There is genuine acrimony on the Board. And I think that's good for the schools. No more situations where a powerful inner circle is both working and frequently socializing with Steinhauer.
Personally, I think the inner circle is still there, but a smaller, tighter inner circle. I understand Elaine Cappucci and Larry Lebowitz were brutal. No meeting video posted yet. Elaine
Timmy sent out an email saying that there were technical difficulties with the recording. David Huston did record the meeting for me, so at least, we will be able to hear how rude Larry Lebowitz, Bill Cooper, and Elaine Cappucci were last night. Elaine even went after Paula. Again. The whole thing was disgraceful. Elaine
I love watching the school board meetings online. I can say to Larry, "No you didn't!" Right off the bat, when Larry was nominating Bill Cooper for VP, he dissed Mike Riemer by stating that Mike had no experience with negotiating contracts. Mike disagreed and said that he did have experience with negotiating contracts. Larry tried to pull a fast one and said at the 17:38 time stamp, that he said "school board contracts." No you didn't, Larry! Elaine
I just finished watching the meeting and my heart is pounding. What fighting! Larry, Elaine, and Bill weren't being very transparent when they nominated each other. It seemed well rehearsed. Cooper had a prepared nomination speech for goodness sake! They had the audacity to say that Mike wasn't being transparent. It did come out that he warned them ahead of time concerning the renewal of Peterson's contract. Larry was very unprofessional. Elaine was extremely hostile. I hadn't heard Bill talk so much since his speech about the cost of pizzas.
7:37 PM, I don't think I have ever heard a spouse of a board member come to the microphone before. With their son being a teacher at Jefferson Middle School and assistant football coach, and Elaine's husband speaking, it has become a real family affair. Shaking my head. Elaine
9:07 AM, it was disgraceful. 9:16 AM, Mary passed the torch to Larry and/or Elaine Cappucci. A resident made an excellent suggestion last night to move the solicitor contract to begin in June or July, when the newly elected school board members have had some experience.
Larry was wrong about another thing. The newly appointed school board director may also have experience dealing with "school board" contract negotiations. We won't know that until after the appointment is made.
It was such a hostile environment on Monday night. It seems that both Elaine and Larry were alluding to the fact that their behavior was a preview of coming attractions. More bullying on the school board to fellow board members and the public. They certainly aren't handling the shift of board majority very well. Elaine
This sets a terrible tone for the district. The fish rots from the head first. If this is how the school leaders are acting, it will continue to seep into the schools themselves and ultimately rot the learning environment for teachers and students.
How can you tell the kids to get along and not bully each other and respect difference when the adults can't?
"How can you tell the kids to get along and not bully each other and respect difference when the adults can't?"
And that says it all! Whether you agree with the new board, the old board, or are just bored, the specter of grown adults acting like spoiled elementary school children does not speak well of the "public" education system here in Leboland. It is intolerable when public officials try to punish private citizens for "questioning authority" - rather like the "thought police" in a George Orwell novel; it is reprehensible when they try to do it to themselves.
Although not writing about our school district, J.D. Tuccille, contributing editor of Reason Magazine, had a salient observation concerning people in positions of authority at various government levels: "We live in a world governed by officials who love exercising power to punish people they dislike." Well said. If the newly elected members of our school board didn't know that before, they certainly know it now!
1. If Mr Reimer wants to be the champion of transparency, surprising some Board members with a motion to table the appointment of the solicitor (which happens at every reorg meeting), was not a great first step.
2. Discussing his surprise motion with some but not all before the meeting, was not a great step in that direction either.
3. Mr. Reimer suggesting that he or anyone else can simply suspend Board or District policy for purposes of a vote on a case by case basis was laughable...and a bit scary. This District NEVER deviates from policy. EVER.
4. It’s obvious that Mr. Reimer and his followers have little understanding of how long it would take to retain a new solictor, the process by which that is conducted and how current matters would be handled.
