regarding his stipend earlier on Oct. 10, Kling replied, "I don't know what is taking so long (to resolve the stipend issue). It shouldn't be that difficult, but who knows."
According to Kling's account to police investigating the Klaus contract issue, Kling had initiated a payment schedule for Klaus to begin receiving stipend payments, but that process was interrupted after concerns were raised about that money being paid out.
Those accounts are in accordance with statements Kling gave to the Eau Claire school board during its inquiry of the Klaus contract issue, sources familiar with that investigation said. Board members have expressed frustration with Kling's apparent willingness to work on behalf of Klaus receiving his stipend as well as his failure to tell them about the matter prior to inquiries about the stipend payments by the Leader-Telegram and district employees last fall.
Board members also said they were upset with Kling's handling of repeated Leader-Telegram requests for information related to Klaus' contract change. Kling responded to portions of the request but delayed responses on others. He said he was directed by former board President Mike O'Brien to not supply the newspaper with the information it requested.
Kling, who has been with the district since 2000, said Monday his decision to resign and retire is something he had been contemplating for some time. Initially, he planned to retire next year, but Kling said he thought now was as good a time to retire with new Superintendent Ron Heilmann starting July 1.
Kling didn't discuss whether his resignation was because of the Klaus contract issue, but board President Carol Craig said Monday that played a part in his leaving.
"It does speak to the issues raised during the inquiry, and it also speaks to the issue that Mr. Kling is inclined to want to retire," she said Monday. "Both of those are mutually kind of entangled."
In the police investigation into the contract matter, Kling said that sometime in February 2007 Klaus told him his contract had been altered to include his receiving his stipend payments at age 53 rather than the previously stated age 55. Kling said he told Klaus "that was very good for him," and didn't think much about the matter until last summer, when Klaus asked him if necessary paperwork had been completed for Klaus to begin getting his stipend on Aug. 1.
Kling said he next met with central office employees and determined that Klaus' contract did not authorize him to begin receiving those payments, and told Klaus that further verification was needed before payments could begin.
Klaus then directed his executive assistant, Patti Iverson, to compose a document directing that Klaus' stipend payments begin Aug. 1, and had former board President Carol Olson sign and backdate it, making it appear to be part of changes to Klaus' contract approved on Feb. 5, 2007.
Kling subsequently set up a schedule for Klaus to begin receiving his monthly stipend payments. That schedule was sent to the Business Services Department in late August, but Business Services Director Dan Van De Water questioned whether Klaus could receive that money because Klaus hadn't retired and the payments could cause Social Security and income tax issues.
District administrators met the following week and referred the issue to the Davis and Kuelthau law firm instead of the Weld, Riley, Prenn and Ricci firm of Eau Claire, of which then-board President O'Brien is an employee. Several follow-up meetings occurred before the board voted on Oct. 22 to deny the retirement stipend to Klaus until he reaches age 55.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Monday, July 21, 2008
LT Editorial: WI Supreme Court Ruling about Open Government
Closed Session Meetings are not exempt from Open Government Laws.
Maria
Updated: 7/20/2008 11:37:01 PM
High court stands up for government openness
The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck two blows for open government this month, knocking down some of the barriers that stand between the public and those who seek to make government decisions outside of public view.
We join other advocates of open government in hailing these decisions. As Peter Fox, executive director of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, told The Associated Press, the rulings were "Absolute victories for the citizens of this state." Fox, whose group filed briefs in both cases, added that "It's really about citizens and ... the ability of local governments to operate fully in public view."
While the subjects of the rulings may seem obscure for most Wisconsinites, they are nonetheless vital. Our nation's democratic principles - as well as state law - demand maximum government openness. Those of us who pay the bills and deal with the consequences of government decisions - whether they are made by federal lawmakers or local school boards - deserve to know as much as possible about what's going on behind closed doors.
In the first case, Sands v. Whitnall, the court ruled that what happens in closed-door meetings of governmental bodies can't be withheld from disclosure in lawsuits. The case dealt with an employee of the Whitnall school district in suburban Milwaukee whose contract wasn't renewed. She sued the district to find out what was said in a closed-session board meeting about her contract. An appeals court ruled against her in 2006, saying an exemption to the state open meetings law allowed the board to keep quiet about discussions of employment matters. However, in the majority decision, Justice Louis Butler wrote that state law "does not describe the contents of closed meetings as either secret or exempt from discovery."
The Supreme Court decision is important because the appeals court ruling had a potentially chilling effect on access to information about closed meetings: Earlier this year, Mike O'Brien - then Eau Claire school board president - cited the appeals court ruling to justify denying the Leader-Telegram information about former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract. When reporter Julian Emerson asked about what happened in closed meetings in which the backdating of Klaus' contract was discussed, O'Brien wrote that "If the information cannot be disclosed in a court case, it stands to reason it cannot be disclosed to the press." The Supreme Court ruling invalidates such arguments and reaffirms public oversight.
In the second case, State v. Beaver Dam Area Development Corp., the court ruled 4-2 that quasi-governmental bodies that resemble government entities in "function, effect or status" are subject to open meetings and records laws. While economic development decisions may require confidentiality, that doesn't justify exempting publicly funded development agencies from public scrutiny, the court said.
To paraphrase state law, both rulings highlight the public's entitlement to full and complete information about its government.
- Tom Giffey, editorial page editor
Maria
Updated: 7/20/2008 11:37:01 PM
High court stands up for government openness
The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck two blows for open government this month, knocking down some of the barriers that stand between the public and those who seek to make government decisions outside of public view.
