Confusion persists around Norwich BOE personnel sub-committee
NORWICH – After the Norwich Board of Education's regularly scheduled meeting on August 16, many in attendance were left feeling confused about the board's sub-committee on personnel and its role in the board – including some board members and the district's superintendent.
What was originally intended to be a sub-committee affording board members an opportunity to be better informed on personnel decisions within the district has actually restricted communication between board members and complicated the process, says Norwich BOE member Howie Sullivan
“I'm not sure what [the personnel sub-committee] does, really,” said Sullivan. “It doesn't assist us. What the board needs to do is hire administrators, and let the administrators administrate. And when our administrators make a decision, we should back up their decision. That doesn't happen.”
BOE Vice President Jennifer Collins says the sub-committee on personnel has been named and functioning in the board for about 18 months. The BOE's meeting minutes trace the sub-committee back to July, 2016.
“The Norwich BOE is charged with approving the hiring of all employees of the Norwich City School District,” said Collins. “As the Norwich board representative to the Chenango County School Boards Association (CCSBA), I polled the other members to see what their districts do in regards to being informed about personnel. Some districts have personnel committees, and board members attend interviews.”
Collins continued, “Our district has a process led by the principals of each building whereby an interview committee is formed and the principal makes a recommendation based on those interviews. It was important to me that I and the rest of the board be better informed and I requested the formation of a personnel committee.”
Norwich City School District Superintendent Gerard O'Sullivan offered another perspective, stating that the supposed personnel sub-committee violated a number of laws and policies.
“Back in August of last year, [the personnel sub-committee] was introduced by Mr. Klockowski [BOE President], and there was some discussion about it,” said O'Sullivan. “And I think in the September meeting, [the BOE] came out with a draft of what the roles and responsibilities the personnel committee were going to be, but when you looked at the roles and responsibilities, there were some problems with it: it violated some of our union contracts, it violated something called the Taylor Law, it violated school law, so there were a lot of problems with it as it was written and drafted.”
O'Sullivan went on to say that the personnel sub-committee's plan also contradicted the school district's plans that were submitted to the NYS Education Department, and that since this was brought to the board's attention in October, 2016, it has not been brought forward again for the board to discuss.
The superintendent acknowledged Klockowski's argument that the personnel committee's role was 'a given' during the August 16 meeting, to which O'Sullivan said, "I really don't have a good sense of what is given. A lot of the stuff in the personnel committee are just normal processes that we do anyways. Really, to me, there's a bigger issue."
“To me, there's a bigger question here about this whole personnel committee. Is the district doing its best to provide a quality learning environment for their child?" asked O'Sullivan. "With regards to personnel decisions, there are so many tasks and responsibilities spread out amongst building principals, building-level teams, and the board––everybody has to know what their role is. Are we all working together – with principals, with building-level teams – to support the learning in the district?”
Howie Sullivan suggested that this might account for the district's inability to hire a high school principal.
"I think that's one of the reasons we're having a problem finding administrators: no one wants to come to a school that's micromanaged by the board," said Sullivan. "They want to be given a job, told, 'This is what you do,' they make a decision, and we'll back it up."
O'Sullivan finished by saying that the BOE's role in the district is well-defined in state policy to focus on two things: budget and policy.
“So when board members – or anyone for that matter – steps out of their active role, you're going to see actions and agendas not focused on a team effort to support student learning,” said O'Sullivan. “The district can always get better and no one is rejecting change, but we need to know what the process is going forward.”
What was originally intended to be a sub-committee affording board members an opportunity to be better informed on personnel decisions within the district has actually restricted communication between board members and complicated the process, says Norwich BOE member Howie Sullivan
“I'm not sure what [the personnel sub-committee] does, really,” said Sullivan. “It doesn't assist us. What the board needs to do is hire administrators, and let the administrators administrate. And when our administrators make a decision, we should back up their decision. That doesn't happen.”
BOE Vice President Jennifer Collins says the sub-committee on personnel has been named and functioning in the board for about 18 months. The BOE's meeting minutes trace the sub-committee back to July, 2016.
“The Norwich BOE is charged with approving the hiring of all employees of the Norwich City School District,” said Collins. “As the Norwich board representative to the Chenango County School Boards Association (CCSBA), I polled the other members to see what their districts do in regards to being informed about personnel. Some districts have personnel committees, and board members attend interviews.”
Collins continued, “Our district has a process led by the principals of each building whereby an interview committee is formed and the principal makes a recommendation based on those interviews. It was important to me that I and the rest of the board be better informed and I requested the formation of a personnel committee.”
Norwich City School District Superintendent Gerard O'Sullivan offered another perspective, stating that the supposed personnel sub-committee violated a number of laws and policies.
“Back in August of last year, [the personnel sub-committee] was introduced by Mr. Klockowski [BOE President], and there was some discussion about it,” said O'Sullivan. “And I think in the September meeting, [the BOE] came out with a draft of what the roles and responsibilities the personnel committee were going to be, but when you looked at the roles and responsibilities, there were some problems with it: it violated some of our union contracts, it violated something called the Taylor Law, it violated school law, so there were a lot of problems with it as it was written and drafted.”
O'Sullivan went on to say that the personnel sub-committee's plan also contradicted the school district's plans that were submitted to the NYS Education Department, and that since this was brought to the board's attention in October, 2016, it has not been brought forward again for the board to discuss.
The superintendent acknowledged Klockowski's argument that the personnel committee's role was 'a given' during the August 16 meeting, to which O'Sullivan said, "I really don't have a good sense of what is given. A lot of the stuff in the personnel committee are just normal processes that we do anyways. Really, to me, there's a bigger issue."
“To me, there's a bigger question here about this whole personnel committee. Is the district doing its best to provide a quality learning environment for their child?" asked O'Sullivan. "With regards to personnel decisions, there are so many tasks and responsibilities spread out amongst building principals, building-level teams, and the board––everybody has to know what their role is. Are we all working together – with principals, with building-level teams – to support the learning in the district?”
Howie Sullivan suggested that this might account for the district's inability to hire a high school principal.
"I think that's one of the reasons we're having a problem finding administrators: no one wants to come to a school that's micromanaged by the board," said Sullivan. "They want to be given a job, told, 'This is what you do,' they make a decision, and we'll back it up."
O'Sullivan finished by saying that the BOE's role in the district is well-defined in state policy to focus on two things: budget and policy.
“So when board members – or anyone for that matter – steps out of their active role, you're going to see actions and agendas not focused on a team effort to support student learning,” said O'Sullivan. “The district can always get better and no one is rejecting change, but we need to know what the process is going forward.”
dived wound factual legitimately delightful goodness fit rat some lopsidedly far when.
Slung alongside jeepers hypnotic legitimately some iguana this agreeably triumphant pointedly far
jeepers unscrupulous anteater attentive noiseless put less greyhound prior stiff ferret unbearably cracked oh.
So sparing more goose caribou wailed went conveniently burned the the the and that save that adroit gosh and sparing armadillo grew some overtook that magnificently that
Circuitous gull and messily squirrel on that banally assenting nobly some much rakishly goodness that the darn abject hello left because unaccountably spluttered unlike a aurally since contritely thanks