5. Mr. Peterson deserves some credit for being as polite as he was under the circumstances. His job (which he has done incredibly well) is way more important than anything the Board members take on. Hands down. Lawyers often fire clients, and he demonstrated great composure in not doing so then.
6. While I appreciate the passion of Mr. Lebowitz and Mrs. Cappucci, they would be better served (IMO) with a lot less hyperbole. As my kids say, “If everything is awesome, nothing is awesome.”
7. I hope that the other members of the Board find their voices and their own opinions. It was pretty clear that the solicitor issue was being crammed down the new majority’s throat by Mr. Reimer, but when they actually heard the facts, etc, and acted on their own and in accordance with the rules and policies, they made the correct decision on several fronts.
8. Mr. Reimer better come better prepared or grow a thicker skin, because (for better or for worse, good or bad), it seems pretty apparent that he’s going to face some challenges (and challengers) every step of the way.
12:52 PM writes: "4. It’s obvious that Mr. Reimer and his followers have little understanding of how long it would take to retain a new solictor, the process by which that is conducted and how current matters would be handled."
But you have full understanding, 12:52 PM. I see.
The challengers are going to be Larry Lebowitz, Elaine Cappucci, and Bill Cooper. Elaine
I love the idea of moving the solicitor contract to the summer months. There is a lot going on this time of year. If we wanted to see what is out there (and why not test the waters) the summer months might be a better time to do it. As Mr. Huston said, Mr. Peterson might be the best there is. We'll never know if we don't look around.
9:57 AM, we will have an election for five school board directors in two years. It is quite possible that the new majority will be brand new faces. If we follow this poorly written policy, five new faces, with no prior experience with the solicitor, are expected to vote on the Solicitor Contract. I can see why Riemer wanted a change. This should be discussed at the next policy meeting. Elaine
The District has had the same Solicitor for decades. The District has had the same auditor for decades. Neither contract has even been bid out for decades. Decades! This would never happen in the private sector. It's completely unprofessional. Makes you wonder. Whats the harm? Why the hysteric pushback? Something stinks.
Actually, in the private sector companies do keep their lawyers for decades. There’s a lot of value in it, just like there’s a lot of value (IMO) in maintaining consistency in the legal services provided to the District. As was noted at the meeting, most school districts use a Firm rather than an individual. When you use a Firm (which is what you would get if you put it out to bid), the Firm sends one of a handful of attorneys to each meeting to sit there and take notes. In my experience, Mr. Peterson comes to EVERY meeting. Not his associate or some other lawyer in the Firm that knows nothing about education law. Other Firms that would respond to the RFP would likely also perform legal services for other districts. Some solicitors cover as many as 4 or 5 districts at once. Personally, I like the fact that we a dedicated counsel.
Further, you don’t need to have an RFP to evaluate the solicitor’s job performance. I hope everyone involved in District administration does that on a regular basis. I suspect the reason why this position is rarely discussed (or changed) is because Mr. Peterson has served the District very well for a very long time. In my opinion, there is no real money to be saved based on the rates that he charges the District, and if there is in the minds of some, then I suspect you’ll get what you pay for.
If you live by the theory that Mr. Peterson holds the key to the closet where all of the skeletons and conspiracy theories are kept, then I probably won’t change your mind.
9:10 AM, Jim Roberts was the municipal solicitor for years. When attorney and now State Rep Dan Miller was on the commission, the municipality put out an RFP and that is how they got Phil Weis from Buchanan Ingersoll. His firm was the only one which charged a flat fee with no billable hours. It was such a sweet deal for taxpayers, that the municipality hired Phil's firm. No billable hours and we get Phil for almost EVERY meeting.
Peterson's firm is charging billable hours for every RTK, something that Mary Birks and Timmy have encouraged residents and taxpayers to do for quite a long time. Every lawsuit with Peterson representing the district - billable hours.
BTW, there have been other attorneys representing Tucker Arensberg throughout the years. Fred Wolfe comes to mind, in addition to others.
