OK, so now What? (Part I)

Former Bristol County Prosecutor of the Year Ray Veary was sworn in as a judge very shortly before hearing, and later dismissing, Dr. Mary Ellen Johnson's suit against the Sandwich School Committee and four members individually.  Johnson's counsel later filed for reconsideration and pointed out what he saw as legal errors in the Judge's rulings.  The same Judge again denied he made any errors.

Johnson's counsel then appealed to the State Appeals Court who had some very pointed questions for the lawyers for the Town's insurance company who are defending the Town, and the four individually-named members.   In fact, two members of the three judge panel made it quite clear during the hearing that the contract in question was clearly valid because nobody bothered to meet the requirements of the law which clearly state that somebody must file for judicial review in order to invalidate an otherwise valid contract.

This week, the Appeals Court issued a full written opinion which stated that Superior Court erred in dismissing the case, reversed the prior ruling, and raised the following key points:

Judgment Reversed.

 Excerpts:  

"The judge's findings were premature and limited the plaintiff's ability to argue both the propriety of the notices and, if they were in fact inadequate, whether the violations were de minimis."

" ... even if the April 30 actions violated the open meeting law, the violation did not operate automatically to invalidate the actions. Instead, the plaintiff contends, judicial intervention was necessary to invalidate her contract extension. We agree"

"... no such complaint to invalidate the April 30 meeting was filed within the twenty-one day window. The district attorney's office was put on notice of the violation and had the opportunity to file a complaint to invalidate the contract. Instead, it offered an opinion letter with no legal effect. The judgment therefore must be reversed "

"Deciding as we do, there is no need to discuss the correctness of the denial of the plaintiff's motion to amend, ... or to comment on the plaintiff's allegations relating to the tort of intentional interference with contractual relations."

Ruling:

Is that REALLY the best you can do?

The Sandwich Enterprise -- still available in 2-ply rolls!

There was an amusing headline on page two of this week's Emptyprize -- "NotThePTA Blogger Tapped to Design SEIC Website".  The best excerpt was "... that blog has earned a reputation for creating controversy with strong criticism and negative comments against school committee members and other members of the public ...".

They "forgot" to mention all of the criticism and negative comments this blog aimed at the local "media" over the years!!  

They also "forgot" to mention my almost 30 years experience in finance, real estate development and technology, or that I have been developing websites for numerous public and private clients on both a paid and pro-bono basis for many years. 

I think the SEIC's mission to encourage private development is the best hope this Town has to attempt to stabilize its finances without choking residential taxpayers.  I am glad to donate my time to their efforts.


Could this be yet another pathetic attempt by The Emptyprize to create controversy where none exists?

May the Bird of Happiness Fly up your nose!

Since somebody said recently I never had anything good to say about anything, I'm going to make (almost) no  comments about the last School Committee meeting.

Which is good, because, unfortunately, it seemed pretty obvious that two SC members seem to think the most important function of a School Committee Chairperson is to hang around the Schools all day to offer their wisdom & guidance to the trained, professional staff that actually does the real work.  One of the two also apparently saw setting up a spreadsheet to "track meeting minutes" as a major accomplishment.  Its too bad she didn't apply her spreadsheet "skills" to something worthwhile -- like the Community School deficit, or any one of a host of other budget issues facing the District..

The To Do List ....

Nasty fight between BOS & SC over School funding ........ DONE

Threaten to increase student fees and cut teachers due to lack of funding  ........DONE

Hold budget hearings that are ignored by parents/taxpayers  .......DONE

Suddenly find money to avoid lay-offs and fees .......DONE

Argue with FinCom over Budget, explain they can't adjust line items ...... DONE

Congratulations, Dr. Pierce!

(WickedLocal.com)

This was a tough year for BOS Candidates -- there were two very good ones. Fortunately, one of them won.

Congratulations to Jim Pierce on his reelection to the BOS -- Jim has been an extremely hard-working and diligent Board member who has always been willing to discuss any topic with any person at any time.

I sincerely hope that Tim Cooney will see this as a warm-up run, put his signs away carefully, and come back again next year.  His real-world business experience would certainly make him an asset to the BOS, especially once the general public gains a better understanding of the SEIC.

Moving on .....

Anybody up for a Recount?   (SACAT image)

Congratulations to all three members!     (I don't know if we'll ever hear the break-out of "write-in" votes -- but I heard a rumor a large number of them were actually for cartoon characters -- and many of the others were for Bob Guerin!)

Irony defined?

Once upon a time, there was a gigantic hullabaloo because members of an outgoing School Committee felt obligated to complete the Superintendent's review and contract before their terms expired.  Nothing nefarious -- it just made more sense that the review be completed by the folks who had actually been involved with the work under review.  It also made sense to have the contract resolved BEFORE Town Meeting -- so folks could get an honest view of what they would be funding.

Much noise was made about "rushing the deal", the Editor of The Cape Cod Times went out of his way to write a bitchy editorial and went even further to write an even bitchier (and even more inaccurate) piece for one of his industry trade journals.

Incoming Committee members were adamant that they should be allowed to do the review -- even though they had no experience with the Superintendent (or even in doing employee reviews!)

Two years later... 

The next Superintendent receives his review on the last regularly scheduled School Committee meeting of the term and an extra Executive Session is added after Town Meeting on the night before the election, presumably to discuss the Superintendent's contract.

And .... silence.

I am not saying it's wrong. 

I am, not saying a good review or contract are not deserved.

I am not questioning their judgement ---- I agree with their actions completely.

I just find it humorous.

Gene Shalit's Night at Town Meeting (a Guest Column)

Surprisingly, Gene Shalit is still alive.  Not surprisingly, he did not actually write this piece.  I have agreed to allow the writer to remain anonymous -- since he's one of those "nice people" who hates to offend anyone ... (and because I missed Town Meeting).

You wanted a picture of Snooki ?

If the operators of our local cable access channel really wanted to make some money they could sell the rights to our televised Town Meeting to the reality channel. Last night's meeting would be slightly more refined than an episode of Jersey Shore but a little more dysfunctional than Jerry Springer. 

Let's begin with highlights of our soon to be former Moderators performance: Typical of Madam Moderator, virtually everyone who rose to speak about the town's payroll, salary and benefits, and union contracts was told by the Moderator that they were "out of order." In a town where 75% of every tax dollar collected pays for salaries and benefits, why discussion of compensation is out of order remains a mystery to me. Perhaps the Moderator attended Jersey Shore's Snooki's School of Town Meeting Rules? 

In another moment of "Moderator knows best," the outgoing Moderator grew indignant and threatened to physically remove a resident and taxpayer who wished to speak to an issue and had clearly and obviously raised her hand and waived her meeting handbook prior to a vote being called. True, the speaker was slightly more crazed and slightly less articulate than Jersey Shore's "The Situation" but is that any reason to deny a taxpayer their right to speak?