Fox C-6 Board Candidates Vow Transparency in Recent Post Dispatch Article

A March 21, 2015 article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch states that the Fox C-6 School Board candidates vow to restore the public trust.

There are 6 candidates running for the Fox C-6 school board election on Tuesday April 7, 2015. This past year has put our school district into extreme turmoil as we are seeing an exodus of talented teachers leaving the district encouraged by the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program which used to be called the Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program prior to 2014. 

David Palmer is an incumbent. His wife, Gee Palmer, is currently the Director of Nursing for the Fox C-6 School District and his son is a teacher in the school district. The article also states that David Palmer has a niece that is a teacher in the district as well.

David's wife was nominated by Dianne Brown in 2006 to be promoted to the Director of Nursing position while David Palmer was the president of the Fox C-6 School Board. Gee Palmer's promotion was approved by the school board in June 2006. She was given a 75% pay raise rather than a stipend amount as previous Directors. 

The Post Dispatch article states that Gee Palmer "is about to retire". However, Gee Palmer's name hasn't appeared on any of the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP) lists that have been provided to the public so far. If she is retiring and walking away with 50% of her pay, her name won't be appearing on the VSIP list until after the April 7 election.

David Palmer certainly hasn't helped to improve transparency during his years on the school board. I' made requests for years for the board to publish the board packets on the website and publicly acknowledge the district's problems with ED OCR and USDA OCR.

Mr. Palmer also wasn't a fan of talking to the public about issues in the district because of his fear of being misquoted at the November 5, 2013 board workshop. That's when the school board voted in Closed Session not to have "Listening Posts" with the public like I was informed they would by former Superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow in an email. Fox's former legal counsel Ernie Trakas voiced his concerns for having open discussions with the public which caused our school board to vote against doing what they do in the Rockwood School District.

You can read about David Palmer's comments in my article below about the November 5, 2013 workshop.

The Fox C-6 School Board Fails the Public Again!

David Palmer has kept the public in the dark far too long and DOES NOT need to be on the Fox C-6 school board anymore. Mr. Palmer is the last of the "old regime" school board members left. He was first voted onto the school board in 2002.

To say that Sherry "Chellew" Poppen is vowing to restore Public Trust seems disingenuous. Sherry Poppen DID NOT mention or tell the Lone Dell Parents club parents that she has a son that is a teacher in the district and a daughter that is a secretary in the district. I knew that she had a daughter who was a secretary in the district but I had not researched to see if she had any other family members working in the district. So I first learned about her son being a teacher in the district in the Post Dispatch article. What's even stranger is the fact that Fox alumni classmates of hers wrote into this past week's Arnold-Imperial Leader telling the Fox C-6 Community to vote for Sherry Poppen. Her classmates telling Fox patrons to vote for Sherry Poppen live in Festus. There is certainly a strong effort in signage to get Sherry Poppen's name out in front of the public along with her brother's name Jim "Chellew" who was Fox's superintendent prior to Dianne Brown-Critchlow.

You can read the details of the Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program in Regulation 4740.1 which can be found on the district website by clicking on the link below. The program was changed in February 2014 by Dianne Brown-Critchlow with suggestions from Fox's former legal counsel and approved by the board to become the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program.

Regulation 4740.1

Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program

March 21, 2015 Post Dispatch Article
Candidates for Fox School Board vow to restore Public Trust

My Open Letter to the Fox C-6 BOE Regarding the Hiring of School District Leadership

I emailed the Fox C-6 School Board the following letter this morning regarding the hiring of future leaders in our school district.

I emailed board president John Laughlin and Dr. Wipke very early Monday morning in which I expressed my concerns about the hiring of the next Seckman Elementary School principal. I never received a response to my email.

I decided to send this email after I noticed last night that Angie Burns Baker, the wife of assistant superintendent Dan Baker, was listed as the 2015-2016 Director of Federal Programs in the March 2015 board meeting packet that was posted online Friday March 13, 2015.

