Improvements in Transparency Helps the Community Perform Oversight

Nearly a decade ago, I was writing articles about some of the issues that our community was facing under superintendent Dianne Brown Critchlow. Between December 2010 and July 2015, I spoke at more than 20 school board meetings during the 3 minute public comments portion of the meeting because I could bring “concerns” to our school board as a whole because in 2010, school board members didn’t have individual email addresses like they do now. It took several years of me requesting for that to happen. I wrote articles on my blog and provided examples to our school board of what other school districts were doing in the area such as posting bill payments online for their community as well as board meeting packets and board meeting minutes within days of a school board meeting. Many of the school districts that Dianne liked to compare Fox to also posted audio or video recordings of their school board meetings online for the public to review. Asked to Pay For Bill Payments and Board Packets When I asked for copies of bill payments so I could review them to find out how much Fox was spending in legal fees in order to get around writing a 504 plan, I was asked to pay to get copies of the bill payments via my Sunshine Request because the law allows a school district to charge to provide copies of documents. However, other school districts were posting their bill payments online and were available for free. I pointed this out to our school board members at the time during public comments and via email. It took years for that to occur and it wasn’t until the very end of Dianne’s tenure before that started to happen. One thing that wasn’t posted online was the credit card statements. I asked our school board members during public comments at the February 2014 school board meeting as to whether or not they were being provided copies of the credit card statements with the board packets and bill payments each month for review since Fox had paid more than $2.1 million in credit card bills in the first half of the 2013-2014 school year

It became obvious that they hadn’t been getting copies of the credit card statements when I made a Sunshine Request to get copies of the credit card statements and I was asked to pay between $160 and $170 to provide me copies of those statements. It wasn’t until my Sunshine Request was fulfilled in the fall of 2014 that I noticed that copies of the credit card statements were FAXed to the district. Apparently, getting copies of those credit card statements for the school board was a problem too. Bill Payments Missing from Board Packets I'll never forget the comment I received after a school board meeting from former board member Dan Smith when I asked about posting the bill payments online. He told me that it would lead to more questions from the community. That was a pretty interesting response given the fact that bill payments are public records. Even after the board packets started getting posted online, the bill payments didn't get posted with them. When I asked about that, I was told that they didn't get posted because there were students names on the checks and that it was a privacy issue. It soon became apparent that the bill payments needed to get posted online with the board packets in order to keep the public informed about what was being spent by our school district each month. For ease of access for the community, I started posting copies of school board meeting minutes for the public to review and for me as well for quick access over on my blog. During the 2014-2015 school year, board meeting minutes started to get posted more quickly for the public and archived on the district’s website. I had to pay to obtain many of the board meeting packets in the early days when I made Sunshine Requests for copies of them even though they were already in PDF format. Below is a link to where you can review board meeting minutes and some board meeting packets dating back to the 2001-2002 school year. There's some history documented in those board meeting minutes and board packets of what went on at Fox during that time. There just wasn't a lot of detail. At least not compared to being able to watch video recordings of BOE meetings and being able to download board meeting packets from BoardDocs.

Fox C-6 School Board Meeting Minutes and Packets

Here’s a link to an article written in April 2014 about those missing credit card statements.

What About Those Bill Payments and Credit Card Payments

Why the Fox C-6 Community Wasn't Aware of Problems in the District

So, why wasn't the Fox C-6 community aware of ongoing problems in our school district for such a long time? Why weren't charges filed during the investigation of the state audit findings? I was told that school board meeting minutes were reviewed as part of the investigation. So, the fact that our school board meeting minutes did not contain details about what concerns were being brought to our school board members and district leaders during Public Comment, investigators could only go on what was documented in the minutes. I voiced my concern about the lack of details in board meeting minutes for years and was met with a lot of resistance from our former superintendent on the issue. That's why I always audio recorded my Public Comments because I knew they wouldn't be documented very well in the board meeting minutes. Defending Lack Of Detail In Board Meeting Minutes In defending her position on the lack of detail in our school board meeting minutes, former superintendent Dianne (Critchlow) Salsman sent me the following statement in a September 17, 2013 email:

"Per MSBA council, minutes are not verbatim, it is merely an account of the meeting through the board secretaries eyes."

Below is an example of what Fox's board secretary saw through her eyes and documented for the January 15, 2013 school board meeting that I spoke at. PUBLIC COMMENT AS DOCUMENTED IN BOARD MEETING MINUTES: Rich Simpson - Requested more board information on the district website. PUBLIC COMMENT READ AT THE BOARD MEETING:

Over the last several years I have attempted to encourage you to do the right thing and you have repeatedly failed to do so. I have invested thousands of hours into researching how our school district operates as well as that of other school districts across the state, and across the country. During which, I have gained a tremendous amount of information and knowledge. Much to my disappointment however, I have come to the realization that the school district that I grew up in and loved as a child is not at all what I thought it would be when my children began attending. We have a lot of great teachers in the district, however, the leadership and school board has stifled their abilities to do a great job – even made them fearful for their jobs if they were to express their opinions. Tell me, is this how a school district should be run? I have requested for our community to have board meetings video or audio recorded due to the fact that our board minutes are vague or not always accurate. I have requested that school board meeting information packets be published online prior to school board meetings or after board meetings along with the minutes so our community can be more informed and involved in what is going on within our district. Our school board policies even require that board minutes be accurate and complete and without the board meeting information packets they are not. I have requested that school board member contact information be placed on the district website so our board members would be accessible to the community. All of these things are done in other school districts. 