We join other advocates of open government in hailing these decisions. As Peter Fox, executive director of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, told The Associated Press, the rulings were "Absolute victories for the citizens of this state." Fox, whose group filed briefs in both cases, added that "It's really about citizens and ... the ability of local governments to operate fully in public view."
While the subjects of the rulings may seem obscure for most Wisconsinites, they are nonetheless vital. Our nation's democratic principles - as well as state law - demand maximum government openness. Those of us who pay the bills and deal with the consequences of government decisions - whether they are made by federal lawmakers or local school boards - deserve to know as much as possible about what's going on behind closed doors.
In the first case, Sands v. Whitnall, the court ruled that what happens in closed-door meetings of governmental bodies can't be withheld from disclosure in lawsuits. The case dealt with an employee of the Whitnall school district in suburban Milwaukee whose contract wasn't renewed. She sued the district to find out what was said in a closed-session board meeting about her contract. An appeals court ruled against her in 2006, saying an exemption to the state open meetings law allowed the board to keep quiet about discussions of employment matters. However, in the majority decision, Justice Louis Butler wrote that state law "does not describe the contents of closed meetings as either secret or exempt from discovery."
The Supreme Court decision is important because the appeals court ruling had a potentially chilling effect on access to information about closed meetings: Earlier this year, Mike O'Brien - then Eau Claire school board president - cited the appeals court ruling to justify denying the Leader-Telegram information about former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract. When reporter Julian Emerson asked about what happened in closed meetings in which the backdating of Klaus' contract was discussed, O'Brien wrote that "If the information cannot be disclosed in a court case, it stands to reason it cannot be disclosed to the press." The Supreme Court ruling invalidates such arguments and reaffirms public oversight.
In the second case, State v. Beaver Dam Area Development Corp., the court ruled 4-2 that quasi-governmental bodies that resemble government entities in "function, effect or status" are subject to open meetings and records laws. While economic development decisions may require confidentiality, that doesn't justify exempting publicly funded development agencies from public scrutiny, the court said.
To paraphrase state law, both rulings highlight the public's entitlement to full and complete information about its government.
- Tom Giffey, editorial page editor
Friday, July 18, 2008
Various Letters to the Editor
Updated: 7/18/2008 7:57:01 AM
Klaus harmed district
"There has been an incredible amount of harm to Bill's reputation," stated Thomas Guelzow, attorney for former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus. We can agree to this twisted thinking. However, "Mr. Bill" is the foolish, ignorant one who decided to show his true character, integrity and thirst for money by going behind the backs of the present board members to "work in the dark" to better himself. "Mr. Bill" is the one who did incredible harm. Included with him are the likes of former school board presidents Carol Olson and Mike O'Brien. If they didn't think it was illegal, then why did they do all within their power to hide the true intent?
As great as the disdain for "Mr. Bill" is, we now have a greater concern for the ineptness of school board member Mary Kneer. Should someone be school board vice president who states she "loses track of the conversation when contract language is discussed"? No wonder this board is in the current fiasco. Since Kneer can't stay focused, she should stay home and resign. She is not qualified to hold a position on the board.
One final note concerning business practices and ethics: I thank Mark Donnelly for his response to questions concerning operations at Hope Gospel Mission. I sincerely respect the goals and directions of Christian organizations. As Christians, we are called to a higher standard, and Hope Gospel Mission must specifically show to who and where their budget goes. The community has a right to ask how much does the Steward family earn and where each penny is spent. God calls us to that example, and being ready and willing to show all is necessary for the secular community's concerns.
ORVIN BYSTOL
Eau Claire
NOTE: The original Editorial that Schulz is responding to can be found posted on this blog earlier in July.
Updated: 7/15/2008 6:02:02 PM
Editorial's call for charges in Klaus case unwarranted
By Dean Schultz
The Leader-Telegram's June 26 editorial by Tom Giffey, headlined "Justice now in hands of school board," begs a response. The editorial commented on Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White's decision not to file criminal charges in the contract dispute involving former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus. While the editorial is probably correct in stating that many in the community were "undoubtedly disappointed" with that decision, the next statement - "Count us among the disappointed" - is disturbing, to say the least.
Like previous Leader-Telegram articles, the editorial mentions Klaus, former school board president Carol Olson, Klaus' former secretary, Patti Iverson, and other district administrators. The editorial states that some "have already been convicted in the court of public opinion" and adds that it would have been "gratifying" to see them prosecuted. That statement is irresponsible on its face. Since when do we rely on the public, who do not have the benefit of information gathered by either the police or the school board, to decide who should be prosecuted for - much less convicted of - a crime? That smacks of a lynch mob mentality. The editorial's support of that mentality by stating it would be "gratifying" to have them prosecuted and that the author is disappointed that they won't be (in the face of an acknowledgment of the absence of adequate evidence) is frightening.
Lest you think I'm an apologist for these folks, I assure you I'm not. Unfortunately, this biased commentary detracts from some positive analysis. I agree that the inadequacy of the closed session meeting minutes is deplorable. And the signing of the backdated contract amendment by Olson does raise suspicion; it was an incredibly ill-advised (and perhaps unethical) thing to do since she was no longer on the board. But was it done to fraudulently add a provision that had never been considered or approved? We the public (and the Leader-Telegram) don't know, because three board members say it was discussed, and three say it wasn't, with the seventh member uncertain. In the absence of other evidence, those statistics say just as loudly that the provision might be appropriate as they say it might not. In light of the district attorney finding "no evidence of conspiracy," it's quite possible, even likely, that there was an honest understanding that early retirement was discussed and that early stipend payments had been inferred as a logical extension thereof. While it's clear that Klaus would benefit from the added provision, what possible motive would Olson, Iverson or others have in fraudulently advancing such an action? Apparently the police investigation turned up none.