What are you afraid of, 9:10 AM? What are Elaine Cappucci, Larry Lebowitz, and Bill Cooper afraid of? This is the same crap with Jan Klein, even though the auditor general recommends a change every three to five years. But that's another story for another time. Elaine
I believe Mr. Peterson acknowledged working with a dozen associates and wasn't prepared nor had the ability to make alternate plans without consulting his associates.
I’m not afraid of anything. In fact, I think you’d end up in the exact same place after spending more money for an RFP etc. Have at it though if it makes you happy. I think Reimer and his folks feel the same way deep down. He even voted AGAINST his own motion. And if you think Phil is an ace of an solicitor, well then we really are on different pages.
9:10 am is wrong. Privately held and publicly traded companies change counsel and auditors with much greater frequency than Mt. Lebanon's recent practices. The reason? It gets fresh eyes on your issues and helps to ensure that pertinent questions are not overlooked. The only parties that don't change attorneys/auditors are fraudsters (e.g., Madoff) and the mob.
It's going to be interesting to discover what our auditors may have missed over the past quarter century ... we already know what Peterson missed.
RFP stands for Request For Proposal. I believe the only cost involved is advertising in the newspaper. Maybe 2:02 PM knows of more costs.
Why is it all of a sudden, it is "Reimer and his folks," 2:02 PM and "Reimer and his followers," 12:52 PM? By the way, every negative comment had the spelling of Mike's name wrong. Or maybe all the negative comments were made by the same person. Ya think? Elaine
31 comments:
This is going to be some year on the school board if last night was any indication.
There is genuine acrimony on the Board. And I think that's good for the schools. No more situations where a powerful inner circle is both working and frequently socializing with Steinhauer.
Personally, I think the inner circle is still there, but a smaller, tighter inner circle. I understand Elaine Cappucci and Larry Lebowitz were brutal. No meeting video posted yet.
Elaine
Still no video.
Elaine
What is Reimer hiding already????? I thought things were supposed to be different/better now........
Timmy sent out an email saying that there were technical difficulties with the recording. David Huston did record the meeting for me, so at least, we will be able to hear how rude Larry Lebowitz, Bill Cooper, and Elaine Cappucci were last night. Elaine even went after Paula. Again. The whole thing was disgraceful.
Elaine
An unprecedented shift in power last night caused the recording equipment to malfunction.
I love watching the school board meetings online. I can say to Larry, "No you didn't!" Right off the bat, when Larry was nominating Bill Cooper for VP, he dissed Mike Riemer by stating that Mike had no experience with negotiating contracts. Mike disagreed and said that he did have experience with negotiating contracts. Larry tried to pull a fast one and said at the 17:38 time stamp, that he said "school board contracts." No you didn't, Larry!
Elaine
OMG, what fighting!
Elaine
Mr. Cappucci was out of line.
I just finished watching the meeting and my heart is pounding. What fighting! Larry, Elaine, and Bill weren't being very transparent when they nominated each other. It seemed well rehearsed. Cooper had a prepared nomination speech for goodness sake! They had the audacity to say that Mike wasn't being transparent. It did come out that he warned them ahead of time concerning the renewal of Peterson's contract. Larry was very unprofessional. Elaine was extremely hostile. I hadn't heard Bill talk so much since his speech about the cost of pizzas.
7:37 PM, I don't think I have ever heard a spouse of a board member come to the microphone before. With their son being a teacher at Jefferson Middle School and assistant football coach, and Elaine's husband speaking, it has become a real family affair. Shaking my head.
Elaine
Think about it Elaine. The Cappucci parents owe Mr. Peterson a debt of gratitude for all he has done with the hiring process of their son.
Walking on Washington Road yesterday heard a passersby say SCHOOL BOARD MEETING? IT WAS NOTHING BUT A BRU HA HA
Ms. Birks passed the torch to Mr. Lebowitz.
9:07 AM, it was disgraceful.