The link below contains a copy of the Employment of Certified Employees Report from the March 2015 Fox C-6 school board meeting packet.

March 2015

Fox C-6 Employment of Certified Employees Report

The Fox C-6 Board of Education (BOE) will be meeting tonight in Closed Session at 5:30PM prior to Public Comments. Therefore the board will most likely be making hiring decisions prior to hearing any Public Comments from the community.

Fox's BOE is expected to be making hiring decisions for the Fox High School, Seckman High School and Seckman Elementary School principal positions as well as the Fox C-6 Food Nutrition Director.

Below is the letter I emailed to the Fox C-6 BOE Tuesday morning March 17, 2015.

It is critical that the Fox C-6 school board be completely transparent in the hiring of future leaders of the Fox C-6 School District. This includes the Fox and Seckman High School and Seckman Elementary principals as well as the next Food Nutrition Director.
 The school board failed miserably in December 2012 when it approved the hiring of Kelly Nash as Fox’s Food Nutrition Director over individuals who already possessed the credentials required for the job. That one decision was the straw that broke the camel’s back and the one that led to the public disgrace of our school district and the embarrassment and humiliation of the Fox C-6 community.
 School board policy requires that the superintendent only recommends individuals to the board for hire who already possess the proper certification and education. School board policy was not followed when the board hired Kelly Nash in 2012. It was obvious then and now that she was chosen because she was the daughter in law of former Fox C-6 board member Linda Nash who was the board president at the time of her hiring. The taxpayers paid the price for that decision as well as members of the community who spoke out about that decision.
 Kelly Nash’s hire was very similar to the hiring of Gee Palmer, the wife of current school board member and incumbent school board candidate David Palmer as the Director of Nursing in June 2006.
 David Palmer was the president of the Fox C-6 school board in 2006 when his wife was promoted to Director of Nursing position and given a 75% pay increase ahead of other nurses who were more qualified and who had many more years of service with the district.
 You are now faced with another decision that will forever shape the legacy of the Fox C-6 School District and the Fox C-6 board when you select new leaders for Seckman Elementary, Seckman High School and Fox High School.
 The individuals you choose to lead our teachers and our students should not bring with them any immoral or unethical baggage from the past.
 You are practicing Willful Blindness by even allowing Dan Baker to be a finalist for the position as Seckman Elementary School principal given his past misdeeds and inability to ensure that Fox C-6 was compliant with federal law as assistant superintendent for more than 6 years.
 You will forever be judged by the community by the decisions in choosing new district leadership.
 I am extremely disappointed to learn that you have already given notice in the March 2015 board packet that Angela Burns Baker will be the 2015-2016 Director of Federal Programs.
 Since you are elected officials and represent the taxpayers and patrons of the Fox C-6 School District you are entrusted to make the best choices for our school district.
 How did Mr. Baker become one of 3 finalist for the Seckman Elementary principal position given the fact that derogatory comments were traced to his home and a cell phone owned by the Bakers? Were any Fox school board members part of the screening process for the principal position? Please provide a list to the Public of the candidates for the principal positions in the school district and the members of the committee panels that interviewed the candidates and made recommendations to the selections. It’s imperative that the Fox C-6 school board be transparent and represent the community in an honest and open manner and that all decisions are made aboveboard according to school district policy.
 I am requesting that you please email me a list of all persons that served on the interview/hiring committees and all candidates for the recent job openings in the school district for the Fox and Seckman High school principal positions,  the Seckman Elementary principal position and the Food Nutrition Director position. It’s imperative that this information be published on the school district website in order to rebuild the trust of the community. There are rumblings that individuals that participated on the selection committees were chosen in order to narrow the selection to favor our disgraced assistant superintendents.
 It’s hard to believe that anyone in our community would have considered Dan Baker as a potential candidate for the Seckman Elementary School principal position. Very few people are going to believe that Mr. Baker was ranked above other candidates in terms of integrity and honesty given his past indiscretions. His selection as one of the best candidates gives the impression that our district is still not operating aboveboard.
 In order to maintain any trust with the community everything done by the board needs to be done with full disclosure to the community. If not, all hires will be extremely scrutinized by the public!
 I certainly hope that you can face the public and be proud of your decision after approving the hiring of new leadership in our school district.
  Thank you,
 Rich Simpson

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

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

A Little Digital Archaeology Documents Fox's Spending Spree!

