posted by Mike Madison at 11:36 AM /
Jim Menegazzi writes in today's Post-Gazette:
There are lots of disappointed voters in Mt. Lebanon, and many of them have expressed their disappointment where they should -- at the ballot box. Even better, the Superintendent's buyout energized the taxpayers of the municipality in a way that no other recent issue has -- meaning that everything the School Board does should get scrutiny like never before. But where's the evidence of fraud or criminal conspiracy? Those are serious charges, and before anyone launches a full-scale investigation, there should be some preliminary evidence to justify it. All I've seen is the ugly end of an employment contract. Nothing more.
If the taxpayers of Mt. Lebanon deserve an explanation about the buyout of Superintendent Margery Sable, per state Auditor General Jack Wagner's recent audit report ("State Urges Disclosure on Mt. Lebanon School Buyout," Aug. 9), then why isn't Mr. Wagner conducting a special investigation as he is empowered to do?
Do we know that fraud and/or criminal conspiracy have not been committed? Isn't he empowered to demand answers? Shouldn't these two parties, the Mt. Lebanon school board and Margery Sable, be taken to a judge's chambers and forced to explain their actions?
This was Jack Wagner's chance to show the people of Pennsylvania that he means business. Instead he has merely accepted their non-answers lying down. Mr. Wagner's Web site claims that he is "fighting to protect your family's tax dollars." Some fight. This is one very disappointed voter.
There are lots of disappointed voters in Mt. Lebanon, and many of them have expressed their disappointment where they should -- at the ballot box. Even better, the Superintendent's buyout energized the taxpayers of the municipality in a way that no other recent issue has -- meaning that everything the School Board does should get scrutiny like never before. But where's the evidence of fraud or criminal conspiracy? Those are serious charges, and before anyone launches a full-scale investigation, there should be some preliminary evidence to justify it. All I've seen is the ugly end of an employment contract. Nothing more.
8 Comments:
Evidence of criminal conspiracy... no that's not what this is about.
The school board stated Sable was doing a pretty good job, the conflicts apparently were of differences in management style or direction and future problems. The taxpayers/parents should have an explanation of those differing opinions. The residents may have decided Sable's position was the right one, then again we may have sided with the board.
But public disclosure of the issues should be mandatory, otherwise how do we make an educated decision come November!!!
Hiding behind personal secrecy leaves us to wonder where the personal problems were. Perhaps Sable uncovered some hidden agenda or wrongdoing with current board members/administration. Why else for such a generous buyout????
I went over this ground at (exhaustive) length last year, at Pittsblog. My final hypothesis about the events leading up to the buyout appears here. Via neighbors and friends who know people who know, I've been told that this account is pretty close to the truth.
Final hypothesis - why should taxpayers accept a hypothesis? If your speculation is correct, there is absolutely no reason for secrecy. Furthermore, what does this say about the management of the district. The auditor general specifically addresses the short-comings in the Sable contract, so perhaps the performance of the solicitor needs to be reviewed also. Perhaps, even though the Board members are to be commended for their services, the job maybe be beyond their expertise and capabilities. The fee policy is an example. After, the anger by the band supporters over the fee for using the H.S. for fund raising, Ms. Walton stated, "we failed to see all the ramifications of the fee policy." The elementary remodeling is another example. Not only did they grossly underestimate construction overruns, they used the $5 million earmarked for a new pool. The new pool plan is already $300,000 over projected cost, and doesn't meet building codes. Wouldn't that have been one of the first requirements of the plans? What is Burt Hill charging the district for each revise? The sudden deadline for appointing Dr. Wilson as permanent superintendent is another example. The board let the superintendent decision go down to the wire without taxpayer input. The teacher contract was pushed through too, without review by residents. All of these incidents may have be justifiable, but I have a problem with the transparency of board actions.
And everyone should have a problem with the lack of transparency. I'm not defending the Board.
But I also don't think we need to reopen the debate over why Margery Sable was fired. It's one of the reasons why I called the whole situation "SableGate" in the first place: It's the secrecy that's offensive, not (necessarily) the underlying conduct.
So, and back to the reason for my post in the first place: I think that it's fair to conclude that a large majority of the voters in the School Board primary in Mt. Lebanon were unhappy with the Board's secrecy. People had the information they needed in order to act, and they acted. We've established that the secrecy was wrong. Is there any reason to suspect (as Jim suspected in his letter to the P-G) that crime or fraud was involved? I don't think so. And given the seriousness of those charges, the burden has to lie on the accusers to come forward with at least some evidence; the burden doesn't lie with the Board to disprove the claims.
