Pandemic Leads To More Open Government Meetings

This week’s (November 11, 2011 Leader newspaper has an editorial "Pandemic Taught Us How to have Truly Open Meetings" written by Kim Robertson noting how some governmental meetings have become more accessible due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

That's why it’s important to look back and see how much things have improved over the past decade when it comes to transparency in the Fox C-6 School District and just how long it took for that happen. The Fox C-6 community was kept in the dark during former superintendent Dianne Brown/Critchlow’s tenure. From 2005 until 2014, Fox C-6 school board meetings weren’t audio or video recorded. Not having audio or video recording school board meetings made it very easy to keep anyone outside of Fox’s administration, school board and the few who attended school board meetings from learning about what was happening behind the scenes at Fox or what patrons concerns were in the district. Over the years, I wrote articles about speaking at Fox BOE meetings asking our school board to audio or video record the meetings like they did in other school districts. I even emailed examples of website links to other school districts to our school board. Dianne Critchlow would respond and tell me that it was up to our school board as to whether or not to audio or video record BOE meetings. Video Recorded School Board Meetings It’s great that we now have video recordings of our school board meetings. It allows more people in our community learn about our district and watch Public Comments as well as discussions about decisions being made in our district. It also provides the opportunity to see some of the great things happening in our district when are presentations made by groups and clubs and they are recognized for their accomplishments. You can go back and watch the videos at anytime. Posting of Board Meeting Agendas and Supporting Documents Another big improvement that I asked our school board for many times was the posting of the agenda and the supporting board packet information on Fox’s website days ahead of school board meetings. This took years to implement as well. Fox eventually chose to use BoardDocs which works well in sharing access to documents like Bill Payments and other documents such as bids and proposals, etc. When I first started asking for Bill Payment Reports, I was charged to get copies of the reports because they weren’t on the website. Sunshine Law allows for fees to be charged to provide the documents. Charging for documents is another easy way to hide things from the public. I wished I had paid the $180 for a copy of the Credit Card statements in February 2014 after I started asking our school board if they had been reviewing the credit card statements. The credit card statements weren’t included in the board packets. Read the article I wrote about speaking at the January 15, 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting to see how school board meetings were documented back then. It wasn’t the first time I spoke at a Fox C-6 school board meeting. My first time speaking at a board meeting was December 2010. There were only 7 people in attendance at that school board meeting and Kim Robertson was one of them in attendance. She wrote an article about my questioning the board about the hiring of Jamie Critchlow even though I didn't mention any names during my Public Comments. When I spoke at the January 2013 school board meeting I asked our school board again about recording board meetings and making those recordings available to the public. I also told our school board that I believe that there are people in our school community (aka administrators) who are posting defamatory comments online about me after school board meetings. The online comments after school board meetings began right after the December 2010 school board meeting. Bringing change to your school district is sometimes met with a lot of resistance. Even law firms like to get into the fray of stopping parents from speaking up. The Public Comment I made at the January 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting were documented board meeting minutes the following month as: PUBLIC COMMENTS: Rich Simpson - Requested more board information on the district website.

Once you read the public comment I made at the January 2013 school board meeting, it’s pretty easy to see why the board meeting minutes of my comment provide very little detail. That’s why having audio or video recordings of school board meetings provides a lot more transparency than the board meeting minutes like the one above from 2013. It’s no wonder why it took so long for the public to learn about what was going in our school district and oust our former superintendent. Audio or video recording BOE meetings is essential to having an accurate record of what the public's concerns are and what was really discussed or stated at the meeting and not just what our superintendent wanted the community or the public to know.

January 15, 2013 School Board Meeting Public Comment

Legal Fees in Fox C-6's September 21, 2021 Bill Payments Report

In reviewing Fox's Bill Payments report in BoardDocs for the upcoming September 21, 2021 Fox C-6 School Board meeting, I found another payment to the Mickes Goldman O'Toole, LLC law firm for $4,412.90 for services for June 2021.

Fox had already paid the Mickes Goldman O’Toole law firm $26,664.00 during the 2020-2021 school year. With $23,996.50 of that amount being paid out in April through June of 2021. It would be interesting to know if the fees were for a Due Process Hearing. If it was, I’d like to know what the Due Process Hearing Officer’s findings of fact and final decision was. Mickes Goldman O’Toole is the law firm that we dealt with for 504 issues at Fox between 2008 and 2014. It’s also the law firm that sent me a cease and desist letter in 2012 and to three other members of our community in 2013. Fox switched law firms after the internet scandal became public in June 2014. Looking through the entire 2020-2021 school year, payments were made to the Thomeczek & Brink LLC law firm in July and August 2020 totaling $24,010.00. This was the law firm that was selected by Fox to represent the district as the Due Process Hearing Officer in our 2010 Due Process Hearing. I’m curious as to whether or not the fees in 2020 were for a Due Process Hearing as well. If it was, I’d like to know what the Due Process Hearing Officer’s findings of fact and final decision was. Our Due Process Hearing in 2010 taught me a lot about the tactics used by attorneys to get around the law. You get a full transcript of your due process hearing providing some well documented examples of those tactics and how testimony and facts are manipulated. Recourse Options For Denial or Removal of a Section 504 Plan If your school district denies or removes a 504 plan, you have 3 options of recourse.

1. File for a Due Process Hearing where the school district gets to choose the hearing officer.

2. File a lawsuit in civil court heard by a judge.

3. File a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights.

However, you should be forewarned, speaking from first hand experience, filing a complaint with the Kansas City Office for Civil Rights may take 10 to 12 years or more to resolve.

Don't count on the Kansas City OCR office to do any “vigorous enforcement” of the law.

During the 2020-2021 school year, Fox C-6 made payments to 6 different law firms as reported in Bill Payments reports in BoardDocs:

Tueth Keeney Cooper Mohan & Jackstadt P.C. - $35,855.00

Mickes O'Toole - $26,664.00

Thomeczek & Brink, LLC - $24,010.00

Bryan Cave Leighton Palsner, LLP - $5,000.00

Gilmore & Bell a Professional Corporation - $6,500.00

Shands, Elbert, Gianoulakis & Giljum, LLP - $1,596.00

To review the Bill Payments report in BoardDocs for the September 21, 2021 school board meeting, use the link below:

http://go.boarddocs.com/mo/foxc6/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C6NKWL533DEA

Critchlow Mentioned Amazon Charges at the May 2014 Fox C-6 BOE Meeting! Hiding Facts!

It's definitely not funny that former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Critchlow was using her district credit card and other district employee credit cards to make purchases for personal use. But I did find it funny that she mentioned the Amazon charges at the May 2014 Fox C-6 Board of Education meeting when she responded to my Public Comments.

I was reviewing my audio recordings from Fox C-6 school board meetings looking for examples of when Critchlow would tell everyone at the board meeting that now was a good time to leave. She would say it right before Public Comments started when I made Public Comments.

May 20, 2014 was the last Fox C-6 Board of Education (BOE) meeting that Dianne Critchlow attended. Right before I spoke at that meeting, Critchlow told the parents and students in attendance for recognition that now was a good time to leave as happened many times before right before the start of Public Comments.

The May 20th meeting was also the last meeting before the media announced that defamatory comments posted on the TOPIX website were linked to her home and the home of assistant superintendent Dan Baker.

At the May BOE meeting, Dianne Critchlow and Dan Baker were both already aware of the fact that their homes had been linked to defamatory posts made on Topix. Their Internet Service Providers (ISP) had already contacted them in March or April asking them if they could give out their information because of a subpoena. So they both knew at that meeting and even at the workshop before that they had been linked to posts on TOPIX. That may be why they were fairly friendly at the meeting.

At the May meeting, I still didn't have credit card statements because Critchlow wanted me to pay $170 to get copies of them. I refused to pay because the board should have already had copies of them and they were public records and Sunshine Law allows them to waive the fees when the documents are for public interest.

Even though I didn't have the credit card statements, the May 2014 board packets had the newly updated Bill Payments Report that included individual credit card charges. That's one of the topics that I came to speak about that night.

