On the agenda at Tuesday’s Board of Education meeting were many moves of administrators and teachers: 45 transfers, seven promotions, two resignations, eight re-signings, 10 hires, and three non-renewals.
While some of the moves were necessary to fill positions, others were in response to budget cuts.
Board member Carmelo Garcia asked the administration to give the board an overall layout of the restructuring. The administration said that the staff movement analysis should be available at the next meeting.
As part of cost-cutting measures, several vice principals at the schools were put back into teaching positions for next year. This puts non-tenured teachers’ jobs at risk.
Roughly a dozen teachers face non-renewal of their contracts for next year.
Time saver, or gag order?
Board President Frances Rhodes-Kearns read a statement at the beginning of the meeting asking board members not to isolate items from the agenda for discussion unless they had personally called the administration before the meeting to discuss them, and did not get an answer.
Rhodes-Kearns complained that members of the board have been “grandstanding” on public time at the meetings. In addition, recent meetings have run for upwards of three hours.
Rhodes-Kearns’ suggestion was an attempt to force members to try to resolve issues without doing so in front of an audience.
“Half of [the board members] don’t even read the agenda.”
– Theresa Minutillo
________
He said that questions about policy and process are encouraged, but not questions revealing personal information about job candidates or other personnel.
“People who are unknown to the audience are called into question in public before they even begin [their new job],” Raslowsky said. “It undermines their ability to start well coming out of the gate.”
However, board member Theresa Minutillo said Thursday that she had a different take on Rhodes-Kearns’ statement.
“They are trying to shut down open communication,” she said. “I have every right to ask my questions in public.”
She added, “This board is not a rubber stamp for the superintendent. Half of those people don’t even read the agenda. It’s bull—-.”
But board member Frank Raia said that getting the agenda should give board members ample time to call Raslowsky if there are any questions.
“I get the agenda and I breeze through it, and call Jack with any questions,” Raia said.
He said that he didn’t really have any questions before last week’s meeting, but he did raise a few concerns at the meeting. Raia said that when it comes to personnel, if the position is in the budget and the candidates meet the qualifications, he trusts the administration to make the right decision.
Personnel concerns
Nevertheless, several hirings and changes at the meeting resulted in debate over whether they met the qualifications set forth by the administration.
Minutillo and board member Carrie Gilliard raised the most questions.
Raslowsky responded at the meeting, “We say, ‘What’s the ideal?’ … and how does the pool of candidates match the ideal? Who is the best person out there for the job, given the pool we have?”
Raslowsky said later in the week that part of the problem is that there is a “lack of trust” in him by some of the board members.
Minutillo responded in an interview by saying that he must earn her trust.
“He has promised many things, but he has broken his promises,” she said.
She added, “He was clearly out campaigning for the Parents for Progressive Education ticket [in the April school board election], so how has he gained my trust?”
New contract for BA
Business administrator Brian Buckley, who was charged with preparing the $56 million budget for the district last year, was awarded a new contract by the board. Board members voted unanimously to award Buckley with a new deal, with little to no public critique.
Garcia asked Buckley to follow up on a three-to-five year plan, to which Buckley agreed. Other members asked whether a mishap with a missed payroll tax payment was a one-time problem, and Buckley assured them that it was and that controls were put in place to assure that.
Minutillo said in a later interview, “I think he’s doing a terrific job.”
Grant put to good use
Board member Rose Marie Markle was one of three board members critical of a Perkins grant received by the district for building a technology program. Over the years, the state grant money has diminished because, according to Buckley, the district was not using it appropriately.
When this administration took office, it was too late to reverse the trend, so instead of creating a technology program, the schools used the money for computer equipment.
The grant is now down to $27,600 – down from upwards of $100,000 in the past, according to Buckley – which is not enough money for the board to feed into any sort of district technology program at all.
So the board voted for the administration to donate the money to the Hudson County School of Technology, in exchange for the school providing service to some Hoboken school students.
After the meeting, Markle said that the county school is already open to these students, and that there must have been some other way to spend that money within the district.
She was not alone, as Gilliard and Minutillo also voted down the measure.
Raia said that he didn’t understand the grant either, but that he “deferred to Jack [Raslowsky] on that one.”
For suggestions or comments on this story, email tcarroll@hudsonreporter.com.