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.

It's Time for the Palmers to Step Down!

It's time for current Fox C-6 school board vice-president Dave Palmer to step down from his position on the Fox C-6 school board.

At the October 21, 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting Mr. Palmer stopped parent and taxpayer Jim Osia from asking Fox's "acting" superintendent Tim Crutchley a question about his recent interview on Fox 2 News with Elliot Davis on a You Paid For It segment regarding the MarzanoGate hotel fiasco.

Fox C-6 taxpayers have the right to ask the superintendent that they "hire" or "fire" questions about their actions in public. Forcing questions into Closed Session is simply a way of hiding things from the public or sweeping them under the rug.

For years the practice has been to tell anyone making Public Comments at a Fox C-6 school board meeting that they needed to "refrain from using individual's names and positions" during their Public Comments.

You can listen to how Public Comments used to be handled at Fox C-6 board meetings prior to Dianne Brown-Critchlow's "paid leave" by clicking on the link below. You will hear former superintendent Dianne Critchlow tell everyone that now is a good time to leave the school board meeting followed by Dr. Rizzi reciting what he was told to say regarding making Public Comments. It was quite convenient for Critchlow to have people leave the board meeting prior to my asking questions of the board.

By not allowing taxpayers to question what their superintendent was doing or others in the Central Office gave the public and the board the impression that things were going as well as Dianne Brown-Critchlow said they were. And, if you questioned things in an email, you would receive responses like I've documented in past articles.

Listen to the 08-27-2013 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Public Comments Introduction

Those on the board that were too naive to believe that former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow could do no wrong never got the chance to hear a Public Comment complaint about her or others because no one was allowed to mention names or positions. No one working for the district was going to speak up at a board meeting due to fear of losing their job. Everyone should know by now what happened to those of us that did speak up at school board meetings over the last several years.

Mr. Palmer is the last of the "old" Fox C-6 school board members. He has served on the Fox C-6 school board since 2002. There was only one year in the last 12 years that Mr. Palmer didn't serve on the board.

Mr. Palmer's actions at the October 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting of stopping Mr. Osia from asking Mr. Crutchley a question is one of many reasons as to why he should step down.

The Fox C-6 taxpayers are the ones that hire or fire the superintendent. The Fox C-6 board members represent the taxpayers. If a taxpayer has a question regarding what our superintendent or acting superintendent did, then they should be allowed to ask those questions in a public session. The board openly discussed and fired Cheryl Hermann's daughter at a Fox C-6 school board meeting during open session the month before. Therefore Mr. Osia should not have been stopped during his Public Comments.

When you listen to the following introduction to Public Comments by Dr. Rizzi at the October 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting you will notice that Dr. Rizzi DOES NOT mention that you must "refrain from using individual's names and positions" during your Public Comment. Dr. Rizzi stopped reciting that after Dianne Critchlow began her "paid leave".

Listen to Mr. Palmer Interrupt Jim Osia at the October 2014 Fox C-6 School Board Meeting

Did Mr. Palmer stop Mr. Osia in order to protect the enrichment that his family has received and continues to receive while he has served on the board?

Mr. Palmer was the Fox C-6 school board president in 2006 when then superintendent Dianne Brown promoted Dave Palmer's wife Gee Palmer to the position of director of nursing. Instead of just receiving a stipend for the director of nursing position, Gee Palmer was given a 2 month contract extension and a 75% pay increase!

You will notice on the district's Board of Education page that Mr. Palmer did not serve on the board during the next term following that fiasco. In fact, you need to read the following article that was published on March 13, 2007 in the Jefferson County Suburban Journal on STLTODAY.COM related to Nepotism. Please note that Mr. Palmer could not be reached for comment. This goes along with his November 5, 2013 board workshop comments about not talking to people as a board member because he didn't want to be misquoted.

Hear Dave Palmer's thoughts at the November 5, 2013 Workshop on having Open Forum Discussions with the Public

FoxC6Watchdogs article covering the November 5, 2013 Workshop and transcription of Dave Palmer's Comments

FOX SCHOOLS: Nepotism Complaints Unfounded, District Officials Say - STLTODAY.COM March 13, 2007

Gee Palmer only possesses a nursing diploma even though she is the director of nursing. She does not have a bachelors or masters degree in nursing. This makes me question how she can do reviews of nurses in the district that possess more education than she has. It seems very similar to the same issue that we have with Kelly Nash who is our Food Nutrition Director.