How would you like to become a Digital Archaeologist and peer into the past of the Fox C-6 School District from the comfort of your home? It might not be ancient history. But, it's a historical record that allows you to look back into what's been happening in the Fox C-6 School District over the past 16 years. It's a window into our district's past that not too many people know about and it's an interesting one at that.

For example, you can go back in time and read articles that were published on Fox's website or view pictures of past administrators or school board members or old board meeting minutes as far back as 2001 simply by using the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. The Wayback Machine is a digital archive or snapshot of websites at the time the snapshot was taken. It's your portal to the past. It allows you to see a snapshot in time. You can find information that would have been difficult or maybe impossible to find or too expensive to obtain using Sunshine Law requests. Some of the information might even shock you. Wait till you find out how much our district our district was spending each year when Superintendent Critchlow became Superintendent compared to what we are spending now.

The Wayback Machine gives you the ability to travel back in time just like Google Earth gives you the ability to view older satellite imagery allowing you to see how things have changed over time in your neighborhood or just about anywhere on the planet.

I've already posted quite a few interesting links to older Fox C-6 website pages on the Fox C-6 Watchdog Twitter page which you can find here:

https://www.twitter.com/FoxC6Watchdogs

Traveling Back In Time

The Wayback Machine is a website much like Google's search engine that allows you to look up and review snapshots of websites by typing in the domain name for the website into the Wayback Machine. In order to see previous snapshots of Fox's website you'll need to go to the Internet Archive's website (http://web.archive.org) and type in Fox's web address or URL which is: www.fox.k12.mo.us. Or you can click on the link below to be taken directly to the Wayback Machine's historical record of the Fox C-6 website.

Fox C-6's Website on the Wayback Machine

Once you arrive at the Wayback Machine, you'll see a timeline at the top of the page which shows vertical lines on the timeline for each of the snapshots taken of Fox's website. The very first snapshot was taken in 1998 and the most recent one in 2014. In order to view one of the snapshots simply click on one of the vertical lines on the timeline and the Wayback Machine will transport you back in time to an archived version of the district's website. Not all of the links, images or documents may have been captured from that time. However, there's a lot of information that has. It allows you to review what happened back then and compare it to what's happening now in our district. It gives you an easy way to see if the district's been doing what it said it would do. Has Fox been a good steward of our taxpayer dollars? Or, have they been able to find ways to increase spending without anyone really noticing that the district has nearly doubled the amount of money being spent each year over the last 8 years?

2005 - Fox Approves $88 Million Budget
2013 - Fox Approves $137 Million Budget

Using the Wayback Machine to pull up snapshots of Fox's website from 2005, you will find an article written by Kim Robertson for The Leader titled "Fox Approves $88 Million budget" which talks about the board approving the 2005-2006 budget for $88 Million dollars. The budget that was just approved last year for the 2013-2014 school was approved for $137 Million dollars. That's quite an increase in just 8 years given the fact that the school district's student count has remained roughly the same over the past 8 years. The district's student count for this year was in the 11,000's as it was back in 2005. It's scary to think that the cost of education has increased that much over the last 8 years. 

So, how has Fox been able to increase it's amount of spending so much in 8 years?

According to records obtained from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's website (MO DESE), Fox had the 2nd Highest Average Administrator Salary for the entire state of Missouri last year. Fox also had the 4th Highest Paid Superintendent Salary in the entire state of Missouri. But at the same time, Fox's average teacher salary was the 2nd Lowest Amount of the 9 District's of Distinction that Superintendent Critchlow compared our district to in her annual State of the District address to the board last fall. There are a lot more teachers than there are administrators in the school district, but over time Fox has increased the number of administrators in the district significantly while the number of students remained nearly the same.