It's hard to comprehend the editorial's fervor for prosecution. Never mind that just as many board members said the early retirement issue was discussed as said it wasn't. Never mind that in our society people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Never mind that the district attorney said there was insufficient evidence to prove guilt (if you missed the logic, that means they must be presumed innocent in the eyes of the law). Never mind that the district attorney apparently doesn't concur that the "court of public opinion" should make his, or the court's, decisions for them. Never mind the cost of pursuing legal action which, in the absence of adequate evidence, is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Never mind that the people involved have no history of "suspicious" behavior - quite to the contrary, they have been recognized by many in the community as sound public servants.
As the editorial points out, it's now the school board that must act. It's up to the board to act fairly and objectively on the basis of known facts - not on rumor, gossip, or the innuendo of specious editorial commentary. It's up to the board to insure better documentation of closed meeting discussions. And it's up to the board, above all, to respect the rights and interests of all involved - those of the persons directly involved and those of the taxpayers and citizens of our community.
As for the Leader-Telegram, I for one am very disappointed in its judgment. While I recognize that the editorial is simply an opinion piece, journalists also have a responsibility to report facts and avoid aspersions against an individual, group or organization. The editorial fails this test. The power of the press is immense. At stake is nothing less than the public trust. The exercise of that power demands an extraordinary sense of responsibility. It is disturbing when an institution on which the public often depends for impartiality abdicates that responsibility.
Schultz lives in Eau Claire.
Updated: 7/7/2008 7:37:02 PM
Shame on school district
As a citizen and retired Eau Claire school district teacher, I am very ashamed of the greediness of some administrators and the ineptness of elected officials dealing with contracts. The entire stipend situation has gotten totally out of hand and should have been revamped years ago. It is not saving the district money but is costing an exorbitant amount. There is no good reason for someone who "retires" from a position and then immediately moves into another in the district to receive an early retirement stipend. He or she is not retired. This is "double-dipping" and should be illegal. Board member Mike Bollinger informed me the board recently ended all stipends. This is better late than never, but for how many years will we still have to pay stipends to people who have been promised them in their contracts?
Former Superintendant Bill Klaus apparently had the nerve to want to get his greedy hands on this "gift" money before he reached the age that all other employees wait for. If having someone craft a document to that effect, backdate it and have it signed by someone no longer with the authority to do that is not illegal, it certainly is unethical. For the sake of the district's reputation and as a lesson to the young minds in our schools, I hope this will not be dismissed lightly.
I retired early from the school district in 1993 on the paltry stipend teachers get. However, I was very happy with it and the medical insurance I was given so that a younger, fresher person at a lower salary could take my place and save the district money. I did not go into another position in the system. Early retirees can do many more things in retirement than rip off the system.
PATRICIA LANGLOIS
Eau Claire
Updated: 7/6/2008 3:22:01 PM
Time to clean house
Having been a resident of Eau Claire for 83 years, I cannot believe that even if what the school board did was not illegal, it was at least not what we should expect from our school board.
I have been a supporter of all school referendums except the last one. The actions of this board take away any doubt that I did the right thing.
How we can have any faith in a board that is not sure if it voted on changes to former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract? Three said they had, three said they had not and the seventh member could not remember if she had even voted.
The residents of Eau Claire not only have the right, but the duty, to clean house by recall election.
A lot of good people have served us well over time. We don't deserve a board that has had nine closed sessions and still is not able to say this was wrong.
GEORGE E. KUMFERMAN
Eau Claire
Klaus harmed district
"There has been an incredible amount of harm to Bill's reputation," stated Thomas Guelzow, attorney for former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus. We can agree to this twisted thinking. However, "Mr. Bill" is the foolish, ignorant one who decided to show his true character, integrity and thirst for money by going behind the backs of the present board members to "work in the dark" to better himself. "Mr. Bill" is the one who did incredible harm. Included with him are the likes of former school board presidents Carol Olson and Mike O'Brien. If they didn't think it was illegal, then why did they do all within their power to hide the true intent?
As great as the disdain for "Mr. Bill" is, we now have a greater concern for the ineptness of school board member Mary Kneer. Should someone be school board vice president who states she "loses track of the conversation when contract language is discussed"? No wonder this board is in the current fiasco. Since Kneer can't stay focused, she should stay home and resign. She is not qualified to hold a position on the board.
One final note concerning business practices and ethics: I thank Mark Donnelly for his response to questions concerning operations at Hope Gospel Mission. I sincerely respect the goals and directions of Christian organizations. As Christians, we are called to a higher standard, and Hope Gospel Mission must specifically show to who and where their budget goes. The community has a right to ask how much does the Steward family earn and where each penny is spent. God calls us to that example, and being ready and willing to show all is necessary for the secular community's concerns.
ORVIN BYSTOL
Eau Claire
NOTE: The original Editorial that Schulz is responding to can be found posted on this blog earlier in July.
Updated: 7/15/2008 6:02:02 PM
Editorial's call for charges in Klaus case unwarranted
By Dean Schultz
The Leader-Telegram's June 26 editorial by Tom Giffey, headlined "Justice now in hands of school board," begs a response. The editorial commented on Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White's decision not to file criminal charges in the contract dispute involving former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus. While the editorial is probably correct in stating that many in the community were "undoubtedly disappointed" with that decision, the next statement - "Count us among the disappointed" - is disturbing, to say the least.