When Gee Palmer was promoted to the director of nursing in 2006 there were at least 10 other nurses in the district that had seniority over Gee. So, it makes you question why she was chosen for the job of director of nursing. I have written about the issue of receiving unjust enrichment before about being related to school board members in the following article:

How Much Extra Does It Pay to be Related to a Fox C-6 School Board Member

Both Dave Palmer and Gee Palmer need to step down from their positions in the district. I encourage every parent and taxpayer in the district to email the board and Mr. Palmer asking them to step down.

Hopefully the Palmer's will pay back the Fox C-6 taxpayers for the last 8+ years of undeserved income that Gee Palmer earned while she was "Director of Nursing".

As a nurse, Gee Palmer is supposed to advocate for students in the district but that has not been the case. I'd like to know how the opinion of an arrogant nurse who only possesses a nursing diploma could outweigh the opinion of a 20+ year board certified medical doctor. Perhaps the Missouri Association of School Nurses could explain that one for Mrs. Palmer. Or, you may wish to ask assistant superintendent Dan Baker who was Fox's former 504 coordinator since he was ultimately responsible in the decision making process.

Gee Palmer supported the whims of former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and the former law firm in their stance against providing students with medical related disabilitiesl with Section 504 plans. Gee Palmer participated with Dan Baker in recording a phone call with a doctor and used the recording during a Due Process Hearing to try and discredit another doctor. I plan to cover more about that in a future article now that students have recently been provided Section 504 plans in the district under the new law firm. The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights was involved in making that change in an Early Complaint Resolution meeting held in August 2014.

It took more than 6 years for the district to 'understand' that they weren't properly following Section 504 law as conveyed to them many times over the last several years by the USDA's Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. Now that things are finally being made public as to what's been going on in the district for years, perhaps the Kansas City Office for Civil Rights will begin working on their District Wide Compliance Review again that was opened in March 2010 and has been sitting idle for the last 4+ years. I'm sure there is a lot that could be discovered now that the district is being more open with their records.

Again, don't forget to email Mr. Palmer and the Fox C-6 school board and ask the Palmers to step down from their positions in the Fox C-6 school district.

Email addresses for the Fox C-6 board members and director of nursing can be found on the district website using the links below:

Fox C-6 Board of Education Email Addresses

Fox C-6 Department Contacts

Waiting for Information!

I've made quite a few Sunshine requests and submitted questions to the district over the last several weeks in an effort to get the public the information everyone's been asking about. They want to know what's been going on in the district for the last decade.

I realize that the audit started last week so the accounting staff and CFO are probably very busy looking up information for the auditors.

For years there was very little information flow to the public outside of the school board meeting minutes. The board meeting minutes contained very little information especially with regard to Public Comments. So nearly everyone was kept in the dark about what was actually occurring in the district.

As soon as I get the information I'll get it posted. Some of the information I've requested is:


• Credit card statements for Discover, VISA and American Express dating back to the 2005-2006 school year. I've been waiting for the Discover card statements for several weeks. The Discover cards for both the board secretary and the central office custodian were used often by former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Critchlow.
• Receipts for purchases made by former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow using her district credit cards. This request had already been made by her attorney.
• More information regarding the Orlando trip such as how many cars were rented for the 3 day conference. $1700+ dollars in car rental fees is a lot of money for a 3 day conference.
• Information about the Flip Flippen training. The district paid $10,000 at the start of the 2013-2014 school year for an hour long keynote address. When I asked about it at the August 2013 school board meeting assistant superintendent Andy Arbeitman told me that 9 administrators were able to attend Flip Flippen training for FREE for that $10,000 hour long keynote address. So I've asked questions as to who attended the training. The district ended up spending more than $62,000 with the Flip Flippen training company in 2013-2014.
• Who attended the trips to Rochester, NY, Kansas City, MO and Washington, D.C.?
• How much was the stipend amount was that was paid to previous head nurses in the district compared to the 75% pay raise that Gee Palmer received when she was promoted to district head nurse in June 2006?
• Salary information for our district head nurse. When Fox's current district head nurse Gee Palmer was  promoted to the district head nurse position she was given a 75% pay raise in June 2006. Gee Palmer is the wife of current Fox C-6 school board vice-president Dave Palmer. Mr. Palmer was the board president in June 2006 when his wife was promoted by Dianne Brown to the district head nurse position.
• All invoices from the district's former law firm dating back to the 2008-2009 school year. This was the law firm that sent out the Cease and Desist letters to myself and others. We don't know how many may have been sent over the years but we know of at least 4 of them.

For your information, per Missouri Sunshine Law, anyone can go to the Fox C-6 Central Office during normal business hours and request to view documents such as board meeting minutes, board packets, invoices, etc.