The Bill Payments report changes came about after I put pressure on the board in February 2014 to include the credit card statements in the board packets. However, the first pass of the Bill Payments Report didn't help much as I mentioned in my Public Comments. But the late materials copy of the board packet had an improved version which I linked to later in this article.

We all now know why Critchlow was so reluctant to include the credit card statements in the board packets. It also made her response to me at the May 2014 board meeting somewhat foretelling of what may have been weighing on her mind at the time.

During my Public Comments at the May 2014 board meeting, I repeated my concerns to the board about the bill payments reports, the credit card purchases, transparency issues and lack of response from the board via email. When I finished speaking, Critchlow responded to my comments about the updated Bill Payments Report and the credit card charges listed in the updated report.

(NOTE: The district had already spent more than $2+ million dollars on district credit cards for the 2013-2014 school year by February 2014.)

I laughed when I heard Critchlow's response when reviewing my audio recording because of the fact that she used AMAZON as an example of a credit card charge that might be listed on the newest version of the bill payments report. Because that's where she purchased the logging tongs, tow chains and blinged out cell phone cases from on April 2, 2014.

Listen to my May 20, 2014 Public Comments and Dianne Critchlow's Response about Credit Card Payments

It's funny that Critchlow mentioned AMAZON! It must have been fresh on her mind since she just purchased those items the month before and they were on the May 2014 updated Bill Payments Report in the May board packet. Up until May 2014, credit card payments were listed as a single line item payment for each of the credit card vendors each month, SAMS CLUB DISCOVER, VISA CARD SERVICES and AMERICAN EXPRESS.

Not only did Critchlow place her order during the work day for those items on April 2, 2014 but she used Debbie Davis's school district DISCOVER CARD to pay for them rather than her own district credit card!

Critchlow also had the order shipped directly to her home rather than the school.

It's hard to believe that the items she ordered weren't going to be used for personal use since she had them shipped directly to her home. You can find the purchases on the 04/23/2014 Discover card statement. I've written about some of this before in the article below which has a link to the October 3, 2014 demand for repayment letter sent to Critchlow from Fox CFO John Brazeal.

The Paper Trail Keeps Growing

It's easy to say that the board was approving credit card payments. But you can't say that they were approving the individual credit card charges because Dianne Critchlow wasn't giving them to the board or the public. That had been my point for a long time. Without being able to review the individual charges on the statements, no one knew what was being purchased and how our tax dollars were being spent. Even with individual charges listed in the bill payments report, there was no way to know what was being purchased until the receipts for the charges were reviewed.

Plus, Critchlow used her secretary's Discover card to make purchases for her own personal use. Using someone else's credit card to make purchases would be very misleading to the board even if they did see the charges.

I had been asking the board to update the 2013-2014 Bill Payments report since August or September 2013 after the transaction description and account description columns were removed from the report when Fox switched to new software. It wasn't until later that I found in the district policies that the transaction description and funding account columns are REQUIRED to be on the report for the board to approve per district policy. So when Critchlow wrote me an email refusing to update the Bill Payments Report to add those columns back on the report she was violating board policy. Her email to me is very important evidence as to how she was keeping information from the board and the public.

Matching Up Credit Card Charges To Fund Accounts
I extracted the Bill Payment report pages from the May and June 2014 board meeting packets into a document that you can review to see what account funds the credit card charges were being posted to. You'll see what I was talking about in my Public Comments in the very first section of credit card charges from the May 2014 board packet. That section lists CARD SERVICES for both the TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION and the VENDOR NAME. That's not helpful at all in knowing what was purchased with the credit card.

What you can see is that the ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION column shows what fund account the charges were posted to. I included both the DISCOVER CARD and VISA CARD statements with the May and June Bill Payments reports so you can attempt to reconcile the line items on the Bill Payments report with the individual charges on the credit card statements. I've already highlighted the charges for Dianne Critchlow on the reports including the ones that she charged to Debbie Davis's DISCOVER CARD. Take note of what Accounts the charges were posted to. There are probably many more charges posted on other employee credit cards that we don't know about yet.

You'll notice that the first line item on the Bill Payments report for CARD SERVICES or SAMS CLUB DISCOVER has a total amount in the CHECK AMOUNT column. You can use that amount to match up the credit card statement with the check amount to know what charges on the statement match up with the entries on the Bill Payments report. This might make a fun game for a FACS class, business class or a journalism class.

Intent to Hide Facts
Note the use of PROF DEV MEAL ALLOWANCE VENDOR in the VENDOR NAME column on page 6 of the Bill Payments Report instead of using the actual name of the restaurants where Critchlow, McCutchen, Scott and others purchased food. Listing so many different fast food restaurants and other eateries would have thrown up a Red Flag as it did when the public saw the credit card statements for the first time.

Using PROF DEV MEAL ALLOWANCE VENDOR for restaurants gives the impression that someone wanted to hide the fact that administrators were eating quite often using Professional Development funds. In fact, the $11.79 charge was for the McDonald's meal that Dianne Critchlow charged to the district on a Saturday April 5, 2014 while she was on Family Medical Leave. This tactic demonstrates a great lack of integrity for a National District of Character.

Who's idea was it to enter PROF DEV MEAL ALLOWANCE VENDOR into the payment system rather than the actual restaurant names such as BurgerKing, Drunken Noodles, McDonalds, Panera Bread, Lodge Food and Beverage Lake Ozark MO and Holiday Inn Columbia?

2014 May and June Bill Payment Reports with Credit Card Transactions and Credit Card Statements

To learn more about the funding accounts download and read the 2014-2015 Fox School District Budget from the district's website. Look in section 4 for the Revenue Accounts to see the list of revenue accounts and their prior year actuals and budget amount. You'll notice that the Critchlow charged the cell phone cases to the ADMIN OTHER EXPENSE account and the logging tongs to the STUDENT ACTIVITIES (S/A) BRIDGES REVOLVING account and other charges were posted to the S/A FOX DISTRICT REVOLVING account.

Critchlow refused to post the School Budget documents on the district website when I asked for them 3 years ago and numerous times since then. You can find them using the link below:

Fox C-6 School District Budget Documents

Prior Audits by Dan Jones & Associates
You may also want to review the audits that have been done each year by Dan Jones and Associates from the district website as well. It's odd that the yearly audits don't mention anything about the district credit cards considering millions of dollars in payments were made using credit cards.

There are disclaimers in the independent audit reports as well as to what their audits may or may not uncover related to the district's internal controls. According to the audits, it appears that they no issues were found to report to the board. You can download and read the audits here:

Fox C-6 District Audit Reports back to 2009 

More Info On Twitter
Yesterday, after I extracted that audio I quickly posted a Twitter link to the audio on twitter so everyone could listen to her response. Posting on Twitter is quick and easy. That's why it's a good idea to follow my Twitter account as well:

https://www.twitter.com/FoxC6Watchdogs

You don't have to have a Twitter account to view my posts on Twitter. At anytime you can browse to the link above to read my Twitter posts. Dianne Critchlow used to have a Twitter account. I used to reference her posts and account quite often. However, she deleted her account when the internet scandal broke which also deleted the posts that she made including the one that said she was going on Family Medical Leave (FMLA).

So, if you haven't seen a post on this blog for several days or more you may want to check my Twitter page. I post a lot more quick comments or links to news articles, audio recordings or videos on Twitter because it doesn't take several hours or more to write and edit a whole article like it does when I write a blog post.

So I encourage you to follow or check in on my Twitter page quite regularly. I'm sure it won't grab national headlines like the #callitoffdianne tweets that were made by students in the district wanting to get off of school for a snow day earlier this year. But, you may find some news or information there that might be of interest.

Quote From 2013 - "We're Not Hiding Anything!"

