“I can tell you that once Ernie was given “provisional” recognition of his ex-officio status by the BOE when I was chairman, not once did he ever sit at the table with the elected BOE members nor did he attend any executive sessions.” Romeo Blackmer’s comment below
In his recent letter to First Selectman Margaret Wholean, the Town Attorney Robert DeCrescenzo states “Unless otherwise provided by law, the first selectman, in each town for which its board of selectmen is the executive authority, shall be the chief executive officer of such town and shall be an ex-officio member, without vote, of all town boards,commissions and committees”. (referring to General Statutes § 7-12a). He goes on to say “The Woodstock Board of Education is a “town board” for those municipal functions delegated to it by state law. Local boards of education serve dual roles: they are agents for the state when performing those duties delegated by the State, and they are agents of the municipalities they serve when they perform those functions entrusted by the state to the municipality.”
The Town Attorney then gives an example of where a local board of education acts as “agents of the municipalities they serve when they perform those functions entrusted by the state to the municipality” as when local boards of education must comply with a municipality’s ordinances and established fiscal procedures. (referring to the case Board of Education of the City of New Haven, et al. v. City of New Haven, 237 Conn. 169, 18 1 (1996).
It seems quite interesting that from this opinion, Margaret Wholean and her supporters have concluded that she has absolute unrestricted authority to sit on the Woodstock Board of Education as an ex-officio member in all matters. Wouldn’t that position be contrary to what the Town Attorney has told her in the legal opinion she sought from him? His opinion would seem to suggest that it is ONLY when the Board of Education is acting as a local board that she has ex-officio status on the BOE. It seems equally clear from the Town Attorney’s opinion that if the Board of Education is acting, as it often does, “as agents for the State when performing those duties delegated by the State” (for example, complying with all of the state mandates for education) that Margaret would NOT have any authority to sit as an ex-officio member of the Board of Education. In addition, whenever she sits as an ex-officio member of the Board of Education, she can NOT vote as explained by the Town Attorney.
So, the question really is, why the heck is Margaret forcing this issue? She can’t vote and she also can not sit on the Board of Education at all in instances where the Board is acting in its role as an agent of the State. She is going to force the Woodstock Board of Education to rule in each instance that is acts, as to whether it is performing the role of an agent of a local board or as an agent of the state, in order to determine whether she is properly sitting on the Board of Education in ex-officio capacity. If the Board of Education doesn’t undertake this exercise of making the determination of whether she can rightfully sit ex-officio on the BOE, and thereby allow her to sit in all instances, even when she is not authorized, then how could they exclude any member of the public from sitting on their board, even if that member had no authority to do so? In an exercise of idiotic muscle flexing, Margaret has undertaken to confront the Board of Education for no useful purpose, because even when she sits, she can not vote. Even her authority to sit in executive session is limited as explained by the town attorney. Hasn’t Margaret proven that she already has her hands more than full trying to run the general government side of Woodstock? What is her real agenda in taking this foolish position? She seems to be taking all kinds of advice from Ernie Wetzel. Ernie tried to sit ex-officio on the Board of Education some years ago when Romeo Blackmar was Chair of the BOE and he was shut out. I guess he must have forgotten to tell Margaret about that.
Hey ‘Just Asking’,
You say that the Town Attorney says “Local boards of education serve dual roles: they are agents for the state when performing those duties delegated by the State, and they are agents of the municipalities they serve when they perform those functions entrusted by the state to the municipality.â€?
So if Woodstock Board of Education is an agent for the state, then why would anyone have heart burn if they went to the State Dept of Education for assistance with a local funding problem? And why would anyone have an issue if they went to the State legislature for help? After all, the Town Attorney says they are agents for the State.
Again you have to resort to untruths. I was not shut out. They tried to shut me out but didn’t. They got a legal opinion they wanted which was not to recognize the ex-officio status of the First Selectman. It was on the BOE agenda one night and they voted 4-3 to honor the ex-officio status. At least that board obeyed the law but not the current one.
