Woodstock CT Café

A lawsuit begins when a complaint is filed with the court.

by John Leavitt

“A complaint has been filed and docketed with the State Elections Enforcement Commission (SEEC) against the Woodstock Board of Education that contains evidence taken from the website “woodstockctcafe.com.”  stated by the SEEC attorney. 

This is regarding a May 15th news release from the BOE which was published at the Cafe and also published by the Woodstock Villager around the same date; so the news release is not exclusive to the Cafe.

http://www.woodstockctcafe.com/2009/05/15/letter-endorsed-by-the-board-of-education-to-the-woodstock-community/

I learned about this new lawsuit when I was contacted by a staff attorney from the SEEC who wanted to learn who owned the Cafe. I was happy to talk to the attorney and explain this ownership. At that time he said I probably could guess who the litigant was … it is Powers.

So what’s the nonsense about just wanting to change term lengths and Board member numbers? This is a vendetta against the BOE by Powers, Shultz, and Rosendahl, with Richardson thrown in. It’s an attempt to repeal the duly elected members of the Board of Education for personal gain, e.g. Powers’ pending appeal of his failed lawsuit, his revenge against SPED and Superintendent Frank Baran and many other aspects of the school system governed by the BOE.

This personal vendetta is being funded and always has been funded by the taxpayers of Woodstock to the detriment of the children of Woodstock.

Tony, I think most will disagree with you. This is about repealling the BOE. It’s a vendetta by Powers, Shultz, and Rosendahl. I found out today when I was contacted by a State attorney that Powers has just filed a new lawsuit against the BOE. It’s another knee slapper which you and I will pay for. John

by Anthony Walker

OK, since I weighed in last Friday on the June 9th petition, I’ve had some good conversations and debates; I think that I’ve explained why I, not the petitioners, are voting Yes tomorrow; been invited by someone to have a beer; and had healthy discussions about the budget.  I have also been attacked, had my statements mis-characterized, and been challenged to prove myself.  What I have not heard, from anyone, why 9 members for 6 year terms makes sense.  Lets get back to the topic at hand, can anyone who plans to vote NO, please tell me why 9 people for 6 year terms makes sense?  We’ve talked about the issues with unseating the current board, but I’ve asked the question a couple of times, would a no voting person be OK with new terms if it meant the current BOE members didn’t get unseated? 

This referendum, for me, is not about throwing the current BOE out.  Do I agree with every single member on the BOE.  No, but that doesn’t mean we throw the whole board out.  For me, the referendum is about 9 members being too many and more importantly, a 6 year term TOO LONG.  please, will someone tell me why it is good this way? 

by Kevin

It’s too bad you missed this morning’s broadcast (to Newcomer) on WINY - there was a lot of information there. We had to rotate in and out so there were no more than two of us together at once (so we didn’t have an illegal meeting). Paul Coutu stated clearly after reading the letter that in his opinion it was in no way a no confidence letter. The circumstances of the letter are pretty much what I have outlined here before.

In 2006 the BOE was looking at making large cuts to the budget. Because of this the then BOE was worried that they might be in violation of their legal commitments to the state. They instructed Dr. Baran not to make cuts until they understood their legal obligations and commitments. What this meant is that the teachers had to sit on their hands not knowing which of them would have jobs the next year and it caused them a great deal of consternation.

When the process was over they wrote a letter to Dr. Baran stating that they were unhappy with the process and the level of communication with them. This set off a series of talks between the WAT, the administration and the BOE. At the end of the discussions a better understanding was reached by all parties and the WAT thanked the the administration. Because of that process and those talks I don’t think the WAT is likely to be left in the dark like that again. In any event Dr. Baran was only carrying out the directives of the then BOE in this and in many ways was a victim of the events. He certainly didn’t deserve the drubbing he got from some of the petitioners and the accusation that he received a letter of no confidence.

It was not a letter of no confidence, but a disagreement of how policy was handled. A letter of no confidence is a very serious thing and would need to be handled much differently. It wasn’t for the BOE to publicise the contents of the letter as it was a resolved issue between groups town employees and wasn’t subject for a public airing as a letter of no confidence would have been. Read the rest of this entry »

by Early Traditions

I (recently) served on a voluntary (temporary) bipartisan board, which was instituted by former First Selectman Marge Wholean in order to address town fiscal concerns. The board worked well together and managed to stay out of the spotlight. Many positive recommendations were submitted to the BOS.

For one year and a half, I invested considerable personal time, often at the expense of R & R. Even elected BOE members or other voluntary town board members serve . . . gratis. These people are expected to serve year after year, without complaint, without monetary compensation, at considerable expense of time, so regardless of what side of the issues we find ourselves on, perhaps BOE volunteers could be thanked for collective time–evidence of their dedicated commitment. In fact, all town board volunteers should be so thanked.

The current nine member board (versus the proposed 7 member one) ensures greater odds that a board reflective of diverse opinions will be retained. Isn’t that what we would all collectively and ideally prefer? There’s going to be inherently more checks and balances with nine versus seven people.

I attended two large public forums that were conducted a few years ago in June for the purposes of eliciting public opinion regarding ninth grade retention. Town citizens who spoke did not wish for retention. The BOE and superintendent spent a good deal of time listening and they treated each person who spoke with courteous respect. Dr. Baran personally went to each person with a microphone so that his or voice could be heard. Thankfully, the public opinion was important to the BOE in consideration of this proposal.

I believe it’s possible to work with the Academy–I believe we have more agreements than disagreements as a community and these commonalities can be used as a potential bridge for closing the gap on our differences, however slow or filled with setbacks that incremental progress may be.

Overall, the BOE has done a superlative job serving the Woodstock community over the years–the high educational standards for excellence set by the WPS, including its parents, volunteers, teachers, administrators, superintendent, all show what can be done on a shoe-string budget. Read the rest of this entry »

by PTO Mom

I realize that it was very late at night when I handed you the PTO flyer Mr. Walker, but you missed a lot of what I said, due to the fact that it was hard for me to get a word in edgewise with you.  You were very obviously upset that the PTO chose to weigh in on this issue, and your statement that you would no longer support the PTO is unfortunate. 

Since I am the other half of your conversation, I would like the opportunity to correct some of the statements you have attributed to me.

By law we cannot spend more than $1,000 on printing and materials for advocating our position on this referendum.  Last school year (07-08) we spent over $29,000 on field trips and special events for both schools, and like any business we are required to have insurance coverage, and have operating expenses as well.  So it is not possible for an organization like ours to truly “spend every single penny solely on the kids.”  What we are able to do with our funding (I think) is a very important supplement to the school’s budget.  When you compare the under $1,000 we have spent on some signs and photocopies, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to what we have funded throughout the school year. 

You DID ask me specifically, how it was decided that the PTO should take a stand on this issue?  But you did not hear my answer correctly, and I most certainly did NOT say “we can take a political stand on any issue we see fit.”  I don’t know who said that to you, but it was NOT me.  I told you that the PTO “had announced a special meeting of all its paid members, we discussed what if anything we should do about this petition, and the majority voted to take a stand on it.”

As background – Signs had just been placed around town saying “Vote yes for EDUCATION” and we do not see any benefits to the education of the students in Woodstock, should this referendum pass.  There is nothing wrong with the system as it is set up now.  So the majority of PTO members at that meeting voted that we should take a stand on this topic and try to educate parents on what the potential outcomes of this vote could really mean – like the entire BOE all terminating on November 2, 2009 and a brand new board being elected with 2 fewer members to do the same amount of work.  Read the rest of this entry »