9:16 AM, Mary passed the torch to Larry and/or Elaine Cappucci. A resident made an excellent suggestion last night to move the solicitor contract to begin in June or July, when the newly elected school board members have had some experience.
Larry was wrong about another thing. The newly appointed school board director may also have experience dealing with "school board" contract negotiations. We won't know that until after the appointment is made.
It was such a hostile environment on Monday night. It seems that both Elaine and Larry were alluding to the fact that their behavior was a preview of coming attractions. More bullying on the school board to fellow board members and the public. They certainly aren't handling the shift of board majority very well.
Elaine
This sets a terrible tone for the district. The fish rots from the head first. If this is how the school leaders are acting, it will continue to seep into the schools themselves and ultimately rot the learning environment for teachers and students.
How can you tell the kids to get along and not bully each other and respect difference when the adults can't?
"How can you tell the kids to get along and not bully each other and respect difference when the adults can't?"
And that says it all! Whether you agree with the new board, the old board, or are just bored, the specter of grown adults acting like spoiled elementary school children does not speak well of the "public" education system here in Leboland. It is intolerable when public officials try to punish private citizens for "questioning authority" - rather like the "thought police" in a George Orwell novel; it is reprehensible when they try to do it to themselves.
Although not writing about our school district, J.D. Tuccille, contributing editor of Reason Magazine, had a salient observation concerning people in positions of authority at various government levels: "We live in a world governed by officials who love exercising power to punish people they dislike." Well said. If the newly elected members of our school board didn't know that before, they certainly know it now!
How can you tell the kids to get along and not bully each other and respect difference when the adults can't?
Maybe "Timmy" or "the elites" or the "sports dads" can help set the right tone.
The dog caught the car.
I watched the meeting and here are my takeaways.
1. If Mr Reimer wants to be the champion of transparency, surprising some Board members with a motion to table the appointment of the solicitor (which happens at every reorg meeting), was not a great first step.
2. Discussing his surprise motion with some but not all before the meeting, was not a great step in that direction either.
3. Mr. Reimer suggesting that he or anyone else can simply suspend Board or District policy for purposes of a vote on a case by case basis was laughable...and a bit scary. This District NEVER deviates from policy. EVER.
4. It’s obvious that Mr. Reimer and his followers have little understanding of how long it would take to retain a new solictor, the process by which that is conducted and how current matters would be handled.
5. Mr. Peterson deserves some credit for being as polite as he was under the circumstances. His job (which he has done incredibly well) is way more important than anything the Board members take on. Hands down. Lawyers often fire clients, and he demonstrated great composure in not doing so then.
6. While I appreciate the passion of Mr. Lebowitz and Mrs. Cappucci, they would be better served (IMO) with a lot less hyperbole. As my kids say, “If everything is awesome, nothing is awesome.”
7. I hope that the other members of the Board find their voices and their own opinions. It was pretty clear that the solicitor issue was being crammed down the new majority’s throat by Mr. Reimer, but when they actually heard the facts, etc, and acted on their own and in accordance with the rules and policies, they made the correct decision on several fronts.
8. Mr. Reimer better come better prepared or grow a thicker skin, because (for better or for worse, good or bad), it seems pretty apparent that he’s going to face some challenges (and challengers) every step of the way.
12:52 PM writes:
"4. It’s obvious that Mr. Reimer and his followers have little understanding of how long it would take to retain a new solictor, the process by which that is conducted and how current matters would be handled."
But you have full understanding, 12:52 PM. I see.
The challengers are going to be Larry Lebowitz, Elaine Cappucci, and Bill Cooper.
Elaine
I love the idea of moving the solicitor contract to the summer months. There is a lot going on this time of year. If we wanted to see what is out there (and why not test the waters) the summer months might be a better time to do it. As Mr. Huston said, Mr. Peterson might be the best there is. We'll never know if we don't look around.
I bet before it's over, Mary Birks will be wishing the district had a different solicitor.
