Sandra

From: Sent: Carl Paladino [carl@carlpaladino.com] Monday, July 08, 2013 12:57 PM
Carl

-IO:

Subject:

Other matters and Amendments, deletions and additions to the Carl P. Paladino Agenda of
July 3, 2013

carlpaladino.com

From: Carl Paladino EverybodY Cc: July 08, 20i-3 Date:

Agenda

ect: Other maLters and Amendments, deletions and additions to the Carl P. Paladino of July 3, 20L3 1.) Re: Agenda issue #32. Motion # L7. The use of small- group mini-meetings, whether working meetings or otherwise, is highly unethical and improper. Such they are avoid ".11"d *""tirrgr are carefully structured to avoid the letLer of the Sunshine Law. Theydecision public scrutiny and judgrment as to the motivation, discussion, deliberation and making of BoE members without the opportunity for any public input. How are Ehe constituencies of the BPS to judge their representative members' acEions? It is an abuse of public office. It is insulting and demeaning to the BPS. Respectable holders of the public trust don't ft is scheme, lie, fabricate and spin their BoE responsibilities. absurd to think there is nothin!, wrong with holding secret meetings and denying the transparency. tt is probably the reason members couldn't remember to actually finish was what remember Superintendent's evaluation before approving it. They obviously can't done in secret meetings and what was. done in public The actual reason for such mini meeEings is to aIlow certain members of the BOE to communicate with the administration who should geU jobs, transfers, pay increases, which contractors are to be favored, which students should be given special considerat.ions for enrollments, etc. It's where the dirtY work is done. The business of the BOE must only be conducted in regularly scheduled or special public meetings on notice. Confidential matters will be addressed in executive session. I will make a motion at the July 10, meeEing "that the use of secret, small group or mini meeLings of BOE members Lo conduct any business of the BOE will,be stopped immediatsely"' 2.) Re: Agenda Issue #2. In the CPP Agenda of.luly 3, 20L3, I mistakenly stated at lssue #2, first paragraph thaL Champ Eve was presenE at the BOE mini meeting. My information was wrongi. Mr. Eve was noL there. My apologies to Mr. Eve. 3.) Re: Issue # 33; Motion * Lg. BOE meetings for years have been anything but effective, efficient sessions.The BOE must publicly focus on issues criEical to the remediation and reformation of the BPS which suffers from extreme dysfunction. Such issues are only rarely discussed and by the time the agenda geEs to them, those wiLh tlpical Iimited attention spans are yawnirrg .rrd catatonic. The first hour and a half of a aL conducted be good should which fluff feel unprofessional to BOE meeting is devoted another special meeting. Meeting agendas must be re-structured. I will make a motion at the ,July 1-0, 20L3 meeting that "BOE meeting agendas shal1 be all and business matters including committee reports, a public secLion to allow public input' a for opportunity the with report a response, other business matLers and Superintendent
Subj Q&A

session.

"

abused the use of executive session. P1ease of instruct counsel to distribute at the OuIy 10 meeting a copy of the law and summary to be is business what and session whaL business is required to be conducted in executive conducted in open session. The BOE plans to have only 1 more meeting during the summer on August 2L i-s insufficient, The BOE has recently and historically
1

considering the extreme and chaotic distress of the BPS in so many respecLs. Given Lhe graduation raLe, the lack of an approvable reorganization plan, the lack of compliance with the APPR, the lack of compliance with the No Child Left Behind Laws, etc., it is imperative that the BOE continue it.s by-weekly meetings.

4.) Re: Agenda issue #4. uotion #1. The Buffalo City School District By-Laws under Meetings of the Board of Education, section 1510, at paragraph 7, states that "No commit,t.ee, ruor the entire Board, will act, study, or decide upon an issue unless the supporting documenLation has been freely available to all Board members aL least 48 hours in advance of the above mentioned action." The approval of the Superintendent's evaluation was improper and illega1. Mr. Kristoff and Mr. Pet,rino were preFent at Ehe Board meeting and knew or should have known this fact and failed to raise it. 5.) Re: Issue #34. Mot.ion #20. Improper enrollments in "Test Schools." Everyone in the administration is aware (but the public does not know) 8 that the BPS Test schools whose admissions are supposed to be strictly limited to City of Buffalo resident high achievers, in fact have enrolled not only Buffalo students who did not meet the criteria, but afso non-residents of the city who falsify applications using the City address ofirelatives and friends
Apparently the administraLion has knowingly allowed this abuse to continue for years giving certain families the special privilege of sending their non-accelerated children to "TesL" schools which have maxed out enrollments to the detriment of children.who would otherwise gualify but for lack of space are compelled to attend failing mainstream
schools.
t,

The simple fact that suburban students, are recklessly enrol-Ied in BPS Test schools getting a free education, denying a slot for a Buffalo resident is abhorrent.

and

One can only assume that these practices woul-d not exist except for approval at the highest 1eve1s of the administration and the BOE. I request that the BPS administrator responsible for en,rol-lments be made available at the July l-0,21,0L3 meeting Eo discuss this

matter

i:: 6.) Re: Issue #L!, Motion #3. With reference to my motion on outsourcing priority schools I mistakenly referred to "converting the schools to Regents Approved Charter Schools." I intended to refer Lo "close and restarL" 3S:used in NCLB under the restarL model for school turnaround with the lease of buildings frorn. the BOE and I so mod.ify my motion7.) Re: Tssue #3. Reorganization PIan. The plan introduced last week and prepared by the "Say Yes" and other consultants appears, on its face, to be designed to actually put sLaff closer to the student and should be applauded. The bad part of it is that when it was presented to the Administration and certain BOE members, they interfered and dictated that, certain administ.rat.ors had to be kept on the payroll even though they were not competent, not only for the position they were in, buL aLso for the new position proposed. The plan was Ehen skewered to keep existing staff who should have been discharged and hire new people for the new positions, some of whom were wired in and others who were competent to perform. It is tlpical LhaL Lhe Superintendent could not describe the supposed $1 mill-ion budget savings. Like the BOE members who support her, she tends to fabricate, make stuff ,p, lie and try to rewrite hisLory. This is exactly why the BPS and BOE are dysfunctional. There is always a back story.