Thanks to jon for pointing this out. Check out the board agenda for tonight.
ACTION ITEMS
5.1. Approval, Rescind October 24, 2007 Board Action Approving Employment Contract
for Superintendent of Schools
5.2. Approval, Employment Contract for Superintendent of Schools
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Yeah, getting in a losing lawsuit is really going to save the money. WTF?!?!
Yeah, losing a top-notch administrator is really going to save our test scores. WTF?!?!
Fitz is really going to be racking up the legal bills. First special ed lawsuits. Now one from the superintendent. Anyone get the list of lawyers from the guy at the last meeting?
On the MHS site it's posted:
"The Board Committee meetings of the Board of School Directors scheduled for Wednesday, June 25, 2008 have been cancelled."
Is there a meeting tonight?
From the way it reads it is just the committee meetings. (I seem to remember hearing this before -- maybe at the last meeting).
The Board meeting should still be on.
Yes, the regular business meeting will be held at 7:30. Only committee meetings have been cancelled.
Glad to see that all the School Directors are working hard! What's next? Why cancel the meetings? If there wasn't time or there were conflicts, why not reschedule them? I suppose this is just one more example of the ineptitude, disdain, and lack of care that this board has quickly come to exemplify. RECALL VOTE!!!
The motion passed, I think 5-3. May have been 6-2. I don't know what Dr. Yonson is going to do, but losing her would set the district back years. Even if she was replaced with the best superintendent ever, a supersuperintendent if you will, yet another change in administration means another period of adjustment to a new set of directives.
It's not an insult, they said, we just want what we want. Even though it's my money, couldn't blame her at all if she sues.
I hope any lawsuits target the individuals. I am sure any lawyer worth his salt will come after the district, but I also seem to recall that individuals carry some liability for their actions as public officials. Can anyone clarify on this? I'd just hate to see these *(&^%&%^&^ers walk away from this scott-free. (What does scott-free really mean anyway?)
The surprising and ironic definition of "scot free". It has noting to do with Scotland at all.
Aaaahhh!! Scot Free, you don't pay the tax. Interesting, perhaps even ironic. Thanks for the info.
"I also seem to recall that individuals carry some liability for their actions as public officials. Can anyone clarify on this?"
My understanding is that the individual members are somewhat protected unless there is gross negligence. For example: let's say a school building is commonly known to be unsafe, is deemed unsafe by qualified persons (say, an engineer) and this is put on public record, the board is advised by administrators and/or legal counsel to do something about it, and they still refuse to act. In that example, they may be held liable in a suit. In the case of Dr Yonson's contract, I don't think there's a case, but that doesn't mean she couldn't try.
Post a Comment