While searching for information from some of my older articles, I ran into the following article from March 2013. This was during the scandal of hiring former board member and board president at the time, Linda Nash's daughter in law, as Fox's Food Nutrition Director. Amongst all of that fiasco, Fox finally started posting the board packets on the district website for the community to download and review. This hadn't been done in the past even though I had been asking for them for almost 2 years. The board packets contained the bill payments that were approved by the board each month.

The first time I attended a school board meeting was in December 2010. As I watched the meeting unfold, I wondered how the school board was able to approve the bill payments without having any time to look at the bills. Especially if they just received some of the bill payments in their Late Materials at the board meeting that night.

I found out later that typically the board packets were sent to the board members the Friday before the board meeting for them to review. It included the bill payments for the month that they were going to vote to approve at the meeting the following Tuesday. However, not all of the bill payments are sent to them before the meeting. Typically there would be another round of bill payments that are presented to the board when they arrive at the meeting that night. There's really no time to for board members to review all of those payments right there at the start of the meeting. Therefore, the board is having to approve payments blindly because the information is provided to them just before the meeting.

Depending on what checks are slated in the early bill payment presented ahead of time verses what's presented at the meeting makes it pretty easy to pass off expenses that someone may not want the board to scrutinize as much. This is especially a concern after when your superintendent tells you "We're Not Hiding Anything!". That's what prompted the article I wrote in March 2013. You have to read the article to see what I'm talking about with regards to the bill payments.

Board member John Laughlin began going to the school to review bill payments after I brought up this issue a couple of years ago when I was getting charged for board packets. John also made sure that I no longer got charged for obtaining the board packets after he found out I was getting charged.

It's easy for everyone to criticize the board as a whole. But, there were 7 old school board members until John Laughlin was elected in 2011. There's no telling what Critchlow told the the newest "outside" member of the board that things were great and there's no need to question things. I'm sure that my questioning of things was easily dismissed by Critchlow. She had been doing that for years at board meetings during my Public Comments and in her email responses to myself and the board. As she recently was quoted, "Trust me".

Board Packets Posted Online - NO Bill Payments
Finally after nearly two years, the district started posting board packets on the district website but they left the bill payments out of the packets. Why did they leave out the bill payments? That was the whole point of posting the board packets in the first place. I had to pay obtain the board packets per my Sunshine requests prior to the district posting them online for free. However, the district only provided me with the board packets dating back to April 2010. The district wanted to charge me hundreds of dollars to go and research and copy the board packets prior to that date. Charging lots of money for documents is an easy way to deter someone from obtaining the information and should always throw up red flags.

Critchlow wanted to charge me $170 for the credit card statements for the 2013-2014 school year. This was her way of keeping the statements from the public. The same thing was done for the board packets prior to April 2010. Since then I even asked several times for those prior board packets to be posted to the district website and Critchlow refused. I think the community should press to get those documents posted on the district website knowing what we know now.

Prior to the April 2010 date there was most likely quite a bit spent on attorney fees with all of the time and money the district put into preparing for a Due Process Hearing that was held in May 2010. I've made a recent Sunshine request for copies of all of the invoices from the former law firm dating back to 2008. When I first requested this information a couple of years ago it was going to cost several hundred dollars to obtain. Just remember that Critchlow wasn't trying to hide anything.

Check out the article below and read the response from former board member Ruth Ann Newman as to why the district didn't publish the bill payments when the district first published the board packets on the district website in 2013. I have the exchange of emails with the board and the responses I received.

It's hard to believe Dianne Critchlow's statement of "We're Not Hiding Anything!". It's especially hard to believe after reviewing the credit card statements and finding out that she had district purchased property at her home and had to be asked to return it.

Critchlow never openly provided the credit card statements to the school board. She just asked the board to approve the charges as a whole each month by asking the board to approve the bill payments that included checks to the credit card companies. The board shouldn't have had to ask to obtain the credit card statements. Critchlow as the superintendent should have been providing them to the board each month per school board policy like they do in many other school districts.

On the flip side, our school board should have asked to see the credit card statements since many of the statements totaled between $50,000 and $300,000 or more each month. The words Due Diligence comes to mind.

It's going to take quite a while for the auditors and the district to dig through all of the charges and receipts to find out what was purchased and paid for by the district that the district might not have in it's possession. More things might still be at Critchlow's house. It was something that was easily done.

I certainly hope that the district and the state audit reviews all of the charges dating back to 2005 when Critchlow started as superintendent. We need to recover as much taxpayer money as possible.

Read the article from 2013 by clicking on the link below to see if you think former superintendent Dianne Critchlow wasn't trying to hide anything back then.

Fox C-6 Superintendent Says: "We're Not Hiding Anything!"

What's New In Fox's Board Meeting Packets?

What's new in the August 19, 2014 Board Meeting Packet?

Fox's board meeting packets have been getting posted to the district website on the Tuesday before the meeting. However, this month's board packet wasn't created until Wednesday August 13, 2014. So it wasn't posted until late last Wednesday. I missed downloading the packet before last night's board meeting. I also missed last night's board meeting as well. I am hoping that someone audio or video recorded the meeting.

There have been some improvements made to the Bill Payments Report over the last couple of months. I believe I know why those improvements took so many months to get accomplished. The lastest Bill Payments Report is much more useful now and it finally complies with school board policies. It now lists both the Vendor Name and a Purchase Description for each transaction as well as an account description for the funding account. Thank you to our school board and new CFO for making the changes suggested.

Below I have noted some items of interest found in the August 19, 2014 board meeting packet. One thing that stands out is the fact that Fox C-6 superintendents DO NOT have credit cards assigned to them anymore. The June 2014 board meeting list of credit card holders to be approved did not have them on the list. According to our new CFO all of the credit cards were recalled in mid-June and were more selectively redistributed with tighter restrictions.

The school board must still review the credit card statements each month to ensure that they are being properly used. The credit card statements also need to be included in the board meeting packets so the public can review them as well.

August 19, 2014 Board Meeting Packet Notes

• Credit card approval at the June 30, 2014 school board meeting no longer has credit cards assigned to any assistant superintendents. (pg. 20)
• The DISCOVER CARD is still assigned to Debby Davis, Kelly Nash and Jerry Kwiatkowski with a Credit Limit of $80,000. (pg. 20)
• 2014-2015 Fox C-6 Teacher Salary Schedule posted. (pg. 61)
• Funny jumps in the Salary Steps for Directors and Assistant Directors. It would be intesting to know if those steps that have higher amounts correspond to people currently holding positions in those steps. (pg. 67)
• Bill Payments report for June 30, 2014 was finally corrected to display the credit card vendor as well as the Vendor Name and an Account Description for all of the credit card payments. However, the Transaction Description column was the same as the Vendor Name column for check payments. (pg. 86)
• Sam's Club DISCOVER card payments listed on (pg. 96) in older format.
• AMERICAN EXPRESS card payments listed on (pg. 101) in older format.
• VISA card payments listed on (pg. 103) in older format.
• The July 22, 2014 Board Meeting Bill Payments Report was improved further yet to include a Credit Card column to identify the credit card used. The column order was changed to Vendor Name followed by Purchase Description then amount and Account Description. The Bill Payments report is much easier to read and includes meaningful information. (pg. 127, 265)
• The charges on page 152 for Panera Bread ($22.69, $69.00) and Sunny Street Cafe ($21.52) are listed as Professional Development and were paid with a VISA card. These charges match up with Dianne Critchlow's VISA card charges from May 27 and May 29, 2014. (pg. 152) (School district policy states that Credit Card usage is limited to purchases of "Instructional Materials". Read about why it took so long to obtain the credit card receipts.)
• $349,300 to Brightergy for installation of Solar Panels at seven schools in the district. (pg. 271)
• $27,757.45 in Tuition Instruction Service Contract with Hazelwood School District (pg. 279)
• $17,100.00 to Lindbergh School District for Program for Exceptionally Gifted Students (PEGS) tuition. (pg. 279)
  Five students from Fox C-6 attend the PEGS program in the Lindbergh School District full time. (Two of those students are Mr. Crutchley's children.)
• $38,411.75 for the new attorneys at Shands, Elbert, Gianoulakis (pg. 280).
• Reimbursements for Summer School supplies to teachers begins on (pg. 286) This was a topic of discussion at the August 19, 2012 school board meeting. There were questions about how much it would cost to fully fund the schools for supplies so the teachers and the parents weren't having to provide the supplies.
• Credit Card Statements must be included in the board meeting packets in order to reconcile the charges.
• New Hire - Samual Rayburn - $31,500.00 - August 4, 2014 - Web Content and Communications Coordinator in the Central Office. (page 174)
• Salary amounts are now published with the Employment of Certified and Classified staff in the board meeting packets. (page 174, 294, 296 and 302)
• It seems that there are still a lot of meal purchases for Professional Development.