Like previous Leader-Telegram articles, the editorial mentions Klaus, former school board president Carol Olson, Klaus' former secretary, Patti Iverson, and other district administrators. The editorial states that some "have already been convicted in the court of public opinion" and adds that it would have been "gratifying" to see them prosecuted. That statement is irresponsible on its face. Since when do we rely on the public, who do not have the benefit of information gathered by either the police or the school board, to decide who should be prosecuted for - much less convicted of - a crime? That smacks of a lynch mob mentality. The editorial's support of that mentality by stating it would be "gratifying" to have them prosecuted and that the author is disappointed that they won't be (in the face of an acknowledgment of the absence of adequate evidence) is frightening.
Lest you think I'm an apologist for these folks, I assure you I'm not. Unfortunately, this biased commentary detracts from some positive analysis. I agree that the inadequacy of the closed session meeting minutes is deplorable. And the signing of the backdated contract amendment by Olson does raise suspicion; it was an incredibly ill-advised (and perhaps unethical) thing to do since she was no longer on the board. But was it done to fraudulently add a provision that had never been considered or approved? We the public (and the Leader-Telegram) don't know, because three board members say it was discussed, and three say it wasn't, with the seventh member uncertain. In the absence of other evidence, those statistics say just as loudly that the provision might be appropriate as they say it might not. In light of the district attorney finding "no evidence of conspiracy," it's quite possible, even likely, that there was an honest understanding that early retirement was discussed and that early stipend payments had been inferred as a logical extension thereof. While it's clear that Klaus would benefit from the added provision, what possible motive would Olson, Iverson or others have in fraudulently advancing such an action? Apparently the police investigation turned up none.
It's hard to comprehend the editorial's fervor for prosecution. Never mind that just as many board members said the early retirement issue was discussed as said it wasn't. Never mind that in our society people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Never mind that the district attorney said there was insufficient evidence to prove guilt (if you missed the logic, that means they must be presumed innocent in the eyes of the law). Never mind that the district attorney apparently doesn't concur that the "court of public opinion" should make his, or the court's, decisions for them. Never mind the cost of pursuing legal action which, in the absence of adequate evidence, is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Never mind that the people involved have no history of "suspicious" behavior - quite to the contrary, they have been recognized by many in the community as sound public servants.
As the editorial points out, it's now the school board that must act. It's up to the board to act fairly and objectively on the basis of known facts - not on rumor, gossip, or the innuendo of specious editorial commentary. It's up to the board to insure better documentation of closed meeting discussions. And it's up to the board, above all, to respect the rights and interests of all involved - those of the persons directly involved and those of the taxpayers and citizens of our community.
As for the Leader-Telegram, I for one am very disappointed in its judgment. While I recognize that the editorial is simply an opinion piece, journalists also have a responsibility to report facts and avoid aspersions against an individual, group or organization. The editorial fails this test. The power of the press is immense. At stake is nothing less than the public trust. The exercise of that power demands an extraordinary sense of responsibility. It is disturbing when an institution on which the public often depends for impartiality abdicates that responsibility.
Schultz lives in Eau Claire.
Updated: 7/7/2008 7:37:02 PM
Shame on school district
As a citizen and retired Eau Claire school district teacher, I am very ashamed of the greediness of some administrators and the ineptness of elected officials dealing with contracts. The entire stipend situation has gotten totally out of hand and should have been revamped years ago. It is not saving the district money but is costing an exorbitant amount. There is no good reason for someone who "retires" from a position and then immediately moves into another in the district to receive an early retirement stipend. He or she is not retired. This is "double-dipping" and should be illegal. Board member Mike Bollinger informed me the board recently ended all stipends. This is better late than never, but for how many years will we still have to pay stipends to people who have been promised them in their contracts?
Former Superintendant Bill Klaus apparently had the nerve to want to get his greedy hands on this "gift" money before he reached the age that all other employees wait for. If having someone craft a document to that effect, backdate it and have it signed by someone no longer with the authority to do that is not illegal, it certainly is unethical. For the sake of the district's reputation and as a lesson to the young minds in our schools, I hope this will not be dismissed lightly.
I retired early from the school district in 1993 on the paltry stipend teachers get. However, I was very happy with it and the medical insurance I was given so that a younger, fresher person at a lower salary could take my place and save the district money. I did not go into another position in the system. Early retirees can do many more things in retirement than rip off the system.
PATRICIA LANGLOIS
Eau Claire
Updated: 7/6/2008 3:22:01 PM
Time to clean house
Having been a resident of Eau Claire for 83 years, I cannot believe that even if what the school board did was not illegal, it was at least not what we should expect from our school board.
I have been a supporter of all school referendums except the last one. The actions of this board take away any doubt that I did the right thing.
How we can have any faith in a board that is not sure if it voted on changes to former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract? Three said they had, three said they had not and the seventh member could not remember if she had even voted.
The residents of Eau Claire not only have the right, but the duty, to clean house by recall election.
A lot of good people have served us well over time. We don't deserve a board that has had nine closed sessions and still is not able to say this was wrong.
GEORGE E. KUMFERMAN
Eau Claire
LT Editorial: 7-9-08
Updated: 7/9/2008 6:22:01 PM
Current school board, Heilmann left to clean up mess
The issue: Police reports indicate former Eau Claire school Superintendent Bill Klaus supervised changes to his own contract.
Our view: Policies to correct this blatant conflict of interest need to be implemented and publicized as the first step in trying to restore public trust in our school system.
In the murky matter of what the Eau Claire school board did or didn't do regarding former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract, one thing has emerged crystal clear: The slipshod way the superintendent's contract is handled must - and apparently will - change.
The superintendent is the only district employee who reports directly to the school board, so the seven-member board negotiates, discusses and votes on the superintendent's contract, which obviously includes pay and benefits. It is now clear that somewhere that process broke down.