Hopefully I'll receive the credit card data soon so I can get that information posted for the public. Everyone is very curious as to how far back all of this spending without oversight has gone on.

It was stated on the news recently in a Fox 2 News You Paid For It report that the board approved all of Critchlow's credit card charges. The payments to the credit card companies may have been approved. But the individual charges weren't approved by the board since the credit card statements weren't being provided to them in their board packets. It was the board's responsibility to be checking the charges but they weren't being provided that information. It was the superintendent's job to ensure that charges were being properly made by employees in the district prior to asking the board to approve the payments.

I had asked Critchlow to provide the credit card statements in the board packets to the board members and she did not. However, after reviewing the credit card statements it's pretty easy to see why Critchlow didn't want the school board members to see them.

Hopefully more data will be made available soon so it can be shared with the community. 

Transparency is what allows people to trust an organization such as your school district which everyone has trusted for years but has now learned that it was a big mistake to trust as much as we did.

Here's a really good book about trust that I recommend. It's called Liars and Outliers. It explains how trust is needed in order for an organization to thrive and succeed. If there is no trust, the organization will wither and die. It also explains how societal pressure is needed to ensure that people do follow the rules and do the right thing.

Liars & Outliers

Looking Back In Time - State Audit Begins Today of the Fox C-6 School District!

The state audit begins today for the Fox C-6 School District. The state auditors will be looking back in time at school district records to review what's gone on in the district over the last several years. Hopefully the auditors will be reviewing some records as far back as the 2005-2006 school year when Dianne Brown-Critchlow began her tenure as the Superintendent of the Fox C-6 School District considering what's been uncovered in the last month or two regarding credit card purchases, trips to conferences and having district property in her personal possession.

The state auditor can also look at teacher and administrator certifications as well. There have been a number of people employed by the district over the years that didn't have the proper certification for the job that they were hired for. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the school board wasn't necessarily being provided with much information about the recommended promotions or new hires from former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow.

Last month was a perfect example of this when it wasn't pointed out very well to the board that school board member Cheryl Hermann's daughter was being hired for a position in the district. This lead to a special meeting in which the board re-voted and rescinded their vote to approve the hire. It wasn't a matter of qualifications. It was a lack of transparency.

Getting The Board On Your Side

How is it that things have gotten so bad and out of control over the last 10 years?

A school district superintendent is supposed to work closely with the school board. But, sometimes the relationship between the school board and the school district superintendent gets a little too cozy which usually leads to a lack of oversight which is what I believe happened at Fox.

There's no doubt that former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow wanted to have a good working relationship with the Fox C-6 Board of Education. She was a fellow Fox C-6 graduate and alumni. During her first year as the Fox C-6 superintendent she promoted Gee Palmer to the district head nurse. Gee Palmer is the wife of current Fox C-6 school board Vice-President Dave Palmer.

However, in June 2006, Dave Palmer was the Fox C-6 school board President. There were at least 10 nurses working in the school district that had more years of service than Gee Palmer. Some of those nurses had nearly double the number of years of service or more. But, somehow, Gee Palmer was chosen for the job over those other nurses. Do you think it had anything to do with the fact that Dave Palmer was the school board president at the time?

I mention this because Dave Palmer spoke about nepotism at the last Special School Board Meeting regarding the hiring of Cheryl Hermann's daughter as a Teacher's Aide in the district for $9.87 an hour. The right thing to do would have been for Cheryl Hermann to step down from the school board so her daughter could work for the district. The community wouldn't have had a problem with that based on comments from most of the people I've spoken to. However, hearing Dave Palmer talk to the community about nepotism knowing full well that his wife has been paid 75% more than the other nurses in the district for the last 8 years just didn't sound right.

Gee Palmer's promotion in June 2006 came with a 75% increase in pay. Her contract was lengthened by 2 months. Adding two months to her contract shouldn't have resulted in a 75% pay increase. That was a pretty sweet deal back then for the school board President's wife. That's why listening to Mr. Palmer speak at the last school board meeting about nepotism and the hiring of Cheryl Hermann's daughter just seemed so wrong. But, most of the general public doesn't know about the things that have gone on the past and how much the Palmer's have benefited over the last 8 years with that 75% increase in pay. From what I understand, previous district head nurses were paid at the normal rate on the pay scale since their contract was not any longer than any other nurse. If anyone knows that this was different, please let me know so I can update this article.

Would your decisions as a school board member or school board president be swayed if your wife was given a 75% increase in pay?

How Much Extra Does It Pay to be Related

to a Fox C-6 School Board Member?