Board Members Are Elected Officials and Don't Get Paid

School board members are elected officials and they don't get paid for their work in overseeing the district. This could also be one of the reasons why so many things have been getting the "rubber stamp" of approval from our school board over the years. It takes a lot of time to review board packets and look at the thousands of checks that the district writes each year. That is a lot of work and over time I believe the board has just come to trust that Superintendent Critchlow and her assistants are doing what they are supposed to do without question. That can lead to problems like we have now.

It also helps the superintendent to have happy school board members. It makes them much more willing to go along with her decisions. One great way to help influence board member decisions is to make sure that the board members feel like they are doing a great job for our district and for our kids. She tells the community repeatedly that they are doing a great job and thanks them at all of the board meetings. There's no better way to say thank you to a school board member than the promotion of their spouse or the hiring of their daughter in law to a high paying position in the school district. School board members aren't allowed to vote on decisions where there might be a conflict of interest. So, they step out of the room when votes are taken that involve their spouses or family members. This way everyone in the community knows that the decision made by the board does not give even the slightest hint that there was any possible conflict of interest.

Board Members With Benefits

In 2006 while Mr. Dave Palmer was the president of the Fox C-6 School Board, his wife was promoted to the district head nurse position. She received a 75% pay increase for that promotion. However, her new promotion required her to work more hours. In the past, head nurses only worked on a 9 month contract. Gee Palmer's new contract was a 12 month contract instead of a 9 month contract which made up for that 75% pay increase. The 25% increase in contract length was able to justify the 75% increase in pay.

Also, let's not forget that back in 2012 while Linda Nash was the president of the Fox C-6 School Board, her daughter in law was hired to be the new Food Nutrition Director. That position paid $65,000 per year and was able to be filled by a person with a high school diploma because she had worked at McDonald's for 17 years and had become an assistant manager. Since she didn't have the degree or the certifications that the district was looking for at the time, Superintendent Critchlow and Assistant Superintendent Todd Scott were willing to give her 2 years to obtain her degree and certification because Linda Nash's daughter in law was very enthusiastic about the job. However, in order to help her out with her new job duties the district had to promote to more people in the district to cover what was used to handled by one assistant in the past. So, there was a little more expenditure than expected due to the lack of experience in running a public school district's food nutrition program.

More interesting things to see on the Wayback Machine for Fox?

In Praise of the Board of Education

It was interesting to read former Fox C-6 Superintendent Jim Chellew's 2004 article titled "In Praise of the Board of Eduction". In his article, he mentioned that "Board members are some of the most accessible elected officials." Really? I'll have to disagree with Mr. Chellew on this point. Superintendent Critchlow tends to control access to our school board. A person isn't allowed to mention names during Public Comments at school board meetings. She's told the board not to speak with people. She's sent out Cease and Desist letters to individuals who try to bring things to the school board's attention. I have spoken at many school board meetings over the past several years and have sent emails and letters to our board and hardly if ever receive a reply. It doesn't appear to me that our school board is very accessible. 

So, I find Mr. Chellew's article quite humorous after trying to work with our school board over the years. I know it's the school superintendent's job to promote their school district and tell the public what a great job the district is doing in educating our kids. But, telling the public that the board is accessible when the public knows otherwise is sad.

Brown Hired as New Fox Super

Another very interesting article is the November 2004 announcement of Dianne Brown being chosen as the next Fox C-6 School Superintendent. The 2004 article titled "Brown hired as new Fox super" was written by Kim Robertson for The Leader newspaper. The article states that "The school board advertised the position only within the district, and Brown was the only candidate. The school board interviewed her Monday and voted unanimously to hire her. Chellew said he had hoped Brown would get the job."