At issue is whether the school board last year approved a provision in Klaus' contract to allow him to begin receiving his nearly $270,000 stipend starting at age 53 rather than at the customary age of 55. It's also standard for an employee to actually be retired before getting the payments. Klaus last year stepped down as superintendent to become principal at Northstar Middle School.
New Superintendent Ron Heilmann said any changes to his contract will be typed up by the Personnel Department after board approval. That apparently isn't how it worked under Klaus, who directed changes in his contract by writing alterations in the contract's margins, which then were typed up by Patti Iverson, Klaus' former executive assistant.
Most incredible is that these changes were not seen by the entire school board, according to a statement Iverson gave police investigators looking into possible criminal activity. Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White decided not to charge anyone in the matter because he found the school board members divided over whether they did or didn't allow Klaus to begin receiving the stipend at age 53.
According to the police report, Iverson said not all board members saw Klaus' contract before it was adopted, a practice she said has been the case "for as long as I can remember." Klaus' controversial 2007 contract bears the signatures of only two board members, Carol Olson and JoAnne Evans, both of whom have since left the board.
There are no minutes of any board meeting approving the early stipend payments for Klaus. Board President Carol Craig and fellow board members Trish Cummins and Brent Wogahn said that is because the issue never was discussed. Mike O'Brien, who was on the board at the time, joined Evans and Olson in contending that the early stipend was approved. Board member Mary Kneer said she can't remember either way.
A reasonable person would conclude that something this significant should have been recorded in the board's closed-session minutes. That same reasonable person would be aghast to know not all board members reviewed and voted on the final agreement. Finally, a reasonable person would wonder if some of the fuzzy memories in this case have more to do with covering butts than setting the record straight.
Iverson also told police she doesn't recall changing the stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 but conceded, "I have a feeling that I did."
Olson, who was school board president in early 2007, recalled being asked by Iverson, most certainly at Klaus' request, to sign and backdate a memo authorizing the early stipend payments, even though Olson no longer was on the board when she signed the memo.
By now, many people are probably tired of reading about this, but even more people feel angry and betrayed that such a thing could occur in the first place. Heilmann and Craig, the current board president, certainly realize this, and their first step moving forward is to inform the public in loud and clear terms what changes will be made to prevent something so damaging to the district's image from ever happening again.
- Don Huebscher, editor
Current school board, Heilmann left to clean up mess
The issue: Police reports indicate former Eau Claire school Superintendent Bill Klaus supervised changes to his own contract.
Our view: Policies to correct this blatant conflict of interest need to be implemented and publicized as the first step in trying to restore public trust in our school system.
In the murky matter of what the Eau Claire school board did or didn't do regarding former Superintendent Bill Klaus' contract, one thing has emerged crystal clear: The slipshod way the superintendent's contract is handled must - and apparently will - change.
The superintendent is the only district employee who reports directly to the school board, so the seven-member board negotiates, discusses and votes on the superintendent's contract, which obviously includes pay and benefits. It is now clear that somewhere that process broke down.
At issue is whether the school board last year approved a provision in Klaus' contract to allow him to begin receiving his nearly $270,000 stipend starting at age 53 rather than at the customary age of 55. It's also standard for an employee to actually be retired before getting the payments. Klaus last year stepped down as superintendent to become principal at Northstar Middle School.
New Superintendent Ron Heilmann said any changes to his contract will be typed up by the Personnel Department after board approval. That apparently isn't how it worked under Klaus, who directed changes in his contract by writing alterations in the contract's margins, which then were typed up by Patti Iverson, Klaus' former executive assistant.
Most incredible is that these changes were not seen by the entire school board, according to a statement Iverson gave police investigators looking into possible criminal activity. Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White decided not to charge anyone in the matter because he found the school board members divided over whether they did or didn't allow Klaus to begin receiving the stipend at age 53.
According to the police report, Iverson said not all board members saw Klaus' contract before it was adopted, a practice she said has been the case "for as long as I can remember." Klaus' controversial 2007 contract bears the signatures of only two board members, Carol Olson and JoAnne Evans, both of whom have since left the board.
There are no minutes of any board meeting approving the early stipend payments for Klaus. Board President Carol Craig and fellow board members Trish Cummins and Brent Wogahn said that is because the issue never was discussed. Mike O'Brien, who was on the board at the time, joined Evans and Olson in contending that the early stipend was approved. Board member Mary Kneer said she can't remember either way.
A reasonable person would conclude that something this significant should have been recorded in the board's closed-session minutes. That same reasonable person would be aghast to know not all board members reviewed and voted on the final agreement. Finally, a reasonable person would wonder if some of the fuzzy memories in this case have more to do with covering butts than setting the record straight.
Iverson also told police she doesn't recall changing the stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 but conceded, "I have a feeling that I did."
Olson, who was school board president in early 2007, recalled being asked by Iverson, most certainly at Klaus' request, to sign and backdate a memo authorizing the early stipend payments, even though Olson no longer was on the board when she signed the memo.
By now, many people are probably tired of reading about this, but even more people feel angry and betrayed that such a thing could occur in the first place. Heilmann and Craig, the current board president, certainly realize this, and their first step moving forward is to inform the public in loud and clear terms what changes will be made to prevent something so damaging to the district's image from ever happening again.
- Don Huebscher, editor
LT: more on 7-15-08
Updated: 7/15/2008 4:27:01 PM
Board to discuss possible Klaus discipline, resignation
The continuing investigation into former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus' attempt to receive his retirement stipend early could be nearing resolution.