Why can’t our school district do these things? 

I have never received an answer from our school board as to why these things cannot be done. Our superintendent has informed me that this information is not on our website which I am aware of and that is why I have been asking for it to be. It is my hope that you respect others in our community that may speak at this evening's school board meeting and that the individuals in our school community refrain from making defamatory comments in online forums in the coming days as has been done to me after I have spoken at previous school board meetings. Those who are making the defamatory comments have no business teaching our children, running our school, etc. if they are employees of our school district. I believe that they are, because no one other than those present in this room at those past board meetings had knowledge of who was present and what was said. They are simply playground bullies. Our district has a no bullying policy but it appears that it does not apply to school officials. It is clear that you have embarrassed not only our school district but our community. Our district is not as well respected or as academically advanced as you tout or would like to believe. You may complement each other here and pat yourselves on the back with the thought that you believe that you are doing a great job. However, a growing portion of the community does not share your same point of view and neither does the community of our peers in surrounding school districts. I respectfully request that our current school board members resign and that past board members do not seek re-election. There are administrators that should resign as well so our school district and community can get a fresh start towards building a new and improved school district and one that we can truly be proud of. Thank you!

Of course, there were defamatory comments posted on TOPIX shortly before and after the January 15, 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting in an attempt to intimidate anyone from speaking at the board meeting. Below is a link to the article I wrote on January 27, 2013 regarding the documenting of school board meetings and how our former superintendent kept the community from knowing what concerns were being brought to our school board. The real question is, why didn't our school board act upon the concerns being brought to them at the time? Online Posts Traced to District Employees

I made sure that our school board members were aware of the online posts being made and that I believed that they were being made by District employees. In 2014, the online defamatory posts were traced to school district computers and school district employees homes. Imagine that! Since I wasn't a District employee, I couldn't be targeted by District leaders like others who have stood up against the district culture. Instead, District leaders had to tackle the problem in the online forums anonymously and by not documenting in detail the concerns being brought to our school board's attention.

January 15, 2013

School Board Meeting Public Comment

Fox Board Meeting Minutes and Admin Contracts - NO Public Record of Removal of 10 Years of Service Requirement!

According to news reports and articles and Fox's November 17, 2014 To Whom It May Concern letter the Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program was updated at the February 18, 2014 Special Workshop/Board Meeting and several times over the past several years.

I originally wrote and posted this article on Wednesday December 3, 2014. Shortly after the article was posted I received a couple of emails from Fox's CFO John Brazeal with some clarifications and corrections to my article. This article has been updated to reflect those clarifications and corrections.

After re-reading the To Whom It May Concern letter which I have also added to the bottom of this article, Mr. Brazeal did have it noted in his letter that Dianne Critchlow had sent an email on February 19, 2014 to the staff notifying them that the board approved changes to the Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program at the February 18, 2014 board meeting. Mr. Brazeal's letter noted that Cheryl Hermann made a motion to approve the changes to the retirement program during Closed Session as recorded in the Closed Session minutes.

Per Mr. Brazeal's letter, changes to the retirement program should have been made during the Public Session but were not. Since the change was approved during Closed Session the changes were never documented openly for the public.

How was the public supposed to know that a change was made?

Last week I made a Sunshine Law request for a copy of the minutes from the Closed Session of the February 3, 2014 Fox C-6 board meeting since the February 18, 2014 Public Session board meeting minutes didn't document that the 10 Years of Service requirement had been removed from Fox's Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program that is contained in our current school district Policies and Regulations. When I made the request I had the incorrect meeting date as I had been told that the changes were made at a Special Meeting and not at the regular board meeting. I have now requested a copy of the Closed Meeting minutes for the February 18 meeting per Missouri Sunshine Law and will post them when I receive them. I have already updated the link below to the February 3, 2014 Board Meeting Minutes to include the February 18, 2014 Public Session board meeting minutes.

Yesterday I received the documents from last week's Sunshine request that included a copy of the Closed Session minutes from the February 3, 2014 meeting and a copy of the contracts of some of Fox's administrators and directors.

In my Sunshine request email to the board secretary and the Fox C-6 school board members last week, I informed the board that nothing was recorded in the Public Session meeting minutes regarding changes to the Early Retirement Incentive Program and that was my reason for requesting a copy of the Closed Session meeting minutes.

Taxpayer dollars should NOT be handed out to just anyone who is planning to depart the Fox C-6 School District simply because they are vested in the Public School Retirement System. Doing so would encourage anyone to work at Fox for a year and leave with a big bonus.

Paying 50% of someone's salary as a parting bonus/gift should ONLY be rewarded to those who have devoted many years of service to the district and to our community as reflected in current school district policy.