Download Fox C-6's

August 19, 2014 Board Meeting Packet

(OCR'd Text Searchable PDF)

Fox's board packets for the 2014-2015 school year can be found on the district's website as well. But, the board packets have been getting updated shortly after the board meetings to include Late Materials. When the documents are updated they are assigned new Internet address links to the documents which would break any link posted here.

To download download board meeting packets prior to the next school board meeting for the 2014-2015 school year you click on the link below:

Fox C-6's 2014-2015 Board Meeting Packets Folder

Email Sent to the Fox C-6 School Board Regarding a State Audit

The Fox C-6 School Board has called a meeting for 7PM tonight August 12, 2014 to vote on approving a request for a State Audit of the Fox C-6 School District. 

The community currently has a lot of concerns regarding how taxpayer dollars have been spent by our school district administrators and directors using school district supplied credit cards. The recent release of credit card statements to the public shows that school district credit cards were not used according to school board policies.

This morning I sent the following email to the Fox C-6 School Board regarding tonight's meeting about requesting an ASAP State Audit of the Fox C-6 School District.

Email Sent to the Fox C-6 School Board

on August 12, 2014

 Regarding a State Audit Request

of the Fox C-6 School District 

I hope as members of the Fox C-6 School Board that you will unanimously vote YES tonight to request that an ASAP State Audit be conducted of the Fox C-6 School District. 

As you know, I have been very concerned about Bill Payment Reports and the lack of information provided in those reports for a very long time. Starting in August 2013, the Bill Payments report no longer included a reason code or a description of what the payment was for, which is in violation of school district Policy #3150 - Payment Procedures. 

I have also been expressing my concerns since at least February 2014 about the Credit Card Payments and the fact that school board packets provided to the school board and the public did not include the Credit Card Statements for the BOE to review each month. I have been asking for the credit card statements since at least February 2014 and it took until August 2014 to obtain them. 

After reviewing the Fox C-6 credit card statements provided to me last week for the 2013-2014 school year, it is very apparent that school district credit cards were not being used according to school board policy by school district administrators and directors. Their usage of school district credit cards violated school district Policy #3125 - Credit Cards. 

It is very clear from the comments posted by Fox C-6 taxpayers and parents on Facebook and in conversations with others in our district that Superintendent Critchlow and several administrators not only violated school board policy but they violated the trust of the community. This reflects very poorly on the oversight of both the school board and of our Central Office Administrators. 

I am requesting that the Fox C-6 BOE request that a State Audit conducts an in depth review of the district dating back to at least the 2009-2010 school years to present. 

A State Audit needs to include at minimum a review of financial transactions and teacher certifications of individuals hired and promoted within the school district since 2009. 

It is imperative that both the Fox C-6 BOE and the community are kept fully informed as to whether or not the Fox C-6 School District has been following all state and federal laws as well as the guidelines and regulations of Missouri DESE and the federal agencies that oversee our district. 

It's important to the community and Fox C-6 taxpayers to know that our student's are being provided the best possible education with the funds that we have and that district funds are being spent responsibly. Ensuring that the district funds are being spent responsibly rests on the shoulders of the school board. It is very evident that this has not been happening in our school district for at least the last 9 years. 

In order for you to do your job, you must be kept fully aware of how monies are being spent by closely reviewing Bill Payments Reports and Credit Card Statements. Superintendent Critchlow did not provide you with proper Bill Payments Reports and did NOT provide Credit Card Statements to the school board which violated school board policies. She even refused to correct the problem. This in itself should have been grounds for her dismissal. 

The Fox C-6 community is now very aware of what has been occurring in our school district for the last 6+ years regarding federal compliance as well as bill payments and superintendent salaries. The community is now watching very closely. It's important that you do the right thing and request a very thorough State Audit of the Fox C-6 School District. 

Please include this letter to the school board in the next Fox C-6 school board meeting packet as a letter to the school board so the community can stay informed. Transparency is key to rebuilding the trust of the community. 

Thank you, 

Rich Simpson

New Bill Payments Report to Debut in May 2014 Board Packet

I received an email from Fox C-6 Assistant Superintendent Dr. Lorenzo Rizzi on Wednesday April 14, 2014 in response to my Public Comments about the Bill Payments and Credit Card Statements I made at the April 2014 school board meeting. I also commented about the Bill Payments and Credit Card Statements at the at the February and March 2014 school board meetings as well.

Dr. Rizzi's email stated:

"I am writing to inform that beginning with the BOE May meeting, the payment of bills will show more detail which includes credit card purchases. These will be included in the board packets and posted on the website each month. I have scanned an example for your viewing."

So, starting in May 2014, you will be able to download school board meeting packets and review the bill payments for the month in the new format. I responded to Dr. Rizzi and thanked him for the change. Hopefully, the district will update ALL of this school year's board packets to the new Bill Payments Report format on the district website. It will be very easy for the district to rerun the reports using the new format and replace the pages in the board packets. The district already updates the board packets on the district website each month a few days after the school board meeting to include the Bill Payments Report that was provided in the "Late Materials" just prior to the school board meeting. It should only take a few hours to replace the Bill Payments reports in the board packets for the entire year.

The updated report will be very similar to the old report that had been in use for years before the district switched to the Tyler Systems software last July. The new report format includes two new columns of data. There will be a TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION column and an ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION column for the the fund account.

View a Sample of the New Bill Payments Report

Each month you can download the public portion of the school board meeting packets from the district's website. The board packets contain the board meeting minutes, letters to the district, bill payments report, staff separation and new hires reports and other documents that are provided to our school board members each month a week prior to the next school board meeting. School board meetings are held on the 3rd Tuesday of the month each month (other than July when there is no meeting). So, you can look for the documents online a week before the next board meeting.

The school board meeting packets contain the Bill Payments Report that our school board members review prior to approving the payments each month. Not all of the Bill Payments are included in the board meeting packets prior to the board meeting. There is usually another Bill Payments Report included in their "Late Materials" which is provided to them just prior to the board meeting. The payments in the Late Materials can be anywhere from $1.5 Million to $4 Million dollars or more. The April 15, 2014 school board meeting Late Materials contained an additional $1,582,835.19 in payments for the board to approve. Having descriptions in the bill payments report will help our board members and the public.

You can download Fox C-6 Board Meeting Packets from the district website using the link below. Currently only the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 school year board packets are on the district website.

Fox C-6 Board Meeting Packets on District Website

It's taken a while to convince our school district to put the payment descriptions back onto the Bill Payments report. Last fall I spoke to Assistant Superintendent Mark McCutchen at the Arnold Days parade about the missing descriptions. Since Mr. McCutchen is in charge of finance, I asked him if he could add the payment descriptions back onto the bill payments report because the public has no idea what the purchases were for without a description.

The public is certainly going to ask questions when they see a payment for $24,723 that was paid to The Bridal Shoppe and there's nothing describing what the purchase was for. The majority of people have quite a puzzled reaction when they find out that the district spent $24,723 at The Bridal Shoppe. Had there been a description column on the bill payments report documenting that the payment was for choir robes, then maybe there would have been fewer questions regarding the payment.

It's good to know that our school board is beginning to see the need to be more transparent. It's a very important step towards rebuilding the public's trust of our school board and school district leadership. Prior school board decisions and lack of communication with the public have caused a great deal of distrust in the community. It will take time to restore that trust. Superintendent Critchlow has made it quite clear by her responses that transparency isn't as important to her as it is to the community.