I’m confused. Mr. Wetzel asserts that the BOE had to recognize his status as ex-officio. Perhaps, they were acting in the interest of the town that night and not as agents of the state. So, what is Wholean’s problem? Her refusal to make her request official by putting it in writing is further evidence that she doesn’t really understand the governing process. Making her request in writing creates a historical recording and then gives context to corresponding BOE action. The entire reason for any board to have their meeting in public is to create a public record of the actions taken – it is the act of creating a public record. Minutes require recording of those in attendance (for the purpose of determining if a quorum is present), what motions were made, and the results of the corresponding votes.
Perhaps in strategizing their initiatives with Academy bargaining, the Board feels compromised by a First Selectman that has close ties with them. Otherwise, I’m not sure what the problem is with MW sitting ex-officio. In fact, if it is believed that inter-board communication is compromised in this town, then I think it important, if not essential, that the First selectmen facilitate and promote this by acting as ex-officio. This is perhaps the reason for this statute in the first place. Or would you rather her plan new birdfeeder venues and house number initiatives?
The bottom line: we all elected the DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM, that Margaret Wholean ran under. We DID NOT elect ANY of the CPS candidates or Ernest A. Wetzel. Margaret Wholean should not be taking direction from this man, especially in view of his obvious behavioral and psychological issues. In addition, she should not have run if she had an ulterior agenda or a conflict of interest.
Taxpayer – I think you have positively hit the nail on the head. I really don’t blame the BOE for being resistant to Ms. Wholean. She seems to have illustrated on more than one occasion that her loyalties are with the Academy and, specifically, not the BOE. Indeed, given the current negotiating difficulties I think the inclusion of this ex-officio in the executive sessions only invites continuing negotiation difficulties.
Taxpayer, Ms. Wholean has stated to a number of people, that she “can’t stand” Dr. Francis Baran. Ernie Wetzel is in her office a lot and she takes his council. She also would rather file F.O.I. requests than talk to her BOE and has also stated on numerous occasions that she would “love to audit” the K-8 school system. Last but not least, many have heard her say that she has “padded” HER budget. I have in the past, thought of you as one of the better contributors here, but lately, you seem a bit dense.
Dense? I thought my prior statement rather precise in acknowledging the BOE’s concerns with M. Wholean. I don’t blame them for their hesitancy in acknowledging her ex-officio status. But let’s walk through some of the information presented by the author of the posted commentary. First, consider the role of the BOE as having two functions, as Atty. D. suggests, with one acting as state agent and two as municipal agent. Second, apply the interpreted logic of the author who suggests that MW should only manifest ex-officio status when the BOE is acting as a municipal agent. Third, ask yourself whether or not the BOE, in negotiating with the Academy, is acting as a state agent or a municipal agent? Fourth, if you agree with me that negotiations between a locally elected BOE and a locally appointed high school IS a municipal issue and the BOE is thus acting as a municipal agent, then would you also agree that in this circumstance MW has a right to ex officio status. Fifth, do you believe that it is this particular issue that concerns MW or do you believe that there are other issues that concern her? Do you believe that other issues may include reinterpretation of Prop 46 state mandates for instance? In this case, do you believe that BOE is acting as state agent or municipal agent? I personally cannot answer that difficult question. Nitro, by raising these questions I am not taking a particular side and I am not dense to the fact that these issues are sticky and undermining of good faith. However, we cannot, nor should not, determine or interpret the statutory law based on opinion or hearsay such as that in which you insolently claimed in your unsubstantiated and slanderous comments.
I have heard MW say she “cannot stand Dr. Baran” and threaten to “audit the school system.”
I think MW cannot stand anyone who who is less confused than she is. Despite her financial background, MW does not seem to understand that all an audit will show is evidence that funds are expended as shown on the BOE financial statement – and no one has ever questioned this.
Taxpayer. I personally have heard all of it, but I will not give my name.
Taxpayer, The answer to all of your questions is very simple. Wholean is acting as an agent to the Academy Board of Trustees which include her lawyer/husband Jim Kaeding, and independent Trustee Ernie Wetzel. Another here called her a “puppet”. I think of her as a silly marionette, a stooge or a cat’s paw, with the strings being pulled by more than one person with special interests at stake. The voters did not elect Kaeding or Wetzel. It’s unfortunate that the DTC did not anticipate this problem when they chose her to run for first Selectman. Their selection of her was a huge mistake. Otherwise the DTC did a remarkable job of getting their candidates elected.