I have posted a copy of the Closed Session minutes from the February 3, 2014 board meeting minutes that were sent to me per my Sunshine request below. I compiled both the Public and Closed Session minutes as well as the pages from the board packet that were referenced in the February 3, 2014 board meeting minutes so everyone can review what changes were documented in the minutes. I have also included the minutes for the February 18, 2014 Public Session.

I will post the meeting minutes for the Closed Session of the February 18, 2014 meeting when I receive them.

February 3, 2014 Public and Closed Session Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes

Administrator and Director Contracts
My Sunshine request for documents last week also included a request for some of Fox's top administrator's and directors who have been involved with many of the recent issues in the district and nepotism problems.

My Sunshine request included a request for a copy of the contract for Fox's Director of Nursing Gee Palmer as well as Fox's Food Nutrition Service Director Kelly Nash.

Gee Palmer was given the Director of Nursing job in 2006 while her husband Dave Palmer was the president of the Fox C-6 school board. Her promotion included a 75% pay increase. Her promotion would clearly violate the most recent school board nepotism policy that was just approved at the November 2014 board meeting. Her promotion also violated the ethics to which the board was expected to uphold even in 2006. This is the reason why I have asked Dave Palmer to step down from the school board several times over the last several years as well as his wife from her position. Remaining in their positions with the knowledge of how things came to be certainly reflects poorly on one's moral and ethical beliefs.

Another reason why I wanted to review the contracts was because many people have asked why the Bakers haven't been fired since it was discovered that defamatory posts were linked to their home. It's certainly been a mystery to me considering that Mr. Dan Baker was the Section 504 Coordinator for the Fox C-6 School District and is expected to uphold federal laws. Posting defamatory comments against parents advocating for their children's rights definitely violates Section 504 Law which is a Federal Law.

Knowing that comments posted from the Baker home were also false with regards to knowing me from scouts documents the making of false statements as well. Hopefully, our board members finally recognize that this as a problem considering the fact that I have brought this to their attention for many years and now knowing that comments were linked to the home of Dan Baker.

In reviewing the contracts, you'll notice that the assistant superintendent contracts have statements for termination for cause. However, the other contracts do not. There has been plenty of reasons to Terminate for Cause that have been discovered this year and many ask why this contract clause has not been exercised. I have asked the same question as well.

You should also note that Kelly Nash's contract DOES NOT have any language regarding her requirements to earn a degree or certification in nutrition services or any requirements as the public was informed that she would. This is a very serious problem as well!

I have posted copies of the administrator and director contracts below for you to review.

Everyone in the community should be up in arms and should be contacting our Fox C-6 school board members regarding these issues. You should be demanding that NO ONE be allowed to receive a payout from the district if they have not met the 10 Years of Service requirement as documented in current school district policies.

The public should also be demanding that Kelly Nash be fired or relieved of her duties as the Director of Food Services. This was another major blunder both by former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and Todd Scott.

According to an email received from CFO John Brazeal shortly after I posted this article, Kelly Nash has completed her pre-requisites and has taken the certification test and the district is awaiting the test results.

Mr. Brazeal's email noted that the certification requirements for Kelly Nash were stated in the job posting.

Also, Mr. Brazeal noted that contract language was changed on the August contracts that I posted adding new language in the paragraphs I highlighted that were not on the previous contracts signed earlier in the year. However, district policy required termination for cause language to be in contracts. 

Below are a copy of the Fox C-6 administrator and director contracts that were requested from my Sunshine request last week:

2014 Fox C-6 Administrator and Director Contracts

Below are the important statements from the assistant superintendent contracts. I highlighted them in the PDF copies of the contracts that I posted in the link above as well so you can see what could be used to fire or terminate an administrator. The same should hold true for Directors in our district per district policy.

Administrator agrees to devote Administrator's full time, skill, labor, and attention to serving as an administrator in the District during the term of this Agreement and will not engage in any pursuit that interferes with the proper discharge of duties. Subject to the foregoing, Administrators shall be permitted to make presentations at educational conferences and teach at local institutions of higher education with prior notice and the consent of the Board. The Administrator agrees to properly render such services as directed by the Board, all in accordance with the laws of the State of Missouri, including the making of all reports required by law to be made. 

Administrator agrees to comply with all duties and requirements applicable to Administrator's position, as directed by the Superintendent and/or as stated in any performance standards and criteria, policies, rules or regulations of the District, whether adopted or modified before or after the effective date of this Agreement. Administrator has received, read, understands, and will maintain an updated knowledge of the content of the District's written performance standards, policies, rules and regulations. Administrator agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws.

This agreement may be terminated during its term for cause and/or as otherwise permitted by law. Should the Administrator seek to leave employment prior to the expiration of this contract, he/she shall be liable for any and all cost incurred in the recruitment and hiring of a replacement administrator. Furthermore, the district will determine the last working day of the contractual agreement.

Fox C-6 Voluntary Separation Incentive Program Response

DATE: November 17, 2014
TO: To Whom It May Concern
FROM: John Brazeal, CFO
RE: Recent history of Voluntary Separation Incentive Program

This is a review of the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program, also known as the Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program, or the Voluntary Leave Program, or the Voluntary Incentive Program. 

