More reasons not to vote for Cappucci

There is that little thing about her son being hired as a social studies teacher at Jefferson Middle School and no trace of why the job posting was altered nine months after Elaine Cappucci's son was hired. Keep in mind that Elaine had to resign from the school board because of the nepotism policy and is now running to replace herself, as well as seeking another four year term.

Please listen to Paula's comments on nepotism, as well as Elaine's "rebuttal" from Monday's school board meeting. The school board meeting video is available here. Paula begins at 1:30:57. Elaine begins at 1:38:33. The clip can be viewed here.

Besides her belligerent demeanor during Comments or Questions from Residents or Taxpayers at the October 9, 2017 school board meeting, I wanted to share a little more background on Elaine Cappucci's bio from the CCRB campaign website.

I was part of the team that negotiated the current Act 93 agreement for our District administrators.

That is not something I would be proud of, especially with what has been revealed with Jan Klein's creative accounting in recent days. The Act 93 Agreement can be found here. You can read about Jan Klein's salary adjustment here. Twenty MTLSD administrators received salary increases Please take the time to read the comments in that 2012 post. We were complaining about Jan's sloppy bookkeeping five years ago!

Elaine Cappucci is part of the Million Dollar Heist also known as the Century of Excellence Campaign Committee. Mary Birks likes to refer to it as a 100 year plan. Since Timmy doesn't have an original thought, Elaine has a major role as Timmy's key Key Communicator.

You vote for Elaine Cappucci, it is job security for Janice Klein and Timothy Steinhauer!

You ain't seen nothin' yet

Josephine posted the new five year Act 93 Agreement. The School Board's objective was to craft "a compensation and benefit package that is market competitive and respects internal equity." This agreement includes the following administrative positions: Principals, Assistant Principals, Technology Directors, Supervisors, Director of Special Education, Athletic Director, and all members identified as Act 93 employees.

Under Salary,

A. Annual compensation adjustments for administrators shall be determined by the Board of School Directors with input from the Act 93 Committee and the Superintendent. Administrators with a Meets Expectations rating shall receive a compensation adjustment equal to the Act 1 Index (Special Session Act 1 of 2006), but within the range of 1.4% to 3.5%. If the Index percentage for any given year falls outside of the above mentioned range, either party may exercise their option to meet and discuss the matter.

B. In addition the Board may authorize additional funds that can be used for merit and/or salary adjustments. The Superintendent has the discretion to award those additional funds based on individual performance and potential for any administrator earning a rating of Meets Expectations or Far Exceeds Expectations.

Look at the fringe benefits. They are unreal. Could someone with a knowledge of the previous agreement, kindly compare it to this one, which the dynamic duo (Posti and Cappucci) put together?  I can't believe what I am reading.

Here is Posti's perspective taken from her Center Court blog:

Tonight, the Board will take action on a new five-year Act93 agreement. This agreement applies to principals, assistant principals, the technology director, supervisors, the director of special education, the athletic director, and all members identified as Act 93 employees and it details compensation, benefits and the evaluation system used for our administration. Its development is the result of many years’ worth of discussions and observations and more than a year’s worth of negotiations. Mr. Ostergaard and I began negotiations with Mr. McFeeley, Mr. Freil and Mr. Wolfson last year and Mrs. Cappucci and I continued that work this year on behalf of the Board.


The new agreement is much simpler and streamlines the compensation process, eliminating the “lump sum” provision as well as the tenure bonus for administrators who have worked in the District for 10 years or more. It also bases annual salary increases for this group on the Act 1 Index, offering them a predictable roadmap and the Board a better forecasting tool along with the ability to consider merit increases for the District’s high performers.

This five-year agreement uses the Act 1 Index as a basis for merit increases identifying the minimum as 1.4 and the maximum as 3.5. 1.4 is the historical low of the Act 1 Index and while the historical high was 4.4, the Board chose a more reasonable cap for merit increases. This year’s Index is 1.7% and is locked in next year at 1.7 because it is a reassessment year, giving the Board and the administration an indication of the possible merit increase that two of the five years of the agreement are based upon.


The administrators’ evaluation tool will also be improved, basing measurements not only on achievement of their annual goals but on performance of their day-to-day management duties. The end result is an agreement that takes into account our community’s high expectations of the District’s management team along with our taxpayers’ available resources which the Act 1 index helps indicate. I’d like to thank Dr. Steinhauer and the negotiation team for their thoughtful, collaborative work during the past year.

It is getting to the point where I get suspicious after seeing the words, "collaborative" or "collaboration." Why is that?

School Board Agenda Part 3...Considering an Act 93 agreement

There is too much going on with the August 13 agenda to have it all in one post, so I thought I would break it up into parts. Here's Part 3...Considering an Act 93 agreement.

Act 93 Administrative Agreement – The Board will be asked to consider an Act 93 agreement with the District’s administrators.

How many times are we going to see this? Wasn't this voted on previously? Was a 6.9% increase for Jan Klein not enough? Wasn't this agreement Josephine Posti's and Elaine Cappucci's baby?

Act 93 Administrative Agreement removed from agenda

Thanks to David Huston, the podcasts to tonight's meetings are now available. Josephine Posti announced that an agenda item was removed -

Act 93 Administrative Agreement – The Board will be asked to consider an Act 93 agreement with the District’s administrators.
Act 93 Administrative Agreement: RESOLVED, That the Board approves the Act 93 Administrative Pay for Performance Plan as presented effective July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2017.

Does that mean that there is no agreement for Jan Klein? Steve Scheurer?

The following action item was only an adjustment to Mrs. Klein's annual salary, or a technical amendment or revision as explained by Scott Goldman:

Revision to 2012-2013 Administrative Salaries – The Board will be asked to approve a revised list of salary adjustments for administrators previously approved by the Board.
Revision to 2012-2013 Administrative Salaries: RESOLVED, That the Board approves the revised 2012-2013 list of annual salary adjustments for administrators effective July 1, 2012.

At the last meeting, Scott Goldman had not voted to approve the administrative raises, but since tonight was a technical amendment, the vote was unanimous. I wish the Board would have just come out to explain what the technical amendment was.