If Wholean could function on her own as a ‘CEO’ without pursuing someone else’s agenda then her actions would be less subject to criticizm. But unfortunately her actions are the results of strings working her arms, head, and even her mouth. Its hard to imagine the others in the Town Hall being enamered with her behavior. I doubt that we would see this kind of abberrant behavior from Very, Eaffy, and Barabra Rich. Wholean needs to be kicked out of office with no ceremony, just recognition that she has been inept in her first real job.
For you to not recognize this problem is unfortunate because otherwise I have enjoyed your commentary.
Well Cain November will be here soon. Some may look at it as a time of renewal and hope, I am afraid of returning to those halcyon days of bird feeders and business as usual (AKA Very, Eaffy, and Rich). Not only does it punish us bloggers who enjoy the raw material controversy brings, but it also extinguishes the conversation (pardon the Hillaryism) that needs to take place. Like her or not, MW has brought this conversation forward, in her own way. Stirred up the pot, whether inside the town hall or at board meetings. She made some close alliances and also some angry enemies. Something I bet she struggles with. How and why she went from the Democrat darling to the Democrat demoness is, well frankly, quite speculative and quite amusing to me. I guess blood is thicker than water. Water under the bridge, that is.
Tax, Why don’t you run for Selectman this fall? You’d be a respectible leader in the Selectmens’ office, I think. Quite a contrast to the three there now. If you want to stir the pot with birdfeeders to keep us entertained then we’ll join the fun. MW is not stirring the pot, its the people holding the strings working the hands, head, and mouth.
I see. Funny thing is, ironically, I happen to be a very avid birdwatcher. I have scoped the east coast looking to add a rare warbler to my list. One of my heroes is Andy Resnesiewicz (spelled wrong) at the Pomfret Audobon. If you ever have the opportunity to join him in one of his birdwalks you will be quite amazed at his talent. I’d love to see some of our Open Space in Woodstock be used for such endeavors. I think that one of the problems we face in Woodstock is harboring a pool of capable and qualified candidates to hold offices. I believe this was probably the problem the DTC faced last year and the impetus for them endorsing Ms. Wholean.
Taxpayer, why haven’t commented or questioned Mr. Wetzel? After reading his comments here, do you think he is well?
Do I think he is well?? I hope so. As much as I might agree or disagree with him I have not found him to be “not well”(whatever you mean by that). In fact, I have found Mr. Wetzel extremely articulate,quick, and discerning. I’ll never forget the debate he had against Mr. Neumann for First Selectman. With words unwasted and the flick of his glasses he turned Mr. Neuman into the chump I thought him to be right before my very eyes. It was priceless. I guess I never really lost respect for him and as First Selectman, Mr. Wetzel helped me with an issue that I have also not forgotten him for. Nevertheless, I am not above siding with anyone who I feel is legitimate. Mr. Wetzel’s above response seems to me legitimate. I don’t know the truth of the matter but anyone who comes to this site without anonymity, should earn enough respect to assume they are telling the truth until one of the sharks(I say that with admiration) here proves them otherwise. But most of the time it comes down to he said, she said. I am frequently at loss to the truth of the matter but guess it lies somewhere in between. But taking the in between stand has not made me popular. I will add that I enjoyed the more gentlemanly discourse of Mr. Bowman in response to Mr. Wetzel. I praise Bowman for making a good, legitimate argument without losing control.
I can tell you that once Ernie was given “provisional” recognition of his ex-officio status by the BOE when I was chairman, not once did he ever sit at the table with the elected BOE members nor did he attend any executive sessions. As for Ms. Wholean’s desire to be included as ex-officio on the BOE; she can have my seat from now until November, she’s been sitting in it anyway.
Wetzel is a pathological liar – I don’t know how anyone could say he is “smart”. And it seems perfectly obvious that MW’s sole motivation for seeking status with BOE is to undermine their ability to negotiate with the Academy.