More Historical Information

It's been nearly 4 years since I first posted on this blog concerning issues in the Fox C-6 School District. You can read about my early attempts to get Fox to become more transparent by reading some of the very earliest posts on the FoxC6Watchdogs blog. This was well before the Internet scandal broke earlier this year.

Asking our school board questions or asking them to make changes was truly like speaking to a brick wall back in 2010. My speaking at the December 2010 school board meeting is what lead to many of the slanderous posts being made online in 2010 and 2011. Cheryl Hermann was the school board president at the time and nothing was done back then. That's when the board was definitely ignoring my requests for information or help in stopping the online posts. No one on the board wanted to listen or act on things. They chose to be Willfully Blind!

However, the Fox C-6 school board has changed dramatically since 2010. Five of seven school board members have been replaced since then and I doubt very much that the two remaining school board members (Cheryl Hermann and Dave Palmer) would get re-elected in April 2015 if they decided to run again.

I ask that you read my early articles on this blog to get an understanding about how long it's taken to try and get things turned around and heading in the right direction. I'm certainly glad that more people are paying attention now and that things are beginning to move in a positive direction for both the teachers and staff in the district as well as the community and the students. Improving morale in the district can go a long way towards improving the district's overall success.

Below are links to the 2nd and 3rd articles that I wrote back in July and August 2012. Hopefully they can shed a bit of light as to why it's taken so long to get things changed at Fox. Of course it would have helped quite a bit if the public knew what was going on at school board meetings had former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow been more forthcoming with information in the board meeting minutes about what was being asked at the school board meetings.

Do You Trust Your School
Superintendent and School Board?

My 2nd article posted on the blog was what started the ball rolling for Superintendent Critchlow to send me a Cease and Desist Letter. My article was written explaining my reasons why I thought that Fox C-6 taxpayers should vote no on the $18.5 Million Dollar Bond Issue in August 2012. My concerns about the bond issue wasn't about the bond issue itself, it was about what the money was going to be spent on and the fact that the district wasn't being very transparent with the community about where a large chunk of that money was being spent.

Now, the state auditor will be reviewing how the monies were spent after Fox's new CFO John Brazeal discovered that some of the Bond Issue money may have been used to pay down deficits. This may explain why only $16 Million dollars of the Bond Issue was listed in the Bond Issue budget back then which was promptly removed from the district website after the bond issue passed.

Why You Should Vote NO on Fox C-6's

$18.5 Million Dollar Bond Issue!

I'll need to find the original bond issue budget and post a link to it on this article as soon as I get the chance.

You may wish to read all of my articles from August 2012 to get a better understanding of what was going on and being researched back then.

August 2012 FoxC6Watchdog Articles

Why It Took So Long To Get Fox C-6's Credit Card Statements

It took nearly 6 months to obtain copies of the Fox C-6 School District's credit card statements for the 2013-2014 school year. I can't help but wonder if Superintendent Critchlow would have attended the May 2014 graduation ceremony if the district's credit card statements had been made public prior to graduation. The reaction from the community has not been very positive after reviewing Dianne Critchlow's credit card charges.

Recent events may have taken a much different path if I had paid the $170 fee the district wanted to charge me for the credit card statements back in April.

I didn't pay the fee because the district shouldn't have been charging a fee. In fact the credit card statements should have been part of the monthly board meeting packets that our school board members review each month prior to approving payments. The Fox C-6 school board was simply approving the lump sum payments each month to the credit card companies and trusting that the cards were being used wisely and according to school board policies.

We've now learned that most of our school district administrators weren't using district credit cards according to district policy. It also became very clear as to why there was such a resistance to making the credit card statements available to the public. Even the updated Bill Payment reports that were modified in April 2014 didn't provide the proper information as required by school district policies.

Request for State Audit
For these reasons, I suggested that the Fox C-6 BOE or acting superintendent request a State Audit of the Fox C-6 School District at the June 30, 2014 Fox C-6 School Board meeting during Public Comment. It costs less for the school district to request a State Audit than it does to have an audit forced by a signature petition. The Fox C-6 BOE has called a Special Meeting for Tuesday August 12, 2014 at 7PM to approve the request of conducting a state audit of the district.

I would like to see the district request that the State Audit review the last 5 Fiscal Years rather than the 3 suggested by Mr. Brazeal in his letter to the school board. The review should go back to when leadership changes were made in the district during the fall of 2009. Documents should should still be available for the past 5 years.

A State Audit can also check for compliance with state and federal regulations as well as proper certifications, etc. It's very important to know that our superintendent was recommending individuals who were properly certified for the positions to which they were being hired or promoted to within our district.