And, attempts to block the public from speaking with the school board without first speaking to a school district administrator regarding school board decisions also undermines the public's trust and it does not follow school board policy.

It's important that our administrators and school board members read and understand our school board Policies and Regulations and that they follow them as well. They clearly document the roles of our school board and our Superintendent. They were written and adopted to be the rules for governing our school district.

Per our school board policies, 

"As a member of the school Board, I shall: Accept my policy-making responsibilities and require the Superintendent to administer the school in accordance with those policies."

You can read more from Fox's school board policies about School Board Member Qualifications, their Role, Oath, Code of Ethics and more in the document below that contains just those sections from the Fox C-6 School District's board policies and regulations.

Fox C-6 School Board Member Qualifications,

Role, Oath, Code of Ethics and More

What About Those Bill Payments and Credit Card Payments?

The April 2014 Fox C-6 School Board meeting will have marked 2 months since I asked the Fox C-6 School Board the following two questions:

How can the school board approve Bill Payments when there are no payment descriptions documenting what each payment is for?

How can the school board approve paying the credit card bills when they aren’t provided the credit card statements to document what was purchased with the credit cards?

It's been nearly two months and these questions still haven't been answered by our school board or the school district despite several emails informing the board and Superintendent Critchlow that they still haven't answered the questions. Superintendent Critchlow stated at the November 5, 2013 school board workshop that every person who has asked questions during Public Comments has gotten answers to their questions. Obviously her statement wasn't true.

I continue to document all of the times that Superintendent Critchlow makes statements that aren't true so the public understands what they have been overpaying her for during her tenure as superintendent.

Will the school board ever answer the questions regarding Bill Payments and Credit Card Payments? 

How are they doing their job as a school board and providing oversight of our taxpayer dollars if they have no idea what the checks that they are approving are paying for if there aren't any descriptions on the Bill Payments?

How does the school board know what the more than $2.1 Million Dollars in credit card payments have paid for if they aren't provided credit card statements in their board packets each month?

Please call, email or ask your school board members some of these questions during Public Comments at a school board meeting and let me know if you get an answer. It appears that they can't or won't answer these questions which means that the school board isn't following the Code of Ethics that they swore to uphold.

Latest Emails Regarding Questions to the Board and Credit Card Statements

Below is the email I sent in response to the school district's Tuesday April 8, 2014 email. The district's Tuesday April 8 email included an attachment that informed me that the school district would need to charge me between $160 - $170 for copies of the credit card statements for the current school year. It would take 5 1/2 hours to search for and redact credit card statements and another 1/2 hour to copy the documents. It would cost $16.00 for the 160 copies the actual copies.

My email below refers to the Missouri Attorney General's website which states that a government body can waive the fees if the documents are not for personal or commercial interest. Since the credit card statements are public record and should be included in the board of education materials packet each month for our school board members to review, these documents should be made available to the public as well.

I emailed the board and superintendent my request for the documents and asked that they waive ALL fees for the credit card statements in the public's interest per the Missouri Attorney General's website. I received a response to my my email on Friday April 11 which included a copy of the 2013-2014 Fox C-6 Administrator Salaries and the 2014-2015 Fox C-6 Administrator Salaries as attachments. However, there was no response or reference to my request for the credit card statements and the waiving of the $160-$170 fee they wished to charge to obtain the credit card statements.

From: Rich Simpson
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:42 AM
To: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary
Cc: Hermann, Cheryl - Director; Cheryl Hermann; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Dan Kroupa; Smith, Dan - Board Vice President; David Palmer; Laughlin, John; Linda Nash; Steve Holloway
Subject: RE: Questions for the Fox C-6 School Board and Missouri Sunshine Law Documents Request

Thank you for your reply.

No one on the school board has addressed my questions that I presented at the February 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting and that I included in my March 28 and April 4, 2014 emails regarding Bill Payments and credit card payments. When will these questions be answered by our school board?
The administrator salary schedule that I requested is the one that was included in the board packets in the past. It lists all of the administrator's names and positions along with their salaries for each of the upcoming school years. I have attached a copy of the report from the 2013 school board packets as an example. However, the Administrator Salary report that I attached from the 2013 board packet did not list the salary amounts. The report only had the letter “X” where the salary amounts were to be listed. Please provide the Administrator Salary Report in PDF format similar to the one attached for the 2013-2016 school years with salary amounts included. Also, please include Superintendent Critchlow’s 2014-2015 salary amount as well.

Regarding my question on “chain of command”, I have read the board policies on Public Complaints. My questions to the school board regarding Bill Payments are not complaints. They are simply questions for the board asking them how they can approve bill payments without being provided descriptions for the bill payments or the credit card statements for them to review each month. Nowhere in our board policies does it state that I cannot ask our school board questions at a school board meeting during Public Comments without first contacting district administrators or personnel for board actions.

As our elected school board members, Fox's Code of Ethics states that "As a member of the school Board, I shall:" accept and follow each of the items listed in the Code of Ethics; following our district’s Code of Ethics is not optional.

My request for the credit card statements for this school year was for the public interest and not a request for personal or commercial interest. Therefore, I am requesting that ALL fees for locating and copying the credit card statements for the 2013-2014 school year be waived as documented on the Missouri Attorney General's website so the credit card statements can be provided to the Fox C-6 community so they can review and understand where their tax dollars are being spent.

http://ago.mo.gov/sunshinelaw/requestform.htm  

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

From: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:40 AM
To: Rich Simpson
Cc: Hermann, Cheryl - Director; Cheryl Hermann; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Dan Kroupa; Smith, Dan - Board Vice President; David Palmer; Davis, Debby - CO Secretary; Laughlin, John; Linda Nash ; Steve Holloway
Subject: RE: Questions for the Fox C-6 School Board and Missouri Sunshine Law Documents Request

Mr. Simpson,

Attached is a letter in regard to your Mo Sunshine Law request and the items that you requested that the District does have in a pdf format.  The letter will explain the procedure to follow in receiving the remaining documents you requested.

Thank you,

Debby A. Davis 

Administrative Asst. to the Supt/BOE

How Much Does Fox C-6 Spend on Legal Fees?

Fox C-6 uses the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm for most of its legal services. On occasion the district will use other law firms such as Thomeczek & Brink to act as a Due Process Hearing Officer for the district. The district also has to pay a service to record and transcribe Due Process Hearing testimony.

Here are some past articles that explain why Fox spends quite a bit of your tax dollars on legal fees:

Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Critchlow's

Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting

June 2013 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Public Comments

You can find the payments to the law firms in the monthly school board packets in the Bill Payments section.

Below are the totals from all of the Bill Payments that have been provided in the school board packets dating back to April 2010. They are broken down by school year which runs from July 1 through June 30.

At the November 2013 board workshop, school board president Dan Smith wanted to make sure that things get passed through the district's legal counsel when responding to questions from the public unless they are just simple questions.

Fox C-6 Legal Fees

2009-2010 - $11,185.11 (Only April - June 2010 Data) 
Mickes Goldman O'Toole - $11,185.11
Thomeczek & Brink - $570.00

2010-2011 - $100,342.74
Mickes Goldman O'Toole - $82,974.52
Thomeczek & Brink - $17,368.22

2011-2012 - $81,029.43
Mickes Goldman O'Toole - $81,029.43

2012-2013 - $148,903.30
Mickes Goldman O'Toole - $148,903.30

2013-2014 - $80,579.43 (Through March 2014)
Mickes Goldman O'Toole - $80,579.43

Response to Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman's Response to My February 2014 Public Comments

It's pretty easy to see that your school board isn't being allowed to answer questions from patrons of the district. I asked Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman at Tuesday night's school board meeting if he had received my email response to his email. He said he had. However, he seemed quite offended by my response. He told me that I misunderstood his email and that he was only trying to be proactive in asking me to contact him if I knew what I wanted to ask the school board by getting me information prior to the school board meeting.