Well Hawkeye, you are a coward hiding behind your secret name. What a wuss. Romeo is right, I did not sit at that table with those wonderful folks, wonder why? Romeo hasn’t added anything to education in Woodstock for many years now. Margaret should sit in his seat, something might get done.
Taxpayer, any derogatory statements from me about Ernie are in reference to his statements on this BLog and his rudeness and unwillingness to quantify anything with facts. I am happy that you have some fond memories of conversations past, but again, I am refering to posts and logic reflected on this Blog- and perhaps you should too.
You are correct.
Taxpayer, as a member of the current BOE I attended one of the inter-board meetings and kept very detailed minutes. During the meeting I made the statement that the Woodstock Public Schools are given the “leftovers” after the tuition is paid to Woodstock Academy. I was immediately reprimanded and told that was not true by none other than Ms. Wholean. At that moment I realized how futile it would be to continue to attend and or believe that inter-board meetings would ever be productive. Ms. Wholean’s jumping to the defense of the Academy made her agenda perfectly clear.
For all of you out “there”. Ever had a difference of opinion with Ms. Wholean? It’s like trying to reason with ERNIE! Enough said. Mr. Blackmar: you have done a great service to this Community.
Romeo Blackmar makes it clear none of this is about Republican/Democratic politics. He has been an untiring advocate for the Woodstock public schools for many years. Hats off to a fine man.
That does it Wetzel! Ah’m a callin you out!!
You stole my name and changed it and now ma whole fambly’s mad as hornets! Ever-one thinks ah’m you! Just a low-down, lyin’ snake in the grass!
Ah’ll meet you’n your boys at high noon on the town green this Saturday! ‘N you better be prepared to give mah name back or my Maw says she is gonna give you one helluva whippin! Worse than when she ‘n Paw run you off to Pomfret – where you shoulda’ stayed if ya’ knew what was good fer ya’!
“N stop cuttin down our fine public educational system, jez cuz you got one a’ them fancy “Trustee” positions up on the hill!
(Paw’s not comin’ – said Maw could handle it!)
This last commentary says it all for the low level you folks have fallen to. The low level of intelligent discourse is well spelled out by this last comment. A Taxpayer said it very well, is this current BOE heroes activists or advocates? They have spent the last two years spending our tax dollars on attorneys,studies and attacking the Academy all to get their way. They have gone to the State Legislature, the Ballot box, unethical negotiations with the Academy and outright misrepresentation of the situation. They thumbed their noses at the BOF by bringing in an illegal budget last year. Despite all of this nonsense they have accomplished nothing. They haven’t won a thing. Their tactics are deplorable and a failure. The only thing left for them is to take the Ninth Grade and give us the “savings” from doing so. What a joke. I don’t think they have the guts to take the Ninth Grade because deep down they are only cowards who operate well only in the dark. Kind of like rats.
Mr. Wetzel,
You still have not provided any explanation or evidence for your claims discussed in this thread:
http://www.woodstockctcafe.com/2007/06/17/taxpayer-taxpayer-too-wax-philosophical/#comments
Please provide the requested information so we can evaluate your claims or retract.
Thanks.
Mr. Wetzel – You refer to all who disagree with you and support the Woodstock public education system as “morons” and “scumbags”. And for years you and your CPS allies have publicized false, malicious and personalized information about our public school teachers and administrators. But now you wish hold others to the Queen’s rules?
Bowman- don’t hold your breath- it’s not going to happen. Ernest Wetzel will continue to shoot his mouth off, regardless. This is a very sick man who has a passion to steer and twist -up those with even less cerebral matter than himself. Casualties are a-plenty and never ending with this clown, and it’s all to feed his ego and misplaced fury.
The Academy has made a serious miscalculation if it has vested its political stakes with Ernie Wetzel. The town of Woodstock has rejected this disturbed man for what he is. But I think it makes an important statement about the mindset of the Trustees – don’t they know there is something seriously wrong with him?
Chuckles,
Don’t worry about me, I’m not holding it. I’m not asking because I expect an answer; my question is more for the lurkers.
Thanks.