Policy vs. Regulation/Procedure

Generally, policy setting is the purview of the board. Policies must conform to law. Generally, establishing regulations/procedures is the responsibility of administration. Regulation/procedure must conform to policy, and therefore also to law. Anytime a regulation/procedure spends money, that regulation/procedure should be board approved rather than approved administratively. 

History

Regulation 4740.1 titled Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program was initially adopted in November 1998, with subsequent re-adoptions in April 2000, July 2000, July 2003, September 2004 and July 2005. As of the date of this report, this Regulation was still posted on the District website. 

The last re-adoption of Regulation 4740.1 in July 2005 coincides with the start of Dianne Brown/Critchlow’s tenure as District superintendent. Since that time, the incentive program has operated with a variety of modifications as described herein. Also since that time, policy and regulations/procedures generally have not been kept current.

Program Eligibility

The incentive program set forth in Regulation 4740.1 defines program eligibility to include: 

     1. Minimum of 10 years full-time service as a District employee; and
     2. Minimum of 20 years of service credit in the pension system (PSRS or PEERS), but not more than 31 years of service credit. 

For many years, courts have held that the upper eligibility limit of “not more than 31 years of service credit” to be discriminatory. 

In an email dated February 17, 2009, Dianne Brown announced changes to program eligibility for the 2008-2009 year to be as follows: 

     1. Qualify under current policy/regulation 4740.1; or
     2. Have more than 31 years of service credit in the pension system; or
     3. Have 20 years service credit in the pension system and minimum of 6 years employment with the district; or 

     4. Have meet Rule of 80 provisions with the pension system; or
     5. Be age 60 or greater with a minimum of 6 years employment with the district. 

If these changes were board approved, that fact has not been confirmed. 

In an email dated January 13, 2010, Todd Scott announced that for the 2009-2010 year, program eligibility would be as stated in Regulation 4740.1. 

In email dated February 15, 2011, Todd Scott announced program eligibility for the 2010-2011 year as: 

     1. Minimum of 10 years of full-time employment with the district; and
     2. Minimum of 15 years service credit with the pension system. 

The discriminatory upper limit was removed. If these changes were board approved, that fact has not been confirmed. 

In an email dated February 14, 2012, Todd Scott announced program eligibility would remain the same for 2011-2012 as the prior year of 2010-2011. Again, if this variance from the regulation was board approved, that fact has not been confirmed. 

In an email dated January 7, 2013, Todd Scott announced program eligibility would remain the same for 2012-2013 as the two previous years. Again, if this variance from the regulation was board approved, that fact has not been confirmed. 

In an email dated January 23, 2014, Todd Scott announced program eligibility for the 2013-2014 would match the eligibility requirements of the regulation as: 

     1. Minimum of 10 years full-time service as a District employee; and
     2. Minimum of 20 years of service credit in the pension system (PSRS or PEERS), but not more than 31 years of service credit. 

That action did not stand long. On February 19, 2014, an email was distributed announcing program eligibility for both the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 years to be: 

1. Employee must be vested (5 years service credit) in the pension system.
The announcement of this change indicated “at the February 18th Board of Education meeting the BOE made changes to the Voluntary Early Retirement Program.” 

Program Benefits

Regulation 4740.1 indicates that eligible program participants will: 

     1. Receive a payment equal to 50% of the applicant’s final year’s salary; and
     2. Be required to provide 35 hours of service to the District during the year following the end of District employment. 

Fewer changes were applied to these provisions, however, there were a couple changes through time. 

In an email dated November 30, 2012, Dianne Critchlow wrote: “I am excited to announce that the district is offering, A ONE TIME ONLY, addition to our early retirement incentive. For the first time in Fox C-6 history, we are not only offering to pay half of you highest year’s salary, we are offering 2 years of Board paid health insurance.” 

In an email dated January 7, 2013, Todd Scott announced “employees will no longer have to put in time of service after they retire.” 

February 2014 Events

On February 3, 2014, the Board met to discuss budgetary issues and also entered closed session to discuss “negotiations.” 

In closed session, the presentation to the board showed a history of the declining fund balances, and an action plan that stated: 

     1. Limit or greatly reduce spending
     2. Offer Voluntary Incentive Program
     3. Limit/freeze hiring
     4. Freeze salary schedules 

In regards to the voluntary separation incentive program, and under the heading “Things We Have Discovered,” the following statements were displayed: 

     1. We can no longer use the term “Early Retirement Incentive”
     2. The VIP (Voluntary Incentive Program) is due to PSRS by April 1
     3. Can no longer put a cap on number of years – discriminatory 

Two options were suggested by the superintendent to the board: 

Option A: Increase the incentive to 65% of final salary to employees separating in 2013-2014; 60% of final salary to employees separating in 2014-2015; and 55% of salary to employees separating in 2015-2016. 

Option B: Keep the incentive at 50% of final salary, but add 2 years of district paid health insurance to employees separating in 2013-2014; add 1 year of district paid health insurance to employees separating in 2014-2015; and no health insurance to employees separating in 2015-2016. 

The proposal stated “employees must be vested in the retirement system to be eligible,” but made no mention of minimum employment with the district or any other minimum amounts of service credit with the pension system. 

On February 18, 2014, the Board held its regular meeting and also entered closed session to discuss “negotiations.” 