Unbelievable Credit Card Purchases
The credit card statements really woke up the Fox C-6 community to the fact that there are problems in our district's leadership after reading many of their comments on Facebook. Wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars is an embarrassment to the community. The community's trust of our district's leaders and school board has been shattered. Not only were Central Office Administrators being overpaid, they were also using taxpayer dollars to purchase meals on an almost daily basis when they were the ones who could have most easily afforded to pay for their own meals.

School district policies cover Credit Card usage and Payment Procedures. But it's very obvious that many of our administrators using district supplied credit cards weren't following district policy. Superintendent Critchlow appears to have been the worst offender. She refused to correct the bill payments earlier in the year when asked to include a payment description or reasons for payments as required by district policy.

I'm glad that documented evidence of wrong doing has made it to the public. Now the school board has proof that there have been problems in our district for quite some time and should be able to take action towards terminating those involved. Even the school board shares responsibility for not verifying credit card statements.

One of my concerns currently is the fact that some of those in charge of overseeing and investigating these issues were also participants in the incorrect usage of district credit cards. The credit card companies should be able to provide the statements for the cards and destruction of that data would not look good at this point in time.

I thought it would be helpful for the community to understand why it took so long to obtain the credit card statements by publishing my exchange of emails with the district. The emails start after pointing out at the February 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting my concerns that the district had already paid $2 Million dollars in credit card bills for the school year but credit card statements to document what was purchased was not provided in the board packets.

Accountability means that billing statements must be reviewed each month before the payments are approved by the board of education. Spending $2 Million dollars on credit cards is a lot of money to be spending without checking where and what it's being spent on.

As you can see from the email exchanges below, I requested that the district waive the $170 fee per Missouri Sunshine Law. Eventually I received a response to my request from Dr. Rizzi's on May 1, 2014 near the end of the email chain. My request to waive the fee was denied as quoted below!

Your request to waive the fee of $170 has not been granted. We would be happy to complete the request upon payment.

I asked in a follow up email when the school board decided that they would NOT waive the fees. I never received a response to that question. I had backed them into a corner with my questions so there was no way to answer the question.

I think it is quite clear why Superintendent Critchlow didn't want this information public. That's why my request to waive the fees were denied. But, now that Superintendent Critchlow is no longer pulling all the strings, my most recent Sunshine Request for the credit card statements was supplied FREE of charge.

You'll also notice in the exchange of emails that the district wanted me to forward all of my questions to the district prior to asking them at school board meetings so the district could be more "proactive" rather than "reactive". This request from the district certainly singled me out for asking questions that they don't like to answer. They could have just kept doing what they had been doing by not answering questions but then that's a completely different problem.

Receiving copies of the credit card statements has awakened the Fox C-6 community. It seems that a lot more people are paying attention now and are taking the time to review the data. It's definitely amusing to listen to people's comments as they read through the credit card statements for the first time. There are those purchases that just jump out at you such as "The Disney Store", the "Drunken Noodle", payments to Political Action Committees for school district administrators as well as Red Light Traffic tickets and the almost daily purchase of meals from local or out of town establishments such as the "Swinging Doors Saloon". Then there was the $1000 purchase at Walmart on the same day of another $418.07 purchase at Walmart.

Of course, there were legitimate purchases made by Family and Consumer Science (FACS) teachers that were purchasing "instructional materials" for their classrooms. So please know, that many purchases for Save-A-Lot, Walmart and Shop-n-Save are valid purchases. But, you shouldn't be finding that many charges from our superintendents at Walmart, Shop-n-Save or Save-A-Lot.

The cost to obtain Fox's credit card statements was originally $170 but was eventually FREE! 

Watching people's reactions as they review the credit card statements, PRICELESS!!

It's pretty easy to see why people are upset. Just read what school district administrators were spending our taxpayer dollars on while telling the public that the district didn't have money for various things.

Below are the emails documenting my correspondence with the Fox C-6 Board of Education, Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman and Assistant Superintendent Dr. Lorenzo Rizzi for the months of February through May of 2014 as I attempted to obtain the district's credit card statements. Getting answers to questions has been a problem for several years despite what Superintendent Critchlow told the public as you will see when I had to repeat my questions and email multiple times.

Hopefully, this documentation will give the public a lot better understanding as to how these problems have been allowed to go on for so long without anyone knowing about them.

It also helps to know that school board meeting minutes don't document very well what was said during Public Comment like audio or video recordings do. If they had, the public might have known much sooner what was being investigated which may have led to more people questioning our board and things might not have gotten so out of hand.