Superintendent Salaries Then and Now

The above article also mentions that Superintendent Brown (now Critchlow) would be paid at least $135,217 for the 2005-2006 school year. Her salary as superintendent back then pales in comparison to the $256,131 that she is now being paid for the 2013-2014 school year.

Some More Interesting Links from the Wayback Machine

2007 Photo of Fox C-6 Central Office Administrators

July 2001 Fox C-6 School Board Meeting Minutes - No Tax Increase Bond Issue and Dianne Brown appointed as Section 504 Coordinator

Photo of Fox C-6's 2005-2006 Board of Education

2005 Version of Fox C-6's Board Policies and Regulations

So check out the Wayback Machine and see what else has gone on in our school district over the years. You might be surprised at what you can find. It might even make for a good research paper for some of our students. It's similar to digging up the time capsule that was buried under the flag pole next to the administration office back in 1976. It can reveal a lot about our district's past. Hopefully the information can help steer our district down a better path in the future.

There's So Much To Catch Up On at Fox C-6!

A lot has been happening in the Fox C-6 School District since I last had time to write a blog post. My last post was about the announcement that Fox C-6 Superintendent Dianne Critchlow would be retiring in 2015. This was announced at the November 2013 board meeting. Just yesterday the 2014 Fox C-6 School Board candidates were announced by the district. Between all of that time, there have been a few interesting exchanges of emails with the Fox C-6 school board. Well, I wrote to the board, but the board didn't respond. Retiring Superintendent Dianne Critchlow and Fox's new assistant superintendent Andy Arbeitman responded. Superintendent Critchlow has assigned Mr. Arbeitman the task of responding to all school board meeting Public Comments. It's apparently best for the district to respond to questions rather than allow the school board to do so. Certainly paying for another superintendent to handle her communications with the public is a good idea. Ducking and dodging the media just doesn't look good for the district.

The last couple of months have been a very busy time and I found it much quicker to provide information to the community using Twitter: (https://www.twitter.com/FoxC6Watchdogs).

So, if you haven't been following my Twitter posts, you've been missing out on a lot of information. PLEASE NOTE: You don't have to have a Twitter account in order to read what gets posted on the Fox C-6 Watchdog's twitter page. All you need to do is click on the link above to go to the Fox C-6 Watchdog's Twitter web page to read the posts.

Recently on the Twitter page I provided some of the documentation that Superintendent Critchlow has been keeping from the public for nearly 5 years. You can obtain these documents from the federal agencies via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. It's been nearly 5 years since the district signed a Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR). It's been nearly 4 years since the district was informed it would be undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights which was still open as of last year.

The monitoring letters to the district that are posted on the Twitter feed are a very interesting read. The letters to the district document how after 3 1/2 years our district was still being asked by ED OCR to update their school board policies and regulations as well as student handbooks to comply with Federal Law. Three and a half years seems like an awfully long time to update some documentation. But, then again, it's been nearly 2 years since Superintendent Critchlow informed the public at the March 2012 school board meeting that the district published the "draft" of the updated board policies and regulations for review. Those documents have yet to be approved and adopted by our school board.

There are also links to letters from the USDA to the district informing them in August 2011 that Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE were found non-compliant with Federal law and USDA Guidelines and Regulations. At the time, Superintendent Critchlow forwarded the letter to the board. She informed them that the district attorney found some mistakes in the USDA's Final Agency Decision. The district's attorney filed an appeal letter with the USDA but their appeal was denied. That's why they call it a Final Agency Decision. But, it did give the district another year long delay in having to respond to the USDA.

It took more than 2 years for the district to finally comply with the USDA Final Agency Decision. Surprisingly though, after the USDA accepted the district's documentation in September 2013 and closed the complaint, the district changed the documentation. When the National Director of the USDA's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) found out about the change, he contacted and questioned the district about that change. Assistant Superintendent Dan Baker informed the USDA OCR National Director and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) via email that the updated documentation was sent out by mistake by the district. Mr. Baker told them that the district had "two different working documents" and that "with all the communication that was going on between the different parties, the incorrect version was mistakenly sent". Really? Sounds believable doesn't it?

