Saturday, February 12, 2011

Newsflash! School Board To State The Obvious!

On Monday, the school board is poised to extend District Administrator Tim Culver's contract for yet another year, through June 2013.  What has us scratching our heads is...what's the point?  As part of the LAST time the board adjusted Culver's contract (last September), there was (as there has been) a little clause that states:

This contract shall be subject to a single one (1) year extension to cover the 2012-2013 school year unless either the Board or District Administrator notifies the other in writing on or before January 31, 2011.

Dear school may want to check the calendar...that contractual deadline passed 2 weeks ago.  Legally you already extended the contract by fiddily... (ooops, nevermind) not taking any action to NOT extend the contract [pardon the double negative].

It's s done deal.  So why waste taxpayer dollars sending the contract to be reviewed--scratch that---to be WRITTEN by a law firm.  You crossed out and replaced like 50 letters.  What exactly did that genius move cost us?  That editing couldn't be done by one of our secretarial staff?

Adding insult to stupidity...your open records bumbling suggests that we'll be seeing YET ANOTHER revision to his contract in the very near future.  Which required even MORE legal staff time.

We may be a tech savvy district, but someone forgot that Microsoft Office stores key information about a document in its "properties".  Ooopsies!   What we can now tell speaks volumes:

  1. The contract document was written by Godfrey & Kahn (district legal counsel).  Why are they WRITING a contract instead of just REVIEWING it?
  2. The total editing time for this monumental contract change was exactly 19 minutes.  Hmm...wonder what we paid in legal fees for that?  Our staff couldn't change a couple of dates?
  3. The contract was last "saved" 12/15/2010.  That means that it has been  available for TWO MONTHS!  Why hasn't action been taken?

Here's a question SOMEONE should be asking:   Why was Culver's contract extension sent to legal to edit without even stopping for a moment to think when board president John Whalen and the district balked against having legal counsel review a $10 MILLION "addendum" to the district busing contract????

And here's a follow-up question....How does "addendum" fit as a descriptor for a contract that was carved up pretty heavily both internally and by legal counsel?'s not even a revised contract's better defined a s a whole new contract!!!

But you keep on rockin', school board.  Because precious few care enough to come to your meetings and tell you differently.  Many residents are indeed asleep at the switch until tax bills arrive.  And many others believe that calling you and e-mailing you won't change your minds.  Once you drink the KoolAid, you're unreachable.

Your action Monday will merely state the obvious.  Do you REALLY have time for such foolishness?