Email Exchange To Obtain Credit Card Statements

and Correct Bill Payment Reports

---

From: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent

Date: February 19, 2014 1:08:40 PM CST

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

-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 Jay Arbeitman

Assistant Superintendent of Instruction

---

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; Laughlin, John; Cheryl Hermann; Linda S. Nash; Dan Kroupa

Subject: RE: Response to public comment at the February 18, 2014 board of education meeting

[Responses to Mr. Arbeitman's email in red]

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 C6 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

---

From: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent

Date: March 19, 2014 11:23:46 AM CDT

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.

Andy Jay Arbeitman

Assistant Superintendent of Instruction

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 7:35 AM

To: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent; Dan E. Smith - Board President; David Palmer - Board Vice President

Cc: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; 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

Thank you for delaying the decision to approve the school board policies at the March 2014 school board meeting and for posting a link to them on the front page of Fox’s website.

Since the March 2014 school board meeting, I discovered that the entire section of Employee Evaluations was left out of the board policies Forms section even though they are listed in the Form’s Table of Contents. I was able to locate the Employee Evaluation Forms in the 2012 draft version of the board policies on the district website and review them. These should be added back into the Forms section of the document.

Contrary to Superintendent Critchlow’s statement at the November 5, 2013 board workshop, all questions from Public Comments are not answered. Many questions have gone unanswered.

At the February 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting I asked the following questions that are still unanswered despite renewing my requests in my previous email:

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 with the credit card statements to document what was purchased with the credit cards?

I also asked where I could find a copy of the Administrator Salary Schedule? Could it be found on the website? The copy from last year’s board packets for the 2013-2014 school year only had “X”’s for the Administrator Salary amounts.

I haven’t received answers to these questions. I was simply told by Mr. Arbeitman in his email that if I wished to have him look into the matter that I should give him a call.

Fox has now paid more than $2 Million in credit card bills for the 2013-2014 school year and the board packets did not include credit card statements. There needs to be accountability for this spending. Fox’s board policies states that Bill Payments need to be supported by Invoices, Purchase Orders and Vouchers. Those aren’t provided in the board packets. If a board member wants to know what a payment is for, they must make a request for the documentation. If there aren’t any descriptions on the payments, it’s difficult for them to know what to ask for.

Please email me electronic copies in PDF format of the Credit Card statements for the American Express, Visa and Discover card for the 2013-2014 school year.

Also, please email me a PDF copy of the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 Fox C-6 Administrator Salary schedules that include salary amounts.

The Fox C-6 school board needs to request that the district post the school district budget on the district website like they do in other school districts. If Northwest, Camdenton, Rockwood and Parkway can afford to take the 30 seconds that it takes to copy the documents to their district website, Fox should be able to do the same as well.

I haven’t received a response from Mr. Arbeitman documenting the policy that he alluded to about following the “chain of command”.  Mr. Arbeitman spoke about this at the November 5, 2013 school board workshop.  At that workshop, when Mr. Arbeitman suggested that the district put a policy in place, Superintendent Critchlow stated that the district already had rules in place. Board member Cheryl Herman said that “It’s not a must.” that the community has to contact district administrators prior to speaking to the school board.

Please review our school board policies and provide me with the section that states that questions concerning board actions or decisions requires patrons to first speak with district employees prior to speaking to the board.

I look forward to your response.

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 7:50 AM

To: Arbeitman, Andy - Assistant Superintendent; Smith, Dan - Board President; Palmer, David - Board Vice President

Cc: Crutchley, Tim - CO Admin.; Davis, Debby - CO Secretary; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Holloway, Steve - Director; Laughlin, John - Director; Laughlin, John; Hermann, Cheryl - Director; Nash, Linda - Director; Kroupa, Dan - Director

Subject: Questions for the Fox C-6 School Board and Missouri Sunshine Law Documents Request

Last week on March 28, 2014, I emailed everyone on the Fox C-6 School Board my questions which I posed at the February 2014 school board meeting. I have not received a response to my questions as required by school board policy.

I didn’t even receive any acknowledgements that anyone in the district or on the school board received my email. I did receive two Auto Replies stating that Superintendent Critchlow and a school board member were out of the office.

In last week’s email, I renewed my request for answers to my questions from the February 2014 board meeting and the questions posed in my March 18 email to the board. I also made a request for electronic copies (PDF) of the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 Administrator Salary Schedule as well as electronic copies (PDF) of the credit card statements for the 2013-2014 school year that the school board approves payments for each month as listed in the Bill Payments.

Please consider this email a Missouri Sunshine Law request for electronic versions of the documents requested above as well as the requests for information that I emailed to the board on March 18, 2014.