Apparently, the USDA OCR National Director took Mr. Baker's explanation for changing the documentation after the fact as a way of trying to "subvert" the complaint process. Does changing documentation after the fact, make you question the ethics of our school district leadership? How much effort and risk are they willing to take to get around the law?

Mr. Baker originally offered to answer questions regarding the changes to the documentation. However, after being contacted by USDA OCR, Mr. Baker responded to USDA OCR, the USDOJ and the school board stating that, "upon the advice of legal counsel the District will no longer respond in writing to your inquiries. If you would like to discuss these matters, please contact me at 636.296.8000 to schedule an appointment so that the appropriate people can be made available to answer your questions.  Thank you. " It's certainly an interesting response given the fact that the district has been doing everything "above board" for years.

As taxpayers, it's good to know that our district is being advised by district attorneys paid by taxpayer dollars on these matters. The district attorney and Mr. Baker have both spoken with the USDA OCR National Director on this matter. It's interesting to note that the National Director of the USDA OCR is an attorney as well. Interesting, isn't it?

So check out those documents and other tidbits of information on the Fox C-6 Watchdogs Twitter page.

2014 Fox C-6 School Board Election

School board elections are just around the corner and candidate names were released yesterday by the school district.

Below are the 2014 Fox C-6 School Board Candidates for the April election:

Vernon Sullivan

John Laughlin (I)

Mark Jones

Chris Hastings

Dawn Mullins

Robert (Bob) Gruenewald

Notably missing from this list of candidates is Linda Nash and Dave Palmer. They both have had family members promoted to high paid positions within the district while they were school board presidents. I'm glad to see that they aren't running for school board again. I'm sure it was a win-win for Linda Nash and Dave Palmer as well as Superintendent Critchlow while Mrs. Nash and Mr. Palmer were on the school board. It wasn't so much of a win for taxpayers though. Linda Nash's daughter-in-law was hired as the Food Nutrition Services Director to a $65,000 per year job in 2012. She didn't even have the education or credentials that the district was looking for. Luckily the district is giving her 2 years to obtain her degree in Food Nutrition. The only problem is that the degree is a 4+ year program. So, that's not going to happen.

Dave Palmer's wife Gee Palmer was promoted to the District Head Nurse position in 2006 and was given a 75% pay increase for an extra 3 months of work per year on her contract. The hiring of board president's family members were smart moves by Superintendent Critchlow. There's a good chance that Critchlow got some "brownie points" for those decisions. I'm certain Superintendent Critchlow recommended those hires because she was doing "What's best for the kids!".

Dave Palmer's wife was promoted at the end of Superintendent Critchlow's first year as the Fox C-6 Superintendent when he was the board president. Everyone in the community is now very aware that Superintendent Critchlow's salary has sky rocketed since her first year as superintendent. In 2006, she only made $137,589. For the 2013-2014 school year her salary is $256,131. I've discussed her salary issues before in the articles below.

SUPER SALARIES!! Superintendent Critchlow's Salaryfor 2013-2014 is $256,131!

Also check out my August 2012 article on Superintendent Critchlow's salary here:

Fox C-6 Superintendent Salary

2014 Is An Important School Board Election

The 2014 school board election will be a very important election for our community. The next Fox C-6 School Board will be responsible for finding and choosing our next Superintendent. Our community, parents, teachers and school staff certainly deserve much better than what it has endured for the last 9 years. It's the community's responsibility to make sure that your school board listens to you. Currently the school board has been told to pretty much keep quite. They don't respond to letters, emails or Public Comments. When a Superintendent instructs school board members not to speak to individuals in the community and sends out Cease and Desist Letters, you know there is a problem. It's easy to understand why she doesn't want the board to get the full picture of what's been going on behind the scenes in our district. The behind the scenes don't look as incredible as she portrays them to be. So, keeping the information from the school board  and the public is important for her reputation. So, if you don't want more of the same, contact your school board.

