One of the many issues being scrutinized by citizens is the rushed approval for a new teacher contract, what I called the "Ghost Contract".
The first position taken by East Penn School District was that the summary sheet that was used to approve the changes to the contract were sufficient. Some questions were raised that a final written copy should have been supplied for a sufficient review before an approval vote was held.
Nope, too much common sense for government types.
At a later meeting, School Board Director Mark Prinzinger challenged fellow Director Julian Stolz to provide any differences in the contracts that were not part of the summary sheet. At the next school board meeting, a citizen provided the information. There were indeed some additional positions and salaries that were not part of the summary sheet. Board President Alan Earnshaw declined any comment later in the meeting and mentioned that it would be addressed at the next meeting.
It was not, but the issue was raised again.
This last Monday, the district dealt with the question. The explanation was that the changes were the result of a "typo". Actually, a lot of typos had to have happened.
But the real interesting part was that the typos didn't happen on the new contract. They were supposed to be part of the prior contract, so they just decided to add these positions.
But, if the old contract was signed by the Union and the District, isn't that binding? Only in government is such sloppy incompetence accepted as a reasonable explanation and excuse.
Pelosi bill eliminates CHIP program
6 hours ago
3 comments:
Joe,
Those positions have been part of the contract since before I was elected to the board. They were specifically listed in the 2003-2007 contract and were unintentionally omitted from the 2007-2009 contract. The district and the union signed a memorandum of understanding that those positions were still part of the 2007-2009 contract (since neither side had bargained to remove them from the contract). When we wrote the 2007-2009 contract, they were reinstated into the text of the contract, since those positions had never actually been eliminated.
The only new positions in the contract were the lacrosse coaches. Those positions were created by the board last year after PIAA made lacrosse an official sport. (The board voted unanimously to create a formal high school lacrosse program, at the same time discontinuing the lacrosse club.)
"Actually, Dick (Nepon) ... you have made yourself a joke." -Chris Casey
Wow. Chris. Is this what you mean by being "civil" and "respectful?"
Alan,
We will request the prior prior contract and all relevant documentation that led to that approval.
I hope you are right.
But it does not eliminate our original argument.
It is irresponsible to approve a contract without a full written final contract for review.
However, more and more politicians are approving things without even reading them. That is sloppy, irrepsonsible, and, frankly, weak minded.
This is our leadership at every level of goverment? Well, that explains a lot about the situation our country finds itself in.
Shortcuts, excuses, and B.S.
Post a Comment