Showing posts with label Superintendent Brown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Superintendent Brown. Show all posts

Sunday, July 13, 2014

What Got Our Educators Riled Enough To Write Defamatory Comments?

What was it that made some of the top leaders in our school district so upset that they would write defamatory and derogatory comments online about people that spoke up and asked questions about what was going on in the Fox C-6 School District?

Apparently, asking questions of the Fox C-6 school board about problems in our district, superintendent salaries and pointing out questionable administrative decisions upset the applecart. Sometimes, there were swift responses from our superintendent at school board meetings or in emails but never responses from the school board. But people posting their concerns online anonymously was an easy way for others to respond anonymously in support of the district to those posting concerns by calling them names or pointing out physical flaws or telling them to leave the district if they didn't like the way things were.

It turns out that some of those posts were traced back to the homes of some of our administrators and a retired administrator at least for the posts made since 2013. There are posts stating similar things that date back to 2010 when I first made some posts on Topix and spoke at the December 2010 school board meeting.

I informed our school board members many times over the last several years that I had posted on the Topix website 18 times and that the last time I posted was in January 2011. I wrote about the issues that were happening in our school district and documented facts that the public should know about. Of course, some of our school board members would consider some of those facts "negative" in nature since they weren't a glowing reflection on our district.

Reading the posts on Topix, you'll find that many critical comments about the district were blamed on me. I was an easy target. I had been speaking to school board members and voicing my concerns about problems in our district since 2008. I sent emails and spoke with some of our school board members over the years. I spoke at school board meetings. So administrators had at least one person they could blame for writing critical posts about the district on Topix.

I believe that board members were being told by some district administrators that I was writing defamatory comments on Topix which wasn't true. There were many questionable posts on Topix but I didn't write them. I was falsely accused for writing many posts on Topix over the last 3+ years even though my last post was in January 2011. In 2013, Troop falsely blamed me for hanging signs around the district which wasn't true either. Superintendent Critchlow eventually found out who was hanging signs in the district and sent him a Cease and Desist letter. But Troop ranted on me and another person for being responsible for the signs because he knew who we were. We both received Cease and Desist letters.

In order to clear up any misinformation, I'm providing all of the comments that I posted on Topix in my efforts to educate and motivate the public to speak up about the problems in our district and hopefully start questioning our school board. I wrote a total of 18 posts out of the thousands that have been written over the last 3+ years about our district and its problems. My posts were dry and boring compared to those of Troop and others that attacked me for exposing problems and the outrageous salary being handed out to our superintendent. I thought that facts alone about non-compliance issues and superintendent salaries would be enough to get the community looking into what was going on since the school board was ignoring the problems.

Topix had quite a few people voicing their concerns about our district anonymously. They were afraid to speak out in public about the problems in our district so they used Topix to express their concerns. They were afraid of the repercussions that they might suffer due to their employment in the district and the way that our leadership dealt with those that spoke out.

The general public wasn't going to find out about any of the "negative" things that were occurring in the district from our Superintendent or administrators. But, attempting to expose that information certainly seemed to get some people upset.

Information Hiding
It seemed pretty obvious to me that our superintendent didn't want the public to know everything that was going on behind closed doors in meetings or what was being said during Public Comments at school board meetings. All you had to do was read our school board meeting minutes and the fact that the district has refused to audio or video record school board meetings after several years of requests. And, everyone attending school board meetings for student recognition or other awards were always told by our superintendent that now was their chance to leave the board meeting right before the start of Public Comments. It was almost as if she didn't want them to hear what might be said during Public Comments. Well except for the time that 5 people showed up out of the blue and spoke about how wonderful the district and it's leadership was at one of the board meetings last year. That was quite a show.

As an example of hiding information from the public, after I spoke at the December 2010 school board meeting, my public comments were documented in the board meeting minutes as, "Concerns with the district".  I wrote to the board and asked them to more accurately document my comments as the public needed to know what I spoke about. My request was met with a response from Superintendent Brown informing me that the board meeting minutes met the requirements of the law and that the board minutes weren't going to be revised. I guess board policy requiring accurate minutes doesn't mean that they have to have any details.