On Thursday the school board is scheduled to discuss possible disciplinary action against Klaus as well as a potential resignation agreement.
The meeting notice also lists discussion of his compensation and possible litigation related to disciplinary measures.
The notice doesn't specifically list Klaus' name, but sources familiar with the investigation say Klaus - placed on administrative leave April 30 while the investigation continues - is the subject of the discussions.
The board began an investigation of the matter after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailing how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document that would have started Klaus' $267,209 stipend payments on Aug. 1, when he was 53. The school board subsequently voted in October against granting Klaus that money until age 55.
Board to discuss possible Klaus discipline, resignation
The continuing investigation into former Eau Claire school district Superintendent Bill Klaus' attempt to receive his retirement stipend early could be nearing resolution.
On Thursday the school board is scheduled to discuss possible disciplinary action against Klaus as well as a potential resignation agreement.
The meeting notice also lists discussion of his compensation and possible litigation related to disciplinary measures.
The notice doesn't specifically list Klaus' name, but sources familiar with the investigation say Klaus - placed on administrative leave April 30 while the investigation continues - is the subject of the discussions.
The board began an investigation of the matter after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailing how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document that would have started Klaus' $267,209 stipend payments on Aug. 1, when he was 53. The school board subsequently voted in October against granting Klaus that money until age 55.
LT: 7-15-08
Updated: 7/15/2008 11:32:01 PM
Former school leader's fate could be decided Thursday
By Julian Emerson
Leader-Telegram staff
Nearly three months after launching an investigation into former Eau Claire schools Superintendent Bill Klaus' attempt to access his retirement stipend early, the school board appears to be moving closer to a decision about Klaus' future with the district.
However, the issue could be far from resolved, depending on what disciplinary measures the board imposes on Klaus, the attorney representing the former superintendent said Tuesday.
The board is scheduled to meet Thursday in closed session to discuss possible action against Klaus that could include his firing. It will be the first meeting at which the board has discussed Klaus' contract matter in more than a month.
The meeting notice also lists as discussion topics a potential resignation agreement, Klaus' compensation from the district and possible legal action against the district if Klaus is dismissed.
Board members said they won't necessarily reach a decision about the matter Thursday but will discuss various options related to his employment with the district, including his possible firing.
Board members have refused comment regarding details of the investigation, but sources close to the situation said the board is seeking the possible dismissal of Klaus and two other employees for their roles in Klaus' contract matter.
Tom Guelzow, the attorney representing Klaus, said he isn't aware of any resignation deal involving Klaus. A dismissal of Klaus that does not include compensation according to his contract that runs through 2012 - including his $267,209 stipend - would result in a lawsuit against the district, Guelzow said.
"Without hesitation, we would file litigation if that happens," he said.
Last month, Guelzow said Klaus had no intention of retiring and intends to remain working with the school district. Klaus has worked since last summer as Northstar Middle School principal after a nine-year stint as superintendent. He was placed on paid administrative leave April 30 pending the outcome of the school board investigation.
The board has met nine times in closed session to interview district employees with knowledge of alterations of Klaus' contract and determine whether to discipline Klaus and others.
Last month, Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White decided against filing criminal charges in the matter, citing divided board opinion about whether the members discussed and approved the early stipend payments as part of Klaus' contract to move from superintendent to Northstar principal.
Klaus' stipend payments became an issue after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailing how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document in 2007 that would have allowed Klaus to begin receiving his $267,209 stipend last August. Klaus did not receive that money after the board voted in October to deny early stipend payments.
Emerson can be reached at 830-5911, 800-236-7077 or julian.emerson@ecpc.com.
Former school leader's fate could be decided Thursday
By Julian Emerson
Leader-Telegram staff
Nearly three months after launching an investigation into former Eau Claire schools Superintendent Bill Klaus' attempt to access his retirement stipend early, the school board appears to be moving closer to a decision about Klaus' future with the district.
However, the issue could be far from resolved, depending on what disciplinary measures the board imposes on Klaus, the attorney representing the former superintendent said Tuesday.
The board is scheduled to meet Thursday in closed session to discuss possible action against Klaus that could include his firing. It will be the first meeting at which the board has discussed Klaus' contract matter in more than a month.
The meeting notice also lists as discussion topics a potential resignation agreement, Klaus' compensation from the district and possible legal action against the district if Klaus is dismissed.
Board members said they won't necessarily reach a decision about the matter Thursday but will discuss various options related to his employment with the district, including his possible firing.
Board members have refused comment regarding details of the investigation, but sources close to the situation said the board is seeking the possible dismissal of Klaus and two other employees for their roles in Klaus' contract matter.
Tom Guelzow, the attorney representing Klaus, said he isn't aware of any resignation deal involving Klaus. A dismissal of Klaus that does not include compensation according to his contract that runs through 2012 - including his $267,209 stipend - would result in a lawsuit against the district, Guelzow said.
"Without hesitation, we would file litigation if that happens," he said.
Last month, Guelzow said Klaus had no intention of retiring and intends to remain working with the school district. Klaus has worked since last summer as Northstar Middle School principal after a nine-year stint as superintendent. He was placed on paid administrative leave April 30 pending the outcome of the school board investigation.
The board has met nine times in closed session to interview district employees with knowledge of alterations of Klaus' contract and determine whether to discipline Klaus and others.
Last month, Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White decided against filing criminal charges in the matter, citing divided board opinion about whether the members discussed and approved the early stipend payments as part of Klaus' contract to move from superintendent to Northstar principal.
Klaus' stipend payments became an issue after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailing how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document in 2007 that would have allowed Klaus to begin receiving his $267,209 stipend last August. Klaus did not receive that money after the board voted in October to deny early stipend payments.