The minutes of the close session state: “After discussion Mrs. Hermann made a motion and was seconded to approve the recommendation from the committee to continue the Voluntary Leave Program for the 2013-2014 and the 2014-2015 school year as presented. After the 2014-2015 school year the District will no longer offer the Voluntary Leave Program.” The motion was approved 6-1. 

Directors voting in favor of the motion: Palmer, Hermann, Laughlin, Nash, Holloway and Smith. Directors voting against the motion: Kroupa. 

Motive And Intent

It is impossible to fully assess motives and intentions, but here are a few observations. 

The concept of incentivizing higher cost staff to separate employment as a method for lowering payroll costs can have merit. However, by offering an incentive every year, the program had become more of a retirement bonus with major cost to the District rather than an incentive with cost savings to the District. 

As the District’s financial condition deteriorated, Dianne Critchlow sought to boost the incentive, while members of the Board sought to end the costly program. Some back and forth pushing on the issue exposed some motives. 

When Board members attempted to end the program sooner than later, Dianne Critchlow vehemently objected, potentially due to her own pending retirement date. With her retirement date already announced, she pushed for boosting the program benefits and pushed for expanded eligibility. 

The push for expanded eligibility coincides with the planned separation for Jamie Critchlow. The push for increased benefits coincides with the planned separations for both Jamie and Dianne Critchlow. 

November 2014 Events

I joined the Fox District in July 2014. As the program parameters had been set in February 2014 and announced to staff, I did not attempt to modify the either the eligibility criteria or the program benefits. However, upon noticing that the district was not receiving any benefit from the employee in return for the incentive payment, I did propose there be a separation agreement wherein the separating employee would waive any and all claims that person might have against the District. In this way, the District gains protection from potential employment related liabilities. 

Due to the fact the plan would be ending after the 2014-2015 school year, the program was finally an incentive. In an effort to boost participation and enable employees to leave before they otherwise might, I did propose paying the incentive payment before employment ended so that this payment could be used to purchase service credit in the pension system. 

At the November 3, 2014 board meeting, the program was modified to include payment of the incentive at an earlier date and require a waiver of claims in exchange for the incentive payment. No proposal was made regarding eligibility since that had already been announced to staff as being applicable for the current school year. 

Open Session vs. Closed Session

The discussion and action related to the incentive program took place in closed session during February 2014. The closed session topic was listed as “negotiations.” It is acceptable for the Board to enter into closed session to discuss negotiations in relation to negotiating with employee groups. Normally, the negotiation matters discussed by the Board in closed session proceed to the negotiating table with employee representatives. Later when agreement has been reached between the parties, the resulting agreement is presented to the Board in open session for approval. 

During February 2014, the Board was within its rights to take up the topic for discussion in closed session. Dianne Critchlow contended that a decision was required prior to April 1, 2014. Thus, a vote that should have been taken in open session was taken in closed session. Additionally, the topic was never taken to the negotiating table, which eventually convened in May 2014. 

Policy/Regulations/Procedures on Website

Obviously the objective of posting policy/regulations/procedures on the website is to provide a public resource and public notice of District policies and procedures. Naturally, when a policy is revised, there can be a delay between Board adoption of new policy and posting of the revised policy on the website. This delay should be minimized. 

According to Debby Davis, Custodian of Records for the District, she was instructed to leave the unrevised version of Regulation 4740.1 on the website, despite its revision in February 2014. Please note, the incentive program had been revised almost annually, without revised posting to the website. That should not have been the case. If things have been handled correctly, the revised program would have been posted promptly after each revision. 

As pointed out early in this memo, this matter and many other policy matters appear to be out of date. Policy requires almost constant attention and revision in order to avoid obsolesce. Dianne Critchlow allowed many policy matters to go stale. 

Status

The incentive program exists in its current form until it is changed or ended. The incentive program is an offer from the District to employees. Eligible employees are entitled to accept the offer as it exists or is modified from time to time. The Board should be the only entity with authority to authorize the incentive program and/or modification to an existing incentive program.

Fox C-6 Provides Documents From Sunshine Request For FREE!

The Fox C-6 School District responded to my July 30, 2014 Sunshine Request for documents on Monday August 4, 2104. Fox provided all of the documents that I requested for FREE!

Not charging for documents was a huge departure from previous years. I attribute this to the fact that the leadership of the district has changed. You could say that the district is Under New Management. The days of information hiding and denying wrong doing are on the way out. The truth will prevail and the facts will be more readily available as the school board begins running the district rather than the Superintendent.

A small group of really bad apples in the bunch has stained our school district's reputation for years to come. The disdain for those individuals will take years to be forgotten, if ever for some of us who were caught in their crossfire. Individuals in the federal agencies who have been working on bringing our district into compliance for the last 5 or 6 years are fully aware of what's been uncovered in our district. They are amazed at what's been going on in our district for so long.

It's going to take quite some time for all of the issues and facts to surface and for our district to rebuild. But, the district is starting to move in the right direction. The new superintendent search person referenced several times at last night's meeting how what has happened recently in our district may very well affect our search for a new superintendent.