I also requested from Mr. Arbeitman a copy of the board policy that states that persons wishing to speak to the school board must follow a “chain of command” for questions that are board actions. My review of our board policies was documented in my March 18 email. Please provide the policies as requested that states a “chain of command” requirement for board actions.

I also renew my request to the school board to post the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 school district budgets on the school district’s website like they do in many other school districts such as Northwest, Parkway, Rockwood, Camdenton and many more. It takes less than 30 seconds of time to publish the documents on the district website. Hearing Superintendent Critchlow state that there is no state law or mandate that requires our school district to even have a website is not a good excuse for not publishing the data. As a school board, you should be requesting that this data be made available to the public on the district website.

As Fox C-6 school board members, you were elected by the community to represent us. You took an oath and are required to follow the Code of Ethics as documented in our school board policies. You are required by the Code of Ethics to “maintain the public trust through full and open communication” and“Insist that school funds be spent prudently and effectively to provide maximum educational benefits.”

Can you please explain how failing to respond to emails from parents or patrons or failing to respond to Public Comments follows our school district’s Code of Ethics which state, “As a member of the school Board, I shall maintain the public trust through full and open communication.”?

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary

Date: April 8, 2014 11:39:41 AM CDT

To: Rich Simpson

Cc: Hermann, Cheryl - Director, Critchlow, Dr. Dianne, Dan Kroupa, Smith, Dan - Board President, David Palmer - Board Vice President, 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

Fox C-6 School District

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:42 AM

To: Davis, Debby - CO Secretary

Cc: Hermann, Cheryl - Director; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Dan Kroupa; Smith, Dan - Board President; David Palmer - Board Vice President; 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

Date: April 11, 2014 1:57:38 PM CDT

To: Rich Simpson

Cc: Hermann, Cheryl - Director, Cheryl Hermann, Critchlow, Dr. Dianne, Dan Kroupa, Smith, Dan - Board President, David Palmer - Board Vice President, Laughlin, John, Linda Nash, Steve Holloway

Subject: RE: Questions for the Fox C-6 School Board and Missouri Sunshine Law Documents Request

Mr. Simpson,

I apologize for the confusion but in your request for records you asked for (“In last week’s email, I renewed my request for answers to my questions from the February 2014 board meeting and the questions posed in my March 18 email to the board. I also made a request for electronic copies (PDF) of the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 Administrator Salary Schedule”).

Thank you for the clarification of what you were requesting.  Attached are the Administrator Salaries for the 2013-2014  and the 2014-2015 school years.

Debby A. Davis

Administrative Asst. to the Supt/BOE

Fox C-6 School District

---

From: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin

Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 2:52 PM

To: Rich Simpson

Subject: response to public comments

Mr. Simpson,

I would like to thank you for your public comment last evening.  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.

I hope you have a great Easter Break!

Sincerely,

Dr. Lorenzo C. Rizzi

Assistant Superintendent

Secondary Education

National District of Character

Achievement - Character - Excellence

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 7:07 AM 

To: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin; Laughlin, John - Director 

Cc: John Laughlin 

Subject: RE: response to public comments 

Dr. Rizzi and Mr. Laughlin,

I appreciate your efforts in providing more transparency for the Fox C-6 community. However, in order for the transparency to be meaningful, the reports must be accurate. As I pointed out to Dr. Rizzi a couple of weeks ago in my email, the Vendor Names will need to be correct on the report for credit card payments otherwise the new reports will raise even more questions about the purchases.

The credit card payments should also have a transaction description listed with them other than CARD SERVICES or AMERICAN EXPRESS similar to the check payments. Perhaps the empty LINE AMOUNT column can be used to populate the credit card account on the report. If the community cannot trust the information being supplied by the district, the district will need to provide the credit card statements along with the Bill Payments Report in the board packets as I have previously requested.

I have not received a response from my Sunshine Request regarding the waiving of the $170 fee to obtain the credit card statements for the year. As I stated at the April 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting, the credit card statements are public record and are not for personal or commercial interest. Providing the credit card statements to the community is for the interest of everyone in the Fox C-6 community. Therefore, I renew my request for the district to provide PDF copies of the credit statements for the 2013-2014 school year and that the school district waives any fees for providing that information. The new copiers recently procured by the district have a scan to PDF or network function making it very easy to produce a PDF document of the credit card statements.

Once the new Bill Payments Report format is updated to provide the correct information, I ask that all of the 2013-2014 school board packets be updated to include the new information provided in the new report. This will help reduce questions regarding this year’s payments. The board packets are already quickly updated each month with the late materials bill payments and replacing those pages with the new report should not take very long.

