- Today's CN article Records reveal Plainfield schools' legal expenditures more than doubled in one year!
- In all honesty (an abused word in Plainfield) what does the public and the BOE expect. The legal costs in the past FY are due directly to the BOE's handling of the Gallon mess. Rather than "fire" the present legal counsel the BOE should first review (a) the present contract, what is the "retainer" fee per year? What are the obligations of the firm under that contract? How much does Hunt charge per hour for services not listed in the contract? What Legal services are outsourced and at what costs?
- And, above all, what is the legal advice given y Counsel and how has it affected BOE action. Certainly the warning that aborted that Friday meeting was unethical at best since it was a blatant violation of an ethical issue.
- That does not excuse the political move to switch to the area's political boss' firm.
- The BOE' President mentioned that a RFQ has been poste. Since I missed it in the legal notices perhaps it could be re posted at the PSS site if is not already up.
- " Board President Lisa Logan-Leach noted that she and fellow board member Wilma Campbell cited the legal budget as one reason they voted against the district's overall budget(" Courier article). Political Grandstanding, since both knew what probable legal problems would carry over into the budget year and Counsel could give a low ball park figure.
- The real question is, did they explore with Counsel the ways to minimize costs? Let them answer that and the gist of the discussions. There is a pint where hiding behind the "its is in litigation" scenario doesn't work.
"All yall screaming about state take over don't have a single child in the district and are not doing anything to make things better. Yall just sitting on your bums writing blogs and comments.
Of course you want the state to take over that would leave you with no ownership of what's gone wrong or how to make it better.
Be a part of the solution --try that for once." (June 4, 2010 1:26 AM)
His English has been perfect when he uses a signature, so I don't know why the "po southern "All yall" and ("Y'all" Is that meant to be reflective of Plainfield's population.
He knows that I have no children in the PSS, but he doesn't know that my mother went through the system , I and my two siblings as well as my 4 children are products of the PSS schools. Of course the oldest is now of Social Security age.
I believe that if the State took over until the system could function that would protect our "ownership" of PSS. At present we have a cesspool of malmanaged and perhaps fiscally corrupt but certainly wandering aimlessly BOE.
We the bloggers are trying to point teh way to the solution, the problem lies in the insularation of the BOE.
RB, you have never offered anything positive in any of your frequent commentaries; blasting the mayor is not enough.
Hey have you talked to the board personally? How do you know they have not looked at the contract as cost and are doing the most cost effective thing for the district? Don't they have an RFP out for legal services given the "CONTRACT" for said legal service expires in June -- the operative word being contract as in the district is obligated to pay until the termination date.
ReplyDeleteYou are being completely unfair and if I were a board member I would certainly take you to task for your many, many and often wrong assertion yet not once have to corrected, amended or apologized once the facts were uncovered!
Sad...
3:37 pm NO.I have not talked to teh board personally. They have theri channel to release whatever information they wish. Anything communicated should be to the public as a whole not an individual.
ReplyDeleteI have reviewed my blog and see nothing unfair. I stand by my statement that as far as any information that has been given to the press for the Counsel to warn members that to attend a meeting when an agenda item is his continued employment would expose them to legal action smells of a threat an d at best was not ethical.