Emerson can be reached at 830-5911, 800-236-7077 or julian.emerson@ecpc.com.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
LT: Klaus oversaw his own contract (7-2-08)
More stupidity and sloppiness while Carol Olson and Mike O'Brien were Pres. of the BOE. It appears that Klaus made his own contract changes and Iverson typed them up and Olson and Evans just signed the contract. Why other BOE members thought this was acceptable I simply don't know. We are long overdue for a decision and report about all of this from the BOE.
Maria
Updated: 7/1/2008 11:47:02 PM
Ron Heilmann, the new Eau Claire school district superintendent seen on his first day at work Tuesday, said any alterations to his contract would be handled by the Personnel Department. "I would think that's how it should be done," he said Tuesday.
Staff photo by Dan Reiland
Report: School chief oversaw changes to his contract
By Julian Emerson
Leader-Telegram staff
During his nine-year tenure as Eau Claire schools superintendent, Bill Klaus was the only district employee who personally oversaw changes to his contract.
According to Leader-Telegram interviews with district officials and a 400-page report detailing the Eau Claire Police Department's recently concluded investigation into Klaus' contract alterations, Klaus was alone among district workers whose contract alterations weren't made directly by the Personnel Department.
Instead, Klaus routinely supervised changes before his contract was filed with that department, prompting questions about when alterations were made in 2007 that would have allowed Klaus to receive his retirement stipend earlier than previously stated.
In her interview with police, Klaus' former executive assistant, Patti Iverson, said she doesn't recall changing the stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 but conceded, "I have a feeling that I did."
Klaus directed changes to his contract, Iverson said, by writing alterations in the contract's margins. He then asked her to make those changes via her computer, she noted.
The timing of Klaus' contract changes has sparked controversy. At issue is whether the board decided that Klaus could begin receiving his $267,209 retirement stipend payments at age 53 rather than the previously stated 55, and whether those changes occurred before the contract was approved on Feb. 5, 2007. Klaus turned 53 last July.
Klaus' contract became an issue after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailed how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document last summer to allow Klaus to receive his stipend payments while he was still working as Northstar Middle School principal. The situation prompted police and school board investigations.
Board members surprised
Several board members said they were surprised by alterations to Klaus' contract and don't recall changes being approved. But Klaus contends changes to his contract - wording reducing his stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 and a provision allowing him to retire as superintendent but continue working in the district - were made prior to board approval.
Disagreement about changes to Klaus' contract could be due to a simple matter of procedure. Iverson told investigators that not all board members saw Klaus' contract before it was adopted, a practice the longtime district employee said has been the case "as long as I can remember."
Olson and JoAnne Evans, board members at that time, apparently viewed the contract because it bears their signatures.
Personnel Director Jim Kling told police that giving Klaus direct oversight of his contract "might not have been a good idea." However, Klaus was allowed to maintain the power to revise his contract because the superintendent is the only district employee who negotiates his or her contract terms directly with the board, Kling said.
Incoming Superintendent Ron Heilmann, whose first day in that job was Tuesday, said he hasn't maintained direct oversight of his file in past superintendent jobs and doesn't plan to do so in Eau Claire.
While superintendents negotiate their own contracts with school boards, any contract alterations should be typed by the Personnel Department as is done with all other district employees, Heilmann said.
"I would think that's how it should be done," Heilmann said.
Contract disputed
Minutes of closed-session school board meetings on Jan. 8, Jan. 22 and Feb. 5, 2007, where Klaus' contract was discussed and ultimately approved, don't specifically denote discussion of Klaus' stipend payments. Current board President Carol Craig said that is because the board never approved that change.
"The board minutes are accurate," she said. "Providing for early payment of Dr. Klaus' stipend was not brought before the full board for consideration; thus, it is not in the minutes."
Police investigation notes also reveal the board's apparent failure to formally approve the early retirement stipend. In his interview with police, Klaus said there was no specific board motion to approve those payments. Instead, Klaus said, "It was me bringing the issue up."
Typically the board must make and approve motions for changes in board policy, including contract changes, to take effect.
Conflicting accounts
Board members gave police conflicting accounts of their interpretation of whether Klaus' contract allowed early stipend payments.
Craig, Brent Wogahn and Trish Cummins said Klaus' contract that the board approved on Feb. 5, 2007, included a provision allowing Klaus to switch from the superintendent job he'd held since 1998 to work as Northstar Middle School principal at age 53 instead of the previously listed 55.
However, the contract never allowed Klaus to receive his stipend early, especially given that he didn't retire, they said.
Three former board members who voted on Klaus' contract - Olson, Evans and Michael O'Brien - dispute that. They said it was the board's intent to grant Klaus his stipend early and claim the term "district retirement" that was inserted into Klaus' contract meant he was "retiring" from his superintendent job and moving to the Northstar position.
The other board member who voted on Klaus' contract, Mary Kneer, first told the Leader-Telegram she didn't remember whether the board approved the early stipend payment. She later said the board didn't vote for Klaus to receive his stipend early.
No criminal charges
Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White said board members' confusion about what happened and a lack of complete records precluded his filing criminal charges related to the case.
Klaus ultimately didn't receive his retirement stipend payments after the school board decided Oct. 22 against paying them until Klaus turns 55 and retires. The board did agree that those payments would go to Klaus' family in the event he dies before his retirement.
Klaus wouldn't have been the first district administrator to receive stipend payments while working for the district. But others getting the payment, most notably Deputy Superintendent Gregg Butler, officially retired from the district for 30 days before restarting employment, as required by state law.