I attached a copy of the sample Bill Payments report that Dr. Rizzi emailed me on Wednesday April 16, 2014. I rotated the report 90 degrees to make it easier to read.


Thank you,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 6:39 AM

To: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Dr. Rizzi,

Thank you for emailing a sample report. That’s good news and will greatly help the board and the community in knowing how our tax dollars are spent by the district.

I would like to suggest changing the column order of the report to having the VENDOR NAME listed prior to the TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION.

In the final version, will the Transaction Description for Check Payments post a description for the payment rather than duplicating the VENDOR NAME?

I hope you have a nice Easter break as well.

Sincerely,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin

Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 11:32 AM

To: Rich Simpson

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Rich,

Thank you for the suggestions. I will pass them along and I will let you know whether or not there will be any more changes. I am not sure how long that will take.

Thanks again,

Lorenzo

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 7:07 AM

To: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin; Laughlin, John - Board President

Cc: John Laughlin

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Dr. Rizzi and Mr. Laughlin,

I appreciate your efforts in providing more transparency for the Fox C-6 community. However, in order for the transparency to be meaningful, the reports must be accurate. As I pointed out to Dr. Rizzi a couple of weeks ago in my email, the Vendor Names will need to be correct on the report for credit card payments otherwise the new reports will raise even more questions about the purchases.

The credit card payments should also have a transaction description listed with them other than CARD SERVICES or AMERICAN EXPRESS similar to the check payments. Perhaps the empty LINE AMOUNT column can be used to populate the credit card account on the report. If the community cannot trust the information being supplied by the district, the district will need to provide the credit card statements along with the Bill Payments Report in the board packets as I have previously requested.

I have not received a response from my Sunshine Request regarding the waiving of the $170 fee to obtain the credit card statements for the year. As I stated at the April 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting, the credit card statements are public record and are not for personal or commercial interest. Providing the credit card statements to the community is for the interest of everyone in the Fox C-6 community. Therefore, I renew my request for the district to provide PDF copies of the credit statements for the 2013-2014 school year and that the school district waives any fees for providing that information. The new copiers recently procured by the district have a scan to PDF or network function making it very easy to produce a PDF document of the credit card statements.

Once the new Bill Payments Report format is updated to provide the correct information, I ask that all of the 2013-2014 school board packets be updated to include the new information provided in the new report. This will help reduce questions regarding this year’s payments. The board packets are already quickly updated each month with the late materials bill payments and replacing those pages with the new report should not take very long.

I attached a copy of the sample Bill Payments report that Dr. Rizzi emailed me on Wednesday April 16, 2014. I rotated the report 90 degrees to make it easier to read.

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin

Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:40 AM

To: Rich Simpson; Laughlin, John - Board President

Cc: John Laughlin; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Cheryl Hermann; Steve Holloway; Vernon Sullivan; Kroupa, Dan; Mullins, Dawn; David Palmer - Board Vice President

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Mr. Simpson,

I apologize for the delayed response.  Here are the answers to your questions and suggestions:

• The bill details will be posted on the website and placed in board packets as conveyed in the sample bill descriptions I provided to you previously.
• The bill details will be placed on the website and in the board packets from this point forward. 
• Your request to waive the fee of $170 has not been granted.  We would be happy to complete the request upon payment. 

I have highlighted your questions to verify that I have answered them.  Thank you for your suggestions and concerns.

Sincerely,

Dr. Lorenzo Rizzi

---

From: Rich Simpson

Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 6:45 AM

To: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin; Laughlin, John - Director

Cc: John Laughlin; Critchlow, Dr. Dianne; Cheryl Hermann; Steve Holloway; Vernon Sullivan; Kroupa, Dan; Mullins, Dawn; David Palmer

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Dr. Rizzi,

Thank you for your reply.

When were these matters discussed and who made these decisions?

Thank you,

Rich Simpson

---

From: Rich Simpson

Date: May 6, 2014 6:39:52 AM CDT

To: Rizzi, Dr. Lorenzo - CO Admin, Laughlin, John - Board President

Cc: John Laughlin, Critchlow, Dr. Dianne, Cheryl Hermann, Steve Holloway , Vernon Sullivan, Kroupa, Dan, Mullins, Dawn, David Palmer - Board Vice President

Subject: RE: response to public comments

Dr. Rizzi,

These decisions were not discussed or made during the Public Session of the April 15, 2014 board meeting.

Were all of the issues discussed and decided during Closed Session under Agenda Item 8.0 - Sections 610.021.14 Records and 610.021.22 Credit Cards as listed on the April 15, 2014 Fox C-6 Board Meeting Agenda?

Thank you,

Rich Simpson