OXFORD – The Oxford School Board of Education members did their best to address the community’s concerns over a move many called “deceitful” and “tricky” on Tuesday night.
Last week, the school board passed a resolution to extend the contract of Superintendent Randall Squier. However, many community members left the meeting believing no action had or would be taken at that time.
On June 8, the board extended Squier’s contract by one year, pushing his end date to 2012. However, a discussion about a letter sent to the district by seven community members led many to believe no action would be taken on the contract until further information from the public was received.
The letter asked that no action be taken until the board had a chance to read a petition signed by hundreds of district residents, asking that Squier’s contract not be renewed. Referring to the letter, board president Robin DeBrita said the board would need to consult legal counsel about the matter. “There will be no action at this time,” DeBrita said on June 8.
That comment led many to believe that no action would be taken on Squier’s contract, something DeBrita explained was a miscommunication. “I don’t think it was anyone’s intent to be unclear,” DeBrita said. “I understand people thought they were being deceived, but that was not our intention.” DeBrita explained that the action she was referring to was in the form of a response to the letter. Legal counsel was consulted after the meeting to determine what could be said in responding to the community.
Newly-elected board member Peter Heggie questioned why the information about Squier’s contract wasn’t made public. “I stayed through the whole meeting, and I don’t remember hearing anything about it.” Heggie said he has nothing against the superintendent, but did find fault with the way the issue was handled. “I’m against all of this back door stuff. As a board member, this back door stuff will not be done. That’s garbage. You can’t do that as a board member,” Heggie said.
Dawn Golden, another newly-elected board member, said it was her assumption that Squier’s contract was one of the two items tabled at last week’s meeting. One item, DeBrita had said, was in regard to the issue of the high school principal’s tenure. Golden addressed the crowd, asking if anyone knew what the other tabled item had been. “When I come on the board, this is going to change,” she said.
Several community members asked why the board felt it necessary to act on the contract before seeing all of the information from the public.
“We felt very comfortable moving forward with the decision based on the past year,” DeBrita said.
Community member Elizabeth Wonka asked if the board had to move forward last week because of a specific timeline or legal reason or if they chose to do so.
DeBrita said she believed they wanted to, as they were comfortable with the decision.
The board addressed the letter that was submitted to them by Fred Bateman and several other community members. Attached to the letter was a list of ten reasons why Squier’s contract should not be renewed. The board wrote a formal response to the community members, addressing each reason in turn.
One of the reasons noted in the letter was the fact that Squier reportedly warned two high school faculty members against speaking to the Board of Education about the issue of the high school principal’s tenure. The board responded that the accusations “were misinterpretations and have since been cleared up with the employees involved.”
Ginny Pluta, a counselor in the district and one of those involved in the incident, took issue with the board’s response. “I don’t know how things were cleared up if no one checked with me,” Pluta said. “No one checked with the other employee either,” Pluta said.
DeBrita said the board took the word of an uninvolved third party who said the issue had been cleared up. Union President Jon Rogers asked, “Who was this third party? Me?” DeBrita said yes. “You misunderstood,” Rogers said.
Other issues in the letter refer to allegations that teachers have been punished for expressing opinions contrary to Squier’s own, that Squier reduced teacher contact time with students, ignored critiques and suggestions for improving programs and created a climate of distrust, dissension and fear of reprisals.
The letter, along with the board’s response to each allegation, will be posted on the Oxford School web site at www.oxac.org later today.
When asked how Squier planned to regain the trust of the community, the superintendent said he wanted to know how he lost it. “When have I not done what I said I plan to do?” Squier asked. “We’ve done a lot of great things in the last four years. We’ve done fabulous things for an 800 kid school district. We are ahead of everybody in our area when it comes to what we’re doing,” Squier said.
The board discussed ways to communicate more effectively with the public. Suggestions offered included placing more information on the school’s web site, in the Blackhawk Bulletin and in the newspaper. Going over each item of the consent agenda was also discussed and may be implemented in the future.