I told Mr. Arbeitman that his email made it pretty clear that the school board was not going to respond to my questions with anything other than a "Thank You" unless I first called him with my questions. He told me that's not what it said. He said that it said "If". I again told him that his email said IF I didn't contact him first, that the board wasn't going to answer my questions. It was quite clear. He again tried to explain that I was taking his email the wrong way and that I just needed to give him a chance.

I recommend that you read Mr. Arbeitman's email that he sent me last month below and read my response to him. I'm fully aware of how the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm and the Missouri School Board Association trains school boards to basically remain silent. There is the belief that the board doesn't have the knowledge needed to respond to patrons on their own. They encourage the boards to have the superintendent or another school district designee respond for them. It's best for the school district to respond to patrons so the board doesn't say something that they shouldn't.

Mr. Arbeitman told me Tuesday night that the school board asked him to respond to my questions. I don't recall seeing anything documented in Fox's school board minutes stating that the school board has asked Mr. Arbeitman to speak for them.

How can Mr. Arbeitman answer questions for the board? He does not approve the Bill Payments. The school board does.

How does the school board approve the Bill Payments without knowing what the payments are for?

Does the district expect school board members to call the Central Office and ask about every check that seems questionable such as The Bridal Shoppe or the numerous monthly payments to restaurants, etc?

It appears that our school board isn't representing our community very well since they won't respond themselves. So, I ask again, why does Fox C-6 have a school board?

I recommend reading this article on the Missouri Education Watchdog's website:

Local School Boards Should Be Abolished

According to Assistant Superintendent Arbeitman's email last month, there is only one person requesting information from the school district. Therefore, the district has no reason to publish public records such as school district budgets, bill payment descriptions or credit card statements like they do in other school districts.

The residents and taxpayers of the Fox C-6 School District can continue to call the Central Office if you want to know why the district spent another $24,000 this month at The Bridal Shoppe. Or perhaps you might want to ask the Central Office why the district paid all of the following restaurants this past month in the area as documented in the March 18, 2014 school board packet.

Without credit card statements, there's no way of knowing what was purchased on the credit cards by the card holders in the district. It's odd that the total credit limit of the 25 VISA card holders as documented by the board packets is only $44,000. However the district continues to have bills nearly double that amount. Review the 2013-2014 Bill Payments which lists the 25 VISA Credit Card Holders on page 2 of the report.

RESTAURANT PAYMENTS
Pomodoro's - $362.70
Panda Express - $350.00
The Dough Depot - $264.00
Detour Grill and Bar - $350.00
Bandana's Barbecue - $470.00
Gator South Beer & Wine Garden - $750.00
The Dough Depot - $456.00
Little Ceasars Pizza - $275.00
Panda Express - $358.00
The Dough Depot - $319.00
Waffle House #1324 - $392.00

CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS
American Express - $29,260.06
VISA Card Services - $79,186.67 (The total credit limit of card holders is: $44,000)
Sam's Club Discover - $20,501.19

My Response to Mr. Arbeitman and the Fox C-6 School Board

I responded to Andy Arbeitman's email regarding my Public Comments at the February 19, 2014 Fox C-6 School Board meeting. I wrote about his email last month. I also copied all of the school board members which makes my response a Public Records document.

My responses are in RED. Mr. Arbeitman's email was very clear in which he stated, “If you choose not to contact me in advance, all further responses from your public comments will be a “thank you” response and that we look forward to responding to you in the future when you are willing to communicate with district employees first.”

However, it is possible that Mr. Arbeitman may have not fully understood what he wrote to me. There is a high probability that the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm wrote the email for him. Therefore, he may not have fully understood what he sent me. The law firm has been writing emails for the district for years since federal agencies have been investigating the school district. Even more so since the USDA found the District Non-Compliant with federal laws and was caught trying to subvert the complaint process last fall.

Dan Baker's Email Slip
The law firm wants to make sure the district doesn't get into any further trouble. A few years ago, Assistant Superintendent Dan Baker, who is the District's Section 504 coordinator, accidentally sent us an email that he meant to send to the district attorney. He was asking the attorney to respond to one of our emails when he had time "Ha Ha". I forwarded the email back to Mr. Baker and told him that I think he intended to send it to the school district attorney Mike Hodge since he addressed it to Mike.

The Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm handles emails for districts across the state like down in the Camdenton school district. It's a win for the law firm as they continue to bill month after month. Fox pays nearly as much per year in legal fees to the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm as it costs to add another Central Office Administrator to the payroll less their retirement benefits. Training school boards that they don't have the knowledge necessary to speak with the public, the law firms are able to bill quite a few hours to school districts across the state helping them stay out of trouble.

It's time that we have some parents and taxpayers go to the Central Office and start scanning invoices and credit card statements to see where all the money is going. We've been told the district doesn't have enough money and that's why they really needed to pass the bond issue. I'd also recommend making copies of invoices from the law firm to see how much they've been billing the district for the last 6 years on OCR related issues.

Law Firm Doesn't Provide Detailed Billing

In the past, I've been told that our law firm doesn't provide the district with detailed billing. It's hard to believe that our district doesn't get detailed billing. You just never know what kind of excuse you will hear when you ask questions as our administrators hope to keep you from knowing the truth!

I believe that it's time for a State Audit of the Fox C-6 School District prior to Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's retirement!


Here is my email response to Mr. Arbeitman that I sent Tuesday March 18, 2014:

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 7:24 AM
To: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent
Cc: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Dan E. Smith; David Palmer; Steve Holloway; John Laughlin; Cheryl Hermann; Linda S. Nash; Dan Kroupa
Subject: RE: Response to public comment at the February 18, 2014 board of education meeting

===================================================================== 

From: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:09 PM
To: Rich Simpson
Cc: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent
Subject: Response to public comment at the February 18, 2014 board of education meeting

Mr. Simpson,

Thank you again for your time and public comments at our board meeting last night.  With regard to your requests to;

-include more information in our board packets online

Yes, my request to the Fox C6 School Board on 2/18/14 included that all the credit card statements (full originals less account numbers) be included in board packets.

-more detailed credit card bills

Actually, this statement is not completely accurate.  My request to the Board of Education on 2/18/14 was that the Board make available to the public the actual original credit card invoices/statements.  I asked the Board to provide the original statements from the credit card company to the public by including them, in their entirety, in the board packets that are then made available to the public on the District's website. By copying this correspondence to Dan Smith, I renew my request to the Board and ask that a member of the Board respond to my request. 

-the district budget online

My request to the Board of Education on 2/18/14 was that the Board publish the district’s budget(s) on the District’s website. The district recently provided the Board with the 2014-2015 district budget. Please publish the 2014-2015 budget on the district website like they do in other districts such as Rockwood.

-more descriptions of payments

Again, this is not completely accurate.  My request to the Board of Education on 2/18/14 was that the Board include a description for each line item payment/disbursement.  Currently there is no description at all, so it’s not accurate to state that I am requesting "more descriptions" when none currently exist. The only information that the Board currently makes available to the public is the name of the Payee to whom payment is made.  No information regarding what the payment is for is included and, therefore, the information is not useful to the average citizen.  My request to the Board on 2/18/14 was that the Board provide information about the intended purpose for each payment.  The example I provided was the recent payment of $24,000 to "The Bridal Shop" which may seem unusual to the average resident but would be immediately clarified if accompanied with a simple description statement indicating that this payment was for  "choir robes". This was practice in our District previously and it currently is the standard in other area school districts. Since the Board that approves spending based on this information, my request is directed to the Board. Board policy 3150 states that list of bills for approval, “will be supported by invoices, approved purchase orders, properly submitted vouchers, or in accordance with salaries and salary schedules approved by the Board.” Therefore I renew my request to the Board. 

-the statement according to your calculations the district has approximately $2,000,000 in credit card bills to date 

The district actually has $1,993,799 in credit card bills to date and a lot of schools utilize credit cards/purchasing cards to pay bills for added cash back rebates.  This allows for more value of the school district dollar.  Most of the credit card bills during the current year are electric bills district-wide, monthly copier costs, and as much of our office/teacher types of supplies when the credit card was still allowed for those types of charges. We have received approximately $35,000 in rebates to date.