It's all about public perception!

If Superintendent Critchlow says things are great, they must be! Right?

Superintendent Critchlow has taken the approach of keeping information out of board meeting minutes, board packets and Public Comments. Her explanation as to why things aren't documented with details as to what people's "concerns within the district" are is because state law doesn't require the district document things verbatim from Public Comments. I've written about this problem many times over the last several years. Since you don't hear about any problems there mustn't be any? Right?

The same problem applies to leaving letters and emails addressed to the Fox C-6 School Board out of board meeting packets that ask questions of the board and provide documentation to the board on issues that should be looked into by the board. For some reason those documents don't get included in the board packets even after writing and asking the board secretary to include them. However, letters of praise for Superintendent Critchlow can be found in the school board packets. The letters of praise seem to have a common theme among them. They sound as if they were written by a superintendent. Certainly it's just a coincidence!

The January 2014 school board packet included one such letter to Superintendent Critchlow. The author of the letter stated that 99.9% of the citizens in our district "are very pleased with everything".

99.9% seems maybe a little high for the percentage of people in our community that are happy about paying Superintendent Critchlow $256,131 per year. I wonder where she got her facts and figures?

You can read the letter to Superintendent Critchlow dated December 16, 2013 here:

Superintendent Critchlow is doing an "outstanding job"!

It's pretty entertaining at times to watch how our district leadership conducts business. I know that the letter to Superintendent Critchlow also said that, "Fox has always been very fiscally responsible and not one to just "jump on the bandwagon" of any new educational approach." So, I'm glad the author of the letter reassured us with her statements on fiscal responsibility. I wasn't so sure of that when I found out at the March 2013 board meeting that the district was going to have to spend an additional $52,000 to build a storage building at Fox High School to store the equipment that used to get stored under the old bleachers. District administrators didn't realize that the new bleachers didn't have any storage space below them because of the truss design. Luckily the district was able to sell the old bleachers to another school district for $30,000 to help offset the cost of the new $320,000 bleachers and the $52,000 storage building. You can read more about that in my March 2013 post here:

Please Vote April 2nd and Make A Positive Change
In Our District

For the latest information on what's happening in the Fox C-6 District that Superintendent Critchlow doesn't want you to know, follow Fox C-6 Watchdogs on Twitter (https:www.twitter.com/FoxC6Watchdogs) or check out the Fox C-6 Watchdogs blog right here (https://FoxC6Watchdogs.blogspot.com).

The Facts About That "MSBA Outstanding School Board Award" Nomination Tweet!

Fox C-6 Superintendent Dianne Critchlow has gotten her own Twitter account. It must have been a suggestion at one of the recent administrator training seminars since it appears that quite a few superintendents are now using Twitter to keep the patrons of their district more informed.

Keeping the community informed IS part of a superintendent's job. However, telling the truth or the whole truth is also something that they should do when keeping you informed. I believe our community is starting to see through all of the "smoke and mirrors" being presented by our Superintendent. If not, keep on reading because not everyone in the community is aware of what she has been doing. Those that are informed have been watching our school board sit back and allow it to happen. If your school board fails to respond to your questions, you can pretty much bet that they aren't doing anything and they don't want the public to know what is going on.

Superintendent Critchlow likes to blurt out statements that aren't always true and her statements are starting to catch up with her. I think she does this to justify the enormous amount of salary that our school board has been providing her over the last several years and she thinks that everyone will simply believe her because she is the superintendent. There just doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why our school board has given our Superintendent such enormous raises.

But, it seems to be working that some of the community is still being fooled because the school board keeps giving her incredible raises and the community doesn't seem to care or notice. Perhaps in one of her next Tweets she could post how much she will be earning for the 2013-2014 school year. The school district hasn't yet released this year's salary schedule despite my request for that and the 2013-2014 school year budget.