Fox provided copies of all of the credit card statements with transactions for the 2013-2014 school year. After a quick review, I noted to the district's custodian of records at last night's school board meeting that the DISCOVER and AMEX credit card statements will need to be rescanned at a higher DPI in order to make them legible. The VISA was legible but rescanning would help.

Making these documents available to the public is a great start towards improving transparency and regaining the trust of the community.

Thank you to the Fox C-6 School Board for doing the right thing in providing these documents!

Credit Card Statements Beg For Supporting Documentation
I think the majority of the community will have a tough time understanding how many times Dianne Critchlow paid for gas and food using her credit card in the 2013-2014 school year. It will lead to more Sunshine requests for supporting documentation and statements from previous years. There are also a lot of airline ticket purchases for air travel on a lot of the administrator credit cards supplied by the district. Those will need to be reconciled as well.

Reviewing the credit card statements and lack of description on Bill Payment Reports makes a State Audit a necessity. I believe most Fox C-6 taxpayers will be quite vocal after reviewing the credit card statements which will lead to even more questions.

What does current Fox C-6 School Board Policy #3125 say about using school district credit cards?

Policy 3125 – Credit Cards (05/97)
School district credit cards will only be issued to employees upon the approval of the Board of Education. Use of the credit card will be limited to the purchase of instructional materials, items related to the improvement of instruction or materials related to capital improvements or supplies.

Fast food restaurants and bars and grills are probably NOT considered "instructional materials". It appears that Superintendent Critchlow's use of her district supplied credit card violates current school board policy.


Below are links to some of the documents supplied in my recent Sunshine request.

2013-2014 Credit Card Statements

VISA Credit Card Statements
Dianne Critchlow's Purchases Begin on Page 11

DISCOVER Credit Card Statements

AMERICAN EXPRESS Credit Card Statements

Settlement and Release Agreements

with Fox C-6 and Contracts

Dianne Critchlow's July 11, 2014 

Settlement and Release Agreement with Fox C-6

Dan Baker and Angela Burns Baker July 17, 2014

Waiver and Release Agreement with Fox C-6

June 10, 2014 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Closed Session Minutes

Redacted with Votes for Critchlow's Early Retirement

Dan Baker's 2014-2015 Employment Contract with Fox C-6

Added New Page on Blog for Fox C-6 Board Meeting Packets and Board Meeting Minutes

Added a new page to the blog to make it easier to download Fox C-6 Board Meeting Packets and board meeting minutes. The page has links to all of the meeting minutes that were available on the district website back in 2009 as well which went back to 2001. The board meeting minutes have also been assembled into single file documents for each school year for easy downloading and reading.

The board meeting packets only date back to April 2010. The board packets posted on FoxC6Watchdogs have been processed using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software in order to make the documents more searchable in PDF readers. OCR is not perfect but works well on many of the scanned pages that the district publishes in the board meeting packets each month.

Still Trying To Get Older Board Packets Online
Fox's website currently has board meeting minutes posted online dating back to 2008. However, the district has refused to publish the board meeting packets prior to the 2012-2013 school year even after repeated requests. They have already provided the documents via Sunshine request so they should be able to quickly post them on the district website.

My requests for posting the board packets were made at board meetings during Public Comments and via email. You wouldn't have known about that the requests were made due to the lack of detail in or board meeting minutes. You can read the board meeting minutes to see how well they were documented for Public Comments. Since you can't watch a video or listen to the audio of Fox's board meetings, it's hard to obtain much information from the board meeting minutes. Fox's school board meetings haven't been recorded in years.

Had the school district been publishing the board meeting packets on the district website like they do in many other school districts, perhaps the community would have been able to ask our school board members questions sooner rather than later about what was going on in our school district. Perhaps the current problems could have been avoided before they became became a public embarrassment for the community.

The board meeting packets contain the monthly bill payments report that our school board members approve each month. It's hard to know where your tax dollars are going without those reports. It's only been very recent that the public can now download board meeting packets from Fox's website the Tuesday before a board meeting so you can review the documents that the board members review and ask questions during Public Comments prior to the board making their decisions.

The following link will take you to the page which is also at the top of the page on the blog now.

Board Meeting Packets and Board Meeting Minutes Page

Fox C-6 Public Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments

The Fox C-6 school board and administration don't seem to be as transparent as other school districts in the area.  This lack of transparency has allowed them to get by with some fairly unethical behavior in their hiring practices and the way they are spending our taxpayer dollars. The taxpayers of the community has every right to access the board packet documents from the district website for FREE.  However, after repeated requests, our school board has never replied as to why they will not post these documents on the district website.  So, please contact your board members and ask them why they won't post the documents.  You should also make a Sunshine Request for the documents yourself just to see if you get a different story than what I am given.  It's fun to compare notes!

I did receive a response once from our superintendent as to why the district can't post the documents to the district website.  She informed me that we don't have a full time person maintaing the district website like other school districts do such as Wentzville.  She said she called Wentzville and they told her that they had two full time people maintaining their website.  Rather than put our money into the website, she told me that, "We put our [Fox's] money into the classroom."

So, was she being truthful about not having a full time person to maintain our website?

After I finally obtained copies of the board meeting minutes with the board packets, I discovered that Fox has had a person employed full time as a web designer for more than 7 years.  Perhaps our superintendent simply forgot that the district had a full time web designer and her statements "weren't an intentional lie".  What do you think?

