If you remember back to the time following the revelation that the Emperor self-commissioned the $2500 Hellman building report to cover his tracks for the defeasement, it was suggested and broadly hinted at, that the Emperor was given a talking to by Counsel Kelly and the rest of the board. (Disclaimer: I was not there and those that were there are not talking. At least not to me. But if you want to, my email is listed at the top.) He was basically told, you're new and inexperienced, and you're eager to push your agenda, but this is not allowed. You can't run your own show here. You act in the name of the board only. We're covering you this time by an 8-1 vote. Go and sin no more.
Now, last night, we find out that the Emperor has been lunching with the district health care provider contact and/or other health care provider contacts (please, someone clarify!) in order to promote "competition" among the providers.
The problem is that the board did not sanction this. The Emperor also apparently casually mentioned that he was "the boss" and he wanted action taken to reduce costs to the district. (Clarification requested.)
Let me stop here and applaud the idea that the Emperor was promoting, not the way it was done. Stimulating competition and lowering costs is worthy. The Emperor has a problem with the "red tape" stuff and clearly and loudly proclaimed this for all to hear.
Captain Obvious reports that many people who have a high disdain for authority and controls have an authority and control problem of their own. Not that I'm making a correlation here, you understand.
So, that's when Robin Reithmeyer unleashed her latest load of lèse majesté and told the Emperor that this board runs on red tape.
Momentary reality check: A self professed experienced CPA with extensive contact with the US Tax Code and the IRS, as well as several municipal governments in Pennsylvania, is unaware that red tape runs the world. Um...I'm thinking, maybe...NOT!
But then, the other four board members, even Mrs. Steve "You Squandered Two Million Dollars Of Our Money" Worob began chiding him. So did Counsel Kelley. So did the audience. They had all already privately told him once not to overreach and to operate beyond his mandate. Now, the public got to watch and join in.
With last night's performance, quite a bit was lost. The openness and honesty that the Stop the Schoolers supposedly ran on, and that Bill Farrell (honestly and sincerely, I believe) mentions quite often, is revealed as nothing but hollow words, as empty as the chocolate bunnies on Easter morning when you bite their ears off. With these acts, one man has made a mockery of the eight remaining members of the board, the school administration that he holds in high disregard, the parents that he openly ignores, and yes, even the taxpayers that he is allegedly crusading for.
Don't believe me? See for yourself on the replays all next week. Watch and check back in with us here and let us know what you think. Unless the tape is mysteriously damaged or lost.
When the name "Bill Clinton" is mentioned, I'm sure the first association you made to a word was "liar". I'm not sure what one word will stick here, but for William I, Emperor of Education, I have no doubt that the single word will show itself sooner rather than later.
I believe my three minutes are up. Feel free to add as you will.
5 comments:
That picture looks more like the Vice-Emperor "Angry Al" than Herr Hellmann.
Epilogue: to this very day, those Tudor dwellings behind the Emperor not only remain structurally sound, they have been equipped with modern technology and HVAC systems and function as some of Ye Olde Towne's many Tobaccoe Emporiums, Salons de Manicure, and Incendiarie Device Shoppes.
I think (I hope) that the other board members, who previously so blindly followed their illustrious leader, have come to the realization that their actions are accountable for.
It is quite one thing to nod in agreement over and over again to benign issues like approving lunch prices or a contract for buying toilet paper.
It is another thing altogether to hang your derriere out over issues that undoubtedly will be highly scrutinized.
Even actions taken to correct previous infractions (i.e. voting to approve after the fact, filing with the state to comply with law...) are no substitute for due dilligence.
There is no doubt in my mind that eventually someone will be called onto the carpet, whether it is by the Dept of Ed or the State Attorney General or some other authority. When that happens, board members will want to make certain that they have acted within the law, so that they do not find themselves being punnished for things they were led to believe were legal or ethical. "I didn't know" and "He told me it was O.K." are no longer valid disclaimers in this world.
SoS's reading of the situation: Spot on.
Jon, let's not forget the Fus-ion restaurante that almost didn't open.
Post a Comment