Targeted on Topix
So, when did I first get targeted on Topix? It was shortly after the first time I spoke at a school board meeting in December 2010. Just one week after I spoke at the December 2010 board meeting, someone posted defamatory comments on Topix about me and my parents. Since there were only 8 people at the December 2010 school board meeting besides the school board members and administrators, it greatly narrows down the number of people who knew what I spoke about at that board meeting. Of those 8 people, there were a few students, a couple of parents, a reporter, myself. It also greatly narrows down who might have shared what I spoke about at the meeting with whoever wrote those defamatory comments.

The next time I spoke at a Fox C-6 school board meeting was at the April 2011 meeting. Since then I've spoken at several meetings. The defamatory and derogatory comments directed at me continued on the Topix website from early 2011 until early this year when it was announced that we were working on obtaining the IP addresses for the defamatory posts.

I found it amazing that defamatory remarks were written on Topix about me only hours after I spoke during Public Comments at the January 15, 2013 board meeting. In fact, I mentioned during my Public Comments that night that I hoped that there wouldn't be any defamatory or derogatory posts made about me or others that spoke at the meeting that night. However, just hours after that board meeting, defamatory comments were posted on Topix by "Seriously" on the Nepotism on Fox Schoolboard thread that were linked back to Dan Baker's residence. I was very surprised when I learned that posts were linked to his residence. But, Dan has been having to deal with ED OCR since 2008 and USDA OCR since 2009 along with Superintendent Critchlow. It certainly doesn't justify his comments. But, when you think you're anonymous, I guess you might say things that you wouldn't normally say to someone in person.

Hopefully, our school board members recognize that this type of behavior isn't acceptable to the general public and that it violates our district policies.

Below I have posted copies of all of the comments I posted on the Topix website with links to those comments. They were written between October 2010 and January 2011. I wrote my last post on Topix on January 11, 2011 but it was deleted from the Topix website at someone else's request.

I recommend checking out some of the posts written by Bullwinkle and Bronco on Topix in various threads about our school district. Their posts were made more than two years before the infamous posts made by Troop. The person or persons writing as Bullwinkle and Bronco shared information on Topix that only a few top people in the Central Office knew. Maybe someone could make a good guess as to who Bullwinkle or Bronco might be.



My Topix posts:

DIST COMPLIANCE REVIEW
The District is currently undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review by the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. The District was notified in March 2010 that they would be undergoing a Compliance Review. The school district attorney wrote to Russlynn Ali, the Department of Education's Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights trying to get out of the Compliance Review. Russlynn Ali responded back stating that OCR will be conducting the Compliance Review.

This information has not been made public by the Superintendent or the School Board for more than 7 months. However, Senator Bond, Senator McCaskill and Congressman Carnahan were all sent letters by Russlynn Ali in March 2010 informing them that the Fox C-6 School District would be undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review by the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.

It would seem that the patrons of the district should be made aware of this as it is a public entity and by not informing them that this is occurring gives the appearance that there is not that much transparency in the district.

Does the School Board or the Superintendent not want the patrons to know what's going on behind closed doors?

The School Board meeting minutes were not posted online for the April through September meetings until October 11, 2010. However, none of the board minutes make a reference to the District Wide Compliance Review. The Office of Civil Rights initiated a total of 8 Compliance Reviews in the entire country this year as of a few months ago. Arne Duncan, the Secretary of the Department of Education mentioned that these Compliance Reviews would be coming in his March 2010 press release earlier this year.

Here is the Press Release:

The audio recording of the speech and question and answer session:

As well as the transcript of the speech and question and answer session: http://www2.ed.gov/news/av/audio/2010/03/03082010.doc

It seems that maybe the monthly keywords posted by the District should be Reviewed and Followed by the Administrators and School Board Members and not just published for the kids in the District. Like someone else posted before, Administrators should lead by example. If leaders do not conduct themselves ethically, honorably or honestly, it makes it difficult for the patrons and parents of the district to respect them.


Superintendent Salary
Apparently, the moderators keep removing a post with Public Information regarding Superintendent Salary. The school board is responsible for determining what the salary is for the superintendent. Since 2006 when Brown became superintendent, her salary has increased from $137,859 which ranked 42nd in the state to 2010 at $207,393 which now ranks 7th in the state.

What is not known is that her contract contains an additional $13,000 for the 2010-2011 school