Last year, Superintendent Critchlow was reported by MO DESE as making $246,824. That's nearly $10,000 more than her salary schedule that was released by the school district to me at the beginning of the 2012-2013 school year. No one has mentioned how that happened.

So, how does your Superintendent go about trying to boost the confidence of the community in the school board?

She posts on Twitter about the Fox C-6 school board. On Wednesday August 7, 2013, she posted the following message:

Dr. Dianne Critchlow @FoxC6Supt
Congrats to the Fox C-6 Board of Education for their nomination to MSBA's Outstanding Board of Education Award

Wow! That sounds impressive!

It makes you think that the MSBA thinks highly of the decisions made by our school board over the last year and all of the publicity that they and our superintendent garnered for our district and the community. Well, that is until you go to the MSBA's website and find out that 208 other school boards in the state were also "nominated" for the Missouri School Board Association's "Outstanding School Board Award" at www.msbanet.org.

Once you read the what the requirements are for a school board to be "nomimated", her comments lose quite a bit of luster. The Missouri School Board Association's website has Fox C-6 listed as being "ELIGIBLE TO APPLY" for an award. From reading the MSBA's webpage for the Outstanding Boards of Education Award, I don't believe that the term "nominated" is a very accurate statement. Nominated certainly sounds more impressive and would give the community that warm fuzzy feeling that our school board is doing a great job. But, the community probably still hasn't gotten over the fact that school board member Linda Nash's daughter in law was hired as the Food Nutrition Service Director with only a high school diploma over much more qualified candidates. It also probably still remembers the fact that Gee Palmer the wife of school board member Dave Palmer was promoted to the position of District Head Nurse with a 75% pay raise in 2006 while Mr. Palmer was the school board president.

Also, lets not forget the fact that the school district spent over $3 Million dollars to put in artificial turf on the football fields when there aren't enough books for all of the students in the classrooms. Dianne will refute the fact like she did on channel 5 that there aren't enough books for the kids. And, yes, it is a separate budget. We know that. But, then you would have to ask the teachers at the school buildings and find out why a principal told me that they don't hand out books to all students because there aren't enough to go around. Then there is that transparency issue that has been dogging our school district for several years in trying to keep the check payments and budget from the community and how much they are paying in legal fees to fend off federal agencies.

Where is the 2013-2014 School Year Budget?

Where is the 2013-2014 Salary Schedules for our Administrators?

Is Superintendent Critchlow now the highest paid Superintendent in the state of Missouri?

I recommend taking a look at the MSBA's Oustanding Boards of Education Award webpage. There are 6 different performance category awards that one of the 208 school boards in the state that are "Eligible" can apply for:

• Teaching, Learning and Assessment 
• Human and Organizational Efficacy 
• Climate, Culture, and Organizational Efficacy 
• School Finance Resources 
• Physical and Environmental Resources 
• Governance, Leadership and Accountability 

In order to be Eligible to Apply for one of the above awards, a school board must be an MSBA member district, and ALL 7 board members must be certified by the MSBA. The school district must also have scored a 12, 13 or 14 on Missouri DESE's Annual Performance Report (APR) for the current and previous year.

So Fox met the criteria along with another 208 districts out of a little over 500 districts in the state. It's just a matter of putting Superintendent Critchlow's tweet into perspective. It's going to take a bit of effort by the community to install a school board that has Integrity, Honesty and Ethics. Actually, that would be good category for an award. The community's made a start at bringing about change to our school district. But it is up to you to stand up and voice your concerns. Otherwise, our Superintendent will keep sweeping things under the rug until she retires and then it will fall on someone else.

As much as Dianne wants to pump up her status and our school board, the public should know the truth. It's very similar to winning awards for the National District of Character. It's just another award for the school to tout in an attempt to cover up all of the problems within the school district. You should take some time to check out how the Character Education awards are obtained.

Don't be fooled by our superintendent! Our community needs change and it will only begin to happen when the community voices their concerns and asks for change to occur!