However, Klaus didn't leave the district and has told the Leader-Telegram he didn't plan to retire for a couple of years.
Emerson can be reached at 830-5911, 800-236-7077 or julian.emerson@ecpc.com.
Maria
Updated: 7/1/2008 11:47:02 PM
Ron Heilmann, the new Eau Claire school district superintendent seen on his first day at work Tuesday, said any alterations to his contract would be handled by the Personnel Department. "I would think that's how it should be done," he said Tuesday.
Staff photo by Dan Reiland
Report: School chief oversaw changes to his contract
By Julian Emerson
Leader-Telegram staff
During his nine-year tenure as Eau Claire schools superintendent, Bill Klaus was the only district employee who personally oversaw changes to his contract.
According to Leader-Telegram interviews with district officials and a 400-page report detailing the Eau Claire Police Department's recently concluded investigation into Klaus' contract alterations, Klaus was alone among district workers whose contract alterations weren't made directly by the Personnel Department.
Instead, Klaus routinely supervised changes before his contract was filed with that department, prompting questions about when alterations were made in 2007 that would have allowed Klaus to receive his retirement stipend earlier than previously stated.
In her interview with police, Klaus' former executive assistant, Patti Iverson, said she doesn't recall changing the stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 but conceded, "I have a feeling that I did."
Klaus directed changes to his contract, Iverson said, by writing alterations in the contract's margins. He then asked her to make those changes via her computer, she noted.
The timing of Klaus' contract changes has sparked controversy. At issue is whether the board decided that Klaus could begin receiving his $267,209 retirement stipend payments at age 53 rather than the previously stated 55, and whether those changes occurred before the contract was approved on Feb. 5, 2007. Klaus turned 53 last July.
Klaus' contract became an issue after an April 19 Leader-Telegram story detailed how former school board President Carol Olson, at Klaus' request, signed and backdated a document last summer to allow Klaus to receive his stipend payments while he was still working as Northstar Middle School principal. The situation prompted police and school board investigations.
Board members surprised
Several board members said they were surprised by alterations to Klaus' contract and don't recall changes being approved. But Klaus contends changes to his contract - wording reducing his stipend eligibility age from 55 to 53 and a provision allowing him to retire as superintendent but continue working in the district - were made prior to board approval.
Disagreement about changes to Klaus' contract could be due to a simple matter of procedure. Iverson told investigators that not all board members saw Klaus' contract before it was adopted, a practice the longtime district employee said has been the case "as long as I can remember."
Olson and JoAnne Evans, board members at that time, apparently viewed the contract because it bears their signatures.
Personnel Director Jim Kling told police that giving Klaus direct oversight of his contract "might not have been a good idea." However, Klaus was allowed to maintain the power to revise his contract because the superintendent is the only district employee who negotiates his or her contract terms directly with the board, Kling said.
Incoming Superintendent Ron Heilmann, whose first day in that job was Tuesday, said he hasn't maintained direct oversight of his file in past superintendent jobs and doesn't plan to do so in Eau Claire.
While superintendents negotiate their own contracts with school boards, any contract alterations should be typed by the Personnel Department as is done with all other district employees, Heilmann said.
"I would think that's how it should be done," Heilmann said.
Contract disputed
Minutes of closed-session school board meetings on Jan. 8, Jan. 22 and Feb. 5, 2007, where Klaus' contract was discussed and ultimately approved, don't specifically denote discussion of Klaus' stipend payments. Current board President Carol Craig said that is because the board never approved that change.
"The board minutes are accurate," she said. "Providing for early payment of Dr. Klaus' stipend was not brought before the full board for consideration; thus, it is not in the minutes."
Police investigation notes also reveal the board's apparent failure to formally approve the early retirement stipend. In his interview with police, Klaus said there was no specific board motion to approve those payments. Instead, Klaus said, "It was me bringing the issue up."
Typically the board must make and approve motions for changes in board policy, including contract changes, to take effect.
Conflicting accounts
Board members gave police conflicting accounts of their interpretation of whether Klaus' contract allowed early stipend payments.
Craig, Brent Wogahn and Trish Cummins said Klaus' contract that the board approved on Feb. 5, 2007, included a provision allowing Klaus to switch from the superintendent job he'd held since 1998 to work as Northstar Middle School principal at age 53 instead of the previously listed 55.
However, the contract never allowed Klaus to receive his stipend early, especially given that he didn't retire, they said.
Three former board members who voted on Klaus' contract - Olson, Evans and Michael O'Brien - dispute that. They said it was the board's intent to grant Klaus his stipend early and claim the term "district retirement" that was inserted into Klaus' contract meant he was "retiring" from his superintendent job and moving to the Northstar position.
The other board member who voted on Klaus' contract, Mary Kneer, first told the Leader-Telegram she didn't remember whether the board approved the early stipend payment. She later said the board didn't vote for Klaus to receive his stipend early.
No criminal charges
Eau Claire County District Attorney Rich White said board members' confusion about what happened and a lack of complete records precluded his filing criminal charges related to the case.
Klaus ultimately didn't receive his retirement stipend payments after the school board decided Oct. 22 against paying them until Klaus turns 55 and retires. The board did agree that those payments would go to Klaus' family in the event he dies before his retirement.
Klaus wouldn't have been the first district administrator to receive stipend payments while working for the district. But others getting the payment, most notably Deputy Superintendent Gregg Butler, officially retired from the district for 30 days before restarting employment, as required by state law.
However, Klaus didn't leave the district and has told the Leader-Telegram he didn't plan to retire for a couple of years.
Emerson can be reached at 830-5911, 800-236-7077 or julian.emerson@ecpc.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)