Elaine
9:57 AM, we will have an election for five school board directors in two years. It is quite possible that the new majority will be brand new faces. If we follow this poorly written policy, five new faces, with no prior experience with the solicitor, are expected to vote on the Solicitor Contract. I can see why Riemer wanted a change. This should be discussed at the next policy meeting.
Elaine
The District has had the same Solicitor for decades. The District has had the same auditor for decades. Neither contract has even been bid out for decades. Decades! This would never happen in the private sector. It's completely unprofessional. Makes you wonder. Whats the harm? Why the hysteric pushback? Something stinks.
Actually, in the private sector companies do keep their lawyers for decades. There’s a lot of value in it, just like there’s a lot of value (IMO) in maintaining consistency in the legal services provided to the District. As was noted at the meeting, most school districts use a Firm rather than an individual. When you use a Firm (which is what you would get if you put it out to bid), the Firm sends one of a handful of attorneys to each meeting to sit there and take notes. In my experience, Mr. Peterson comes to EVERY meeting. Not his associate or some other lawyer in the Firm that knows nothing about education law. Other Firms that would respond to the RFP would likely also perform legal services for other districts. Some solicitors cover as many as 4 or 5 districts at once. Personally, I like the fact that we a dedicated counsel.
Further, you don’t need to have an RFP to evaluate the solicitor’s job performance. I hope everyone involved in District administration does that on a regular basis. I suspect the reason why this position is rarely discussed (or changed) is because Mr. Peterson has served the District very well for a very long time. In my opinion, there is no real money to be saved based on the rates that he charges the District, and if there is in the minds of some, then I suspect you’ll get what you pay for.
If you live by the theory that Mr. Peterson holds the key to the closet where all of the skeletons and conspiracy theories are kept, then I probably won’t change your mind.
9:10 AM, Jim Roberts was the municipal solicitor for years. When attorney and now State Rep Dan Miller was on the commission, the municipality put out an RFP and that is how they got Phil Weis from Buchanan Ingersoll. His firm was the only one which charged a flat fee with no billable hours. It was such a sweet deal for taxpayers, that the municipality hired Phil's firm. No billable hours and we get Phil for almost EVERY meeting.
Peterson's firm is charging billable hours for every RTK, something that Mary Birks and Timmy have encouraged residents and taxpayers to do for quite a long time. Every lawsuit with Peterson representing the district - billable hours.
BTW, there have been other attorneys representing Tucker Arensberg throughout the years. Fred Wolfe comes to mind, in addition to others.
What are you afraid of, 9:10 AM? What are Elaine Cappucci, Larry Lebowitz, and Bill Cooper afraid of? This is the same crap with Jan Klein, even though the auditor general recommends a change every three to five years. But that's another story for another time.
Elaine
I believe Mr. Peterson acknowledged working with a dozen associates and wasn't prepared nor had the ability to make alternate plans without consulting his associates.
I’m not afraid of anything. In fact, I think you’d end up in the exact same place after spending more money for an RFP etc. Have at it though if it makes you happy. I think Reimer and his folks feel the same way deep down. He even voted AGAINST his own motion. And if you think Phil is an ace of an solicitor, well then we really are on different pages.
9:10 am is wrong. Privately held and publicly traded companies change counsel and auditors with much greater frequency than Mt. Lebanon's recent practices. The reason? It gets fresh eyes on your issues and helps to ensure that pertinent questions are not overlooked. The only parties that don't change attorneys/auditors are fraudsters (e.g., Madoff) and the mob.
It's going to be interesting to discover what our auditors may have missed over the past quarter century ... we already know what Peterson missed.
What is an RFP and how much do they cost ?
RFP stands for Request For Proposal. I believe the only cost involved is advertising in the newspaper. Maybe 2:02 PM knows of more costs.
Why is it all of a sudden, it is "Reimer and his folks," 2:02 PM and "Reimer and his followers," 12:52 PM? By the way, every negative comment had the spelling of Mike's name wrong. Or maybe all the negative comments were made by the same person. Ya think?
Elaine
Post a Comment