I am not suggesting that any fraud or illegalities occurred. I am instead concerned with the district management. I attended a PTA meeting to meet Sable - to hear about her plans for the district. I thoroughly agreed with observations and the plans she proposed. She presented a lot of factual information, proposals for improving student performance etc. etc. In the time she was on board she was very specific on where changes needed to be implimented and in our view those changes were having a positive effect. That said - another comment she made was - "I'm not here to make friends. My goal is to improve our kids education and the environment for doing that."
No we're not looking to reopen the Sable contract, but instead to hear where this district to going with our kids education. If the status quo is satisfactory, Sable wasn't the right person for the job. Perhaps she was too dictatorial and inflexible, but as a resident I would like to know where the conflicts were occurring.
No, but that (crime/fraud) was Jim's suggestion, and that's the only thing that I'm responding to.
I've been told that many of M. Sable's programmatic initiatives remain in place, and that objections to her management were not based on the substance of what she was trying to do.
The quality of the educational experience in the District is a different question. My sense -- and it is only a sense, and it is anecdotal, and it is based on talking with neighbors and friends around town -- is that the District is and has been complacent about that quality. The failure to conduct a search for a new Superintendent was a huge disappointment and (to me) speaks volumes about the current Board's willingness to rest on the District's historic laurels. As someone who recruits for an elite college, I know that Mt. Lebanon applicants in recent years have not impressed me the way that applicants from some other schools (BP comes to mind) have impressed me.
Couldn't agree with you more. This whole incident with Sable is not about her, but as you say the quality of education in this district. It does get in the way, but at least it got people's attention.
That is concisely where my problem lies with the silence of both parties. It hides what may be fundamental shortcomings that Sable may have been trying to correct. With no search for a new super. the status quo is maintained. I got the impression that Sable - like you, found a lot of complacency in the district, "kicked some butt" and paid the price for it. There seems to be a lot of nepotism etc. in this district and over time if enough people are looking out for each other - complacency usually sets in. Funny, since you mention BP, there was just an article in the Almanac about the school board holding a special vote to allow someone to become an employee since they had a relative already working in the district and it was against policy. Many companies have no relative policies to alleviate problems, but I bet you'd never see it in this district!!!
As for quality education and MTL's historical laurels, I find more and more parents are spending more and more $$$ supplementing their kids education through programs from Duquesne, CCAC and private tutors.
The kids in this district should score high on tests and would do so in any district whether its BP, USC, Peters, BW. Given their family backgrounds, environment, expectations and money everything is focused for that success. This district gives itself far more credit than it deserves. Perhaps you should start a blog or link or whatever to give parents a venue for comparing notes and presenting them to the board. A lot of families are comparing notes, informally- with no outlet for acting on them, except of course - their vote in November.
Couldn't agree with you more. This whole incident with Sable is not about her, but as you say the quality of education in this district. It does get in the way, but at least it got people's attention.
That is concisely where my problem lies with the silence of both parties. It hides what may be fundamental shortcomings that Sable may have been trying to correct. With no search for a new super. the status quo is maintained. I got the impression that Sable - like you, found a lot of complacency in the district, "kicked some butt" and paid the price for it. There seems to be a lot of nepotism etc. in this district and over time if enough people are looking out for each other - complacency usually sets in. Funny, since you mention BP, there was just an article in the Almanac about the school board holding a special vote to allow someone to become an employee since they had a relative already working in the district and it was against policy. Many companies have no relative policies to alleviate problems, but I bet you'd never see it in this district!!!
As for quality education and MTL's historical laurels, I find more and more parents are spending more and more $$$ supplementing their kids education through programs from Duquesne, CCAC and private tutors.
The kids in this district should score high on tests and would do so in any district whether its BP, USC, Peters, BW. Given their family backgrounds, environment, expectations and money everything is focused for that success. This district gives itself far more credit than it deserves. Perhaps you should start a blog or link or whatever to give parents a venue for comparing notes and presenting them to the board. A lot of families are comparing notes, informally- with no outlet for acting on them, except of course - their vote in November.
Post a Comment
<< Home