Statements that are proven to be false through documentation cause distrust.  Once that trust is broken, it is very difficult to restore!

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either."

- Albert Einstein.


So, how does the Character Trait of Honesty show up on the district letterhead?

I believe that the Honesty trait is severely lacking in the answers being provided by our superintendent(s) lately and I find it very troubling that the leaders of our schools are not always honest with the public.  Actions and facts speak much louder than words.

So, why do you think the district wants to charge the public to obtain public records that once were FREE?  I don't think that it does much for their reputation in terms of transparency in government.  What do you think?

Now you get to do a little investigative work.  Study the CREATED DATE of the board meeting packets below and see if you see a pattern.  I made my request for the board packets in digital form on March 30, 2012.  As you can see below, the board packet documents I received starting with the August 30, 2011 board meeting had a CREATED DATE of March 30, 2012.  The May and June 2011 board packets weren't sent in my first request and were missed and some were sent after the holiday break.  But, notice the pattern of the CREATED DATE for the board packets prior to May 2011 dating back to April 2010.  It appears that the board packets WERE created as PDF documents on a regular bases in the past and that is why I am confused as to why I am being asked to pay for work that used to be done on a regular basis prior to my request.  Also, I was told that the board packets didn't exist in PDF format prior to April 2010.  But, the school district published board minutes in PDF format as far back as 2002.  Doesn't that seem a little strange?

So, how do you find the CREATED DATE in a PDF document?

Open the PDF document with Adobe Reader and then select Properties from the File menu.  The Properties from will display the CREATED and MODIFIED date for the document.  I use a FREE program called PDF-XChange Viewer to perform Optical Character Recognition (OCR) of the scanned board packets. PDF-XChange Viewer can overlay an invisible text layer that can then be used to search for text strings within the document.  It is not perfect but works very well.  It is certainly faster than reading the entire document when you know what you are looking for.  Since the documents aren't always the best scan quality you might have to use substring searches in order to find what you are looking for.

Looking for Legal Fees or Other Expenses
So, you might be interested in finding out how much our school district spends in legal fees or maintenance fees.  When you are viewing the PDF document in a PDF viewer, you can search for the word "legal".  Or you can search for the word "Mickes" or "Goldman" as they are names from the law firm that represent the school district.  Just remember that OCR is not perfect and may overlook some of the words above.  So, you may have to page through the check ledgers manually which are in alphabetic order by vendor name just to be sure you didn't miss something.

I like pointing out Board Policy 0215 as a reminder for our school administrators and board members just in case they forgot what it says.

From School Board Policy 0215
The district recognizes the home as the primary source of moral, ethical, and religious instruction; the role of the school is to support the family by upholding the highest example of morality, ethics, and integrity. [emphasis added]  A policy on character development is for the benefit of all students and is written with respect and sensitivity to the diversity of religions, cultures, creeds and beliefs.

Board Meeting Packets By Year

2012
November 20, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 12/20/2012  1:36:56 PM

October 16, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 12/20/2012  1:50:24 PM

September 18, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 09/24/2012  1:07:50 PM

August 28, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments 
Created: 09/11/2012  3:57:19 PM

June 26, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 07/26/2012  2:57:29 PM

May 15, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 06/20/2012  3:23:58 PM

April 17, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 05/10/2012  9:23:19 AM

April 17, 2012 Fox C-6 Bond Election Notice

March 20, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 04/10/2012  5:25:10 PM

February 21, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:28:46 PM

February 7, 2012 Fox C-6 Special Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:28:05 PM

January 17, 2012 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:27:44 PM

2011
December 13, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:27:01 PM

November 15, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:25:38 PM

October 18, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:24:15 PM

September 20, 2011  Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:15:00 PM

September 20, 2011 Fox C-6 Tax Rate Hearing Notice
Created: 03/30/2012  12:14:35 PM

August 30, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/30/2012  12:23:04 PM

June 28, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 04/11/2012  8:46:14 AM

May 17, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 04/11/2012  8:52:41 AM

April 10, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 05/10/2011  3:16:31 PM

March 15, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 04/19/2011  2:47:33 PM

February 15, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 03/11/2011  2:28:21 PM

January 18, 2011 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 02/11/2011  11:17:46 AM

2010
December 14, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 01/14/2010  9:48:48 AM

November 16, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 12/15/2010  9:20:06 AM
 
October 19, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 11/17/2010  2:38:11 PM

September 21, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 11/17/2010  10:26:28 AM

August 31, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 10/01/2010  3:55:42 PM

June 29, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 10/01/2010  4:19:31 PM

May 18, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 09/30/2010  10:30:19 AM

April 20, 2010 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Minutes with Attachments
Created: 10/07/2010  12:02:43 PM

Fox C-6 School Board Meeting Minutes Issues

How accurate or how much detail should be included in school board meeting minutes?

Should Public Comments be documented with ANY of the topics of concern that were stated during Public Comment by a citizen?

For example, from the December 2010 Fox C-6 board meeting minutes my Public Comments were documented as, “Concerns with the district.”  Is that enough detail for the public to know what concerns were presented to the school board?