Thank you for this information; however, to clarify, my concern was and is not that the District utilizes a credit card(s).  My concern is that the Board provides no descriptive information about credit card purchases to the public and does not include credit card statements like they do in other districts in their board packets.

In order to better meet your needs, thoughts, and questions, we would like to be more proactive with your monthly public comments rather than reactive.  That said, I am requesting that if you know what your questions, opinions, thoughts, or desires are prior to our board meetings, that you to please call me in advance so that we can better serve you and your comments.  This will in no way stop you or prevent you from making monthly public comments, but rather it will allow more validity and affirmation for our board of education that you are following the proper chain of command as per board policy.  If you choose not to contact me in advance, all further responses from your public comments will be a “thank you” response and that we look forward to responding to you in the future when you are willing to communicate with district employees first.  At this time, your request for more detailed credit card bill descriptions, the district budget posted online, and more detailed descriptions of monthly payments are being requested from only one individual and we can make those available to you upon request.  The board appreciates your comments and they will continue to be taken under consideration.

This is where we disagree, and where I seek your further very specific clarification.   Please provide me with a copy of the Fox C-6 school board policy to which you refer above.

Perhaps you may be referring to school board Policy 1480 regarding “School/Community Relations - Public Complaints”. It states:

“Although no member of the community shall be denied the right to petition the Board of Education for redress of a grievance, the complaints will be referred through the proper administrative channels for solution before investigation or action by the Board. Exceptions are complaints that concern Board actions or Board operations only.”

Obviously, Policy 1480 is not applicable here since my concerns meet the stated exception, i.e. the concerns I addressed at the 2/18/14 school board meeting are about “Board actions” and “Board operations” and I am therefore not subject to any “chain of command”.  My concerns/questions were not about student or personnel issues, instruction, discipline, or learning materials.  But perhaps there is another policy that applies of which I am unaware?  

Furthermore, I find it shocking that you have made a threat to me on behalf of the school Board-- “If you choose not to contact me in advance, all further responses from your public comments will be a “thank you” response and that we look forward to responding to you in the future when you are willing to communicate with district employees first.” 

Therefore, at your earliest convenience, please provide me with any school Board policy, documentation, or correspondence that supports your claims that:

• the School Board may refuse to respond to a public question/concern about Board actions unless the resident “first” submits their concern to you
• you, Andy Arbeitman, an employee of the school district, hold the authority to prescreen questions and concerns from members of the public to determine if, in your assessment, the concern is “valid” or not “valid” for consideration by the Board
• the Board has made the decision to abdicate its responsibility and has expressly delegated its authority to you to determine if questions/concerns from the public are “valid” or not “valid” and deserving of a reply from them  

Finally, you added a comment about administrative salaries that was not on your public comment request sheet.  I will be happy to look into this for you upon receiving a return phone call.  My number is listed below.  I look forward to your call.

Your request seems silly since my only availability for phone calls is outside of regular business hours when you would not normally be in your office.  My question, as asked to the School Board on 2/18/14 is that the School Board of Education include the administrative salary schedule on the district website. It should also be included in the board packets with actual salaries and not just “X”’s for the salary amounts. It doesn’t provide the public with any information to only place an “X” for a salary amount. Generally, I can be reached by phone at home between the hours of 6 and 7 a.m. or between 8 and 10 p.m.  Or, if it's more convenient, please simply include this information, along with your responses to my other questions contained in this email, in your response.

I also request that the Board of Education delay approving the Board’s updated Policies, Regulations and Forms until the April 2014 Board meeting. The District and the Board should have properly notified the public that they were available for review and recommendations. No announcements or notifications were posted on the district website or in the local paper notifying the public that the updated Policies and Regulations had been posted for the public to review.

Prior to approving the updated Polices, Regulations and Forms, please remove Vickie Hanson as a point of contact. She retired from the district in 2008.

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

Mr. Arbeitman's Response to My March 18, 2014 Public Comments:

Below is the response I received from Mr. Arbeitman. It appears that our school district doesn't acknowledge the fact that we have elected school board members to represent the community. It would also seem as if he didn't hear Linda Nash's parting message in which she told the few people in attendance at the March school board meeting that it is the school board's job to hire (or fire) the Superintendent.

Perhaps we should provide an Organizational Chart like they have in other school districts to Superintendent Critchlow and Assistant Superintendent Arbeitman which when properly drawn shows the Board of Education above the Superintendent and not the other way around.


========================================================================

From: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent

Date: 03/19/2014 11:23 AM (GMT-06:00) 

To: Rich Simpson 

Cc: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary ,Crutchley, Tim - CO Admin., Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent

Subject: Response to Public Comments at the March 18, 2014 board meeting 

The district has their revised board policies on the website for review; however, we will add a public notice so that the patrons can be more informed.

The board of education continues to be in consideration of Mr. Simpson’s comments and suggestions.  In the meantime, upon request via email or phone, hard copies of the budget and such will be made available to Mr. Simpson.  Please contact Andy Arbeitman at 636-296-8000 or arbeitmana@fox.k12.mo.us.

Why Does Fox C-6 Have a School Board?

Why do we elect school board members to watch over our school district and maintain the public trust if our Superintendent is going to undermine that public trust?

Is Superintendent Critchlow supposed to respond to the community or is the school board supposed to respond to the community?

I think it says a lot to the Fox C-6 community when Superintendent Critchlow informs you via an email from her Assistant Superintendent that the school district / school board won't respond to your questions posed during Public Comments anymore with anything other than a "thank you" unless you speak to a district employee first.

Below is a portion of the email that Mr. Arbeitman sent me the day after I spoke at the February 2014 board meeting. Mr. Arbeitman's email was only sent to me and copied to Superintendent Critchlow and board secretary Debby Davis (Critchlow's administrative assistant). None of the board members were included in the email unless they were blind copied even though Mr. Arbeitman appears to be speaking for the board.

In order to better meet your needs, thoughts, and questions, we would like to be more proactive with your monthly public comments rather than reactive. That said, I am requesting that if you know what your questions, opinions, thoughts, or desires are prior to our board meetings, that you to please call me in advance so that we can better serve you and your comments. This will in no way stop you or prevent you from making monthly public comments, but rather it will allow more validity and affirmation for our board of education that you are following the proper chain of command as per board policy. If you choose not to contact me in advance, all further responses from your public comments will be a “thank you” response and that we look forward to responding to you in the future when you are willing to communicate with district employees first. At this time, your request for more detailed credit card bill descriptions, the district budget posted online, and more detailed descriptions of monthly payments are being requested from only one individual and we can make those available to you upon request. The board appreciates your comments and they will continue to be taken under consideration.

So, it appears from Mr. Arbeitman's email that I am being treated differently than other people who come and speak at school board meetings and have their questions answered without first having to speak with Mr. Arbeitman. School board policy DOES NOT state that a person has to contact a district employee prior to making a Public Comment in order to get a response. If it is a student matter at a building, then a person is asked to go through the chain of command from the teacher to the principal to the Superintendent before speaking to the board. However, my questions can only be answered by the school board. I cannot be required to call Mr. Arbeitman in order to ask the school board a question. The school district doesn't want me asking the board questions that they should be asking the district.

Perhaps the board is asking questions about Bill Payments. If they are, they aren't asking these questions during the public portion of our board meetings. I've been to the board meetings. The board simply approves the payments and abstains when needed.

From the public's perspective during the open session, it doesn't appear that the board is asking any questions about bill payments. They shouldn't be discussing bill payments during Closed Session. Bill payments is not a matter for Closed Sessions. It is a public matter.

Apparently asking our elected school board members at a school board meeting as to how they are able to approve bill payments without knowing what the payments are for doesn't sit well with Superintendent Critchlow. At the February 18, 2014 school board meeting I asked the board how can they approve bill payments when they aren't provided descriptions for those payments in their board packets?

Descriptions for bill payments used to be provided to board members each month in their board packets prior to the district switching to the new school software this year. During my Public Comment, I also asked our board members how they have been able to approve paying nearly $2 Million dollars in credit card bills so far this year when they aren't provided the credit card statements to document where the money was spent? If they knew, they didn't answer my question. I waited for a response. All they said was "thank you". (See below as to how much money was paid to Credit Card companies in January and February 2014.)

Should the community expect our school board to follow district policy under the Code of Ethics section which states, "As a member of the school Board, I shall: Insist that school funds be spent prudently and effectively to provide maximum educational benefits."?

How can school board members insist that school funds are being spent prudently and effectively if they don't know what our tax dollars are being spent on?

Perhaps the community needs to request a state audit of the school district.

Paying out nearly $2 Million dollars in credit card bills without oversight by our school board should raise some "red flags" for the community or any auditor for that matter. It's an easy way for someone to abuse taxpayer dollars when there's very little oversight.

What's the purpose of having a school board if only the superintendent's office is going to respond to Public Comment? It defeats the purpose of having a school board and violates school board policy which states that As a member of the school Board, I shall: Maintain the public trust through full and open communication. Is only receiving responses from our Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent on board matters "full and open communication"?

The response from the school district regarding my Public Comments reads almost like a Cease and Desist letter. Perhaps Superintendent Critchlow doesn't want the public to know how their tax dollars are being spent.

According to the district's response letter, only one person in the district is concerned about having descriptions on bill payments or having credit card statements to document the nearly $2 Million dollars the district has spent so far this year on credit cards. Since no one else is concerned, there's no reason to provide the information to the public like they do in other school districts. The district says they will provide me the information upon request. We will have to see if the district is going to charge me to obtain that information when it is requested as a further deterrent to making the information available to the public.

Would you be concerned if you saw a bill payment to THE BRIDAL SHOPPE for $24,723 from your school district?

Apparently Superintendent Critchlow looked up the check in question after reading my Twitter post last week about the check to The Bridal Shoppe. She told me at the school board meeting that the check to The Bridal Shoppe was for choir robes. I told her that if there had been descriptions on the bill payments, then the check might not have been questioned. She told me that I could call the district anytime if I have a question about a payment. She also informed me at the board meeting that the check to her husband that I mentioned on Twitter was for Professional Development.

Perhaps school board members are calling the school each month asking them what each of the questionable payments are for since they don't have any description or account codes to explain what the payments are for in the board packets (see below). It seems like the district is making it more difficult for our school board to do their job by not providing the descriptions with the bill payments like they used to do in the past.

So you can see how the district is handling things, I've included the email that I received from Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman the day after I spoke at the school board meeting below. Below the district's response, I've posted some sample check payments with amounts from the board meeting packets. Below the check payments, I have listed some of the items from our school board policies Code of Ethics that our board members are supposed to follow.

February 19, 2014 response email from Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitmen to my Public Comments at the February 18, 2014 board meeting:

Thank you again for your time and public comments at our board meeting last night. With regard to your requests to;

-include more information in our board packets online
-more detailed credit card bills
-the district budget online
-more descriptions of payments
-the statement according to your calculations the district has approximately $2,000,000 in credit card bills to date

The district actually has $1,993,799 in credit card bills to date and a lot of schools utilize credit cards/purchasing cards to pay bills for added cash back rebates. This allows for more value of the school district dollar. Most of the credit card bills during the current year are electric bills district-wide, monthly copier costs, and as much of our office/teacher types of supplies when the credit card was still allowed for those types of charges. We have received approximately $35,000 in rebates to date.

In order to better meet your needs, thoughts, and questions, we would like to be more proactive with your monthly public comments rather than reactive. That said, I am requesting that if you know what your questions, opinions, thoughts, or desires are prior to our board meetings, that you to please call me in advance so that we can better serve you and your comments. This will in no way stop you or prevent you from making monthly public comments, but rather it will allow more validity and affirmation for our board of education that you are following the proper chain of command as per board policy. If you choose not to contact me in advance, all further responses from your public comments will be a “thank you” response and that we look forward to responding to you in the future when you are willing to communicate with district employees first. At this time, your request for more detailed credit card bill descriptions, the district budget posted online, and more detailed descriptions of monthly payments are being requested from only one individual and we can make those available to you upon request. The board appreciates your comments and they will continue to be taken under consideration.

Finally, you added a comment about administrative salaries that was not on your public comment request sheet. I will be happy to look into this for you upon receiving a return phone call. My number is listed below. I look forward to your call.

Andy Arbeitman
Assistant Superintendent of Instruction

Sample Payments from Check Register
Below are some sample entries from the Check Register listings found in the January and February 2014 school board meeting packets from the district website that the board approved payments for. As you can see the Transaction Description only lists the PAYEE Name. It does not provide any type of description as to what the payment is for. The Check # and Check Date have been left off this list for readability. You can download the board meeting packets from the district website that contain these checks by clicking on the link below. The February 18th board packet was updated on February 20th to include another $1,747,606.45 in payments that was included in the board members late packet just prior to the board meeting for approval.

2013-2014 Board Meeting Packets

• CARD SERVICES - $85,252.99
• CARD SERVICES - $81,808.52
• CARD SERVICES - $74,379.38
• SAMS CLUB DISCOVER - $26,998.43
• SAMS CLUB DISCOVER - $30,099.44
• SAMS CLUB DISCOVER - $26,072.46
• AMERICAN EXPRESS - $52,543.60
• AMERICAN EXPRESS - $12,127.42
• AMERICAN EXPRESS - $22,141.69
• THE BRIDAL SHOPPE - $24,734.00
• THE ELECTION AUTHORITY FUND - $78,555.00
• MICKES GOLDMAN O'TOOLE, LLC - $4,802.00
• MICKES GOLDMAN O'TOOLE, LLC - $3,494.50
• MICKES GOLDMAN O'TOOLE, LLC - $7,953.50
• PUBLIC SCHOOL RETIREMENT - $1,434,314.66
• PUBLIC SCHOOL RETIREMENT - $1,441,290.46
• LINDBERGH SCHOOL DISTRICT - $14,250.00
• TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC - $22,465.00
• TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC - $134,151.17
• Critchlow, Dianne P. - $50.06
• DUNCAN BRAD - $2,485.00
• DUNCAN BRAD - $2,720.00
• CC DILLON COMPANY - $33,203.29
• K & K CAR REPAIR - $50,425.31
• EXQUISITE CATERING - $3,977.50
• DETOUR GRILL & BAR - $2,456.55
• VIG SOLUTIONS - $82,560
• JEFFCO TRAVEL SERVICES - $31,970.00
• PONDEROSA STEAKHOUSE - $239.70
• AMEREN UE - $140,855.64
• SOUTHWEST AIRLINES - $9,562.80

School Board Code of Ethics

Below are a few of the important points from the School Board's Code of Ethics (Policy 0333 in the current version or Policy 0340 in the updated version) that are in Fox's school district policies.

As a member of the school Board, I shall:

• Endeavor to understand the present and future educational needs of the community.
• Maintain the public trust through full and open communication.
• Insist that school funds be spent prudently and effectively to provide maximum educational benefits.
• Recognize that the public schools are agencies of the state for betterment of the entire community.
• Encourage citizens to participate through channels in shaping the purposes and policies of the local school system.
• Accept my policy-making responsibilities and require the Superintendent to administer the school in accordance with those policies.
• Delegate to the Superintendent of schools and other school employees authority in keeping with their responsibilities.
• Demand that the schools be operated by the best trained technical and professional personnel it is possible to procure.
• Employ only such qualified employees as are properly recommended by the Superintendent of schools.
• Insist that the Superintendent be responsible for keeping the Board properly informed on school matters at all times.
• Make my decisions only after judicious consideration of the evidence and viewpoints of competent and/or interested individuals.

How closely are our school board members following the Code of Ethics?