Would the school board be able to recall what those concerns were when they read the meeting minutes at the next board meeting and voted to approve the minutes as written?

In an email response from Dianne Brown the Fox C-6 School District superintendent dated May 17, 2011 regarding the lack of detail documenting my Public Comments, she informed me that:

“The Board secretary contacted MSBA’s legal counsel the following day after the April meeting.  They informed her that the district was in compliance in the manner in which the BOE minutes are reported.”  

Our superintendent's response was quite terse and stated that, "After reading your concerns, many are false and inaccurate."  Her response was only sent after I had emailed school board president Ruth Ann Newman and school board secretary on May 17, 2011 after never receiving a response from the school board per Policy 403 “All questions will be responded to by an appropriate person with the week wherever possible.”  This could be why it is a rare occurrence for people to speak during Public Comment because they rarely receive a response.

So, after never receiving a response from the school board concerning my questions that were expressed at the April 2011 board meeting, I emailed regarding how my December 2010 meeting comments were documented in the board meeting minutes as well as asking for a response from the questions and comments made at the April 2011 board meeting.

Do you think there was enough detail in the December 2010 board meeting minutes to know what my concerns were?  I would venture to say that an audio or video recording of the meeting would have had a bit more detail as to what questions were presented to the school board.

So, should school board meeting minutes be transcribed from an audio recording of the meeting or simply from what the board secretary heard at the meeting?  At the March 2012 school board meeting, Dianne Brown stated that:

“We are finally ready for the forms and manuals and policies to be reviewed.  This would be an overhaul of all of the school district policies. They will be placed, I believe tomorrow night, Debby, on the website? And, sent out to staff or we will have a place that staff can log into.  We're not sure if we can send that big of documents for download. And we're going to leave them up until June so that staff can make recommendations and the public can make recommendations.  Then we'll bring those recommendations back and my guess is....". 

Dianne’s statement was transcribed from my audio recording taken at the March 2012 school board meeting.

By the way, audio and video recording school board meetings is permitted per Policy 0410 per the guidelines adopted in regulation 0410.

So, on March 29, 2012, a little over a week after Dianne’s statement at the board meeting, I emailed the school board secretary (Dianne Brown's secretary) and Ruth Ann Newman the board president and asked where I could find the updated district policies.  I received the following email response to my question from Dianne Brown:

“The draft of the Board Policies and Regulations are sent via email to the staff for comments (not for public review at this time in the process).  Policy review and adoption has always been handled in this manner. They then will be placed on the district web site after they have been adopted by the board.  Drafts of Board meeting minutes are not for public view (policy 0405).  Only board minutes that have been approved by the board are made public, which you can obtain on the website. You can view the March 20 meeting minutes upon approval of the April board meeting.  It usually takes a week or two, so please be patient.” 

I replied to Dianne Brown’s email and provided her with a transcript of what she stated at the March 2012 board meeting and received the following response from Dianne Brown:

“Hello Rich! Debby will gather all of this information and shoot it to you electronically today.  Please let us know if it all doesn't transmit.”

So, what is wrong with this picture, first of all, if I had not made an audio recording of Dianne’s statement made at the board meeting, I would have had nothing to back up what she said at the board meeting and the updated policies and regulations would have never been made available to the public for them to review and make recommendations to.  The district did finally post the documents on the district website after I followed up to make sure that they were per our superintendent's statement.   I wonder if I would have been told the same story initially by our superintendent if our school district audio or video recorded our board meetings?  I have asked the school board several times to record board meetings and post them online for the Public to view just like they do at other school districts and as they do at Arnold City Council meetings and at Jefferson County Council meetings.  In fact back in 2002, this was requested by another citizen and even documented in the board meeting minutes that a similar request was made.  So, I am not the first person requesting this.  However, to date, the school district refuses to record our board meetings and post them online.

But, the story doesn't end here!  When I received a Draft copy of the March Board meeting minutes, Dianne’s statement regarding the posting of the updated board policies was documented in the minutes as follows:

“Dr. Brown reported that the Board Policy/Regulations/Forms are read for Board review and comments.  These will also be available on the district website for viewing and reading for the Fox C-6 Staff." 

So, I emailed the board secretary and Ruth Ann Newman asking that the minutes be corrected to reflect the fact:

“that the documents would also be available on the district website for the Public to view, read and make recommendations to as well and that they will be left on the website until June for review.”

From this email, I received the following response from our school board secretary (Dianne Brown's secretary):

“The minutes that were transcribed are reflective of what I heard at the meeting.  The minutes are not a verbatim recording of the meeting.”

One of my friends that read our board secretaries response said it sure sounds to me like they need to record their meetings.

Should the minutes have been updated to reflect what Dianne stated at the board meeting?

Or, is it OK to just leave the minutes as they were written? 

I believe the board meeting minutes should have been updated to reflect what was actually stated at the meeting so the public would know that the documents would be placed on the district website.

In order to get a truly accurate documenting of our school board meetings, Fox C-6 needs to audio and/or video record board meetings and make them available online like other school districts or the public will never know what truly happened at our board meetings.  Needless to say, the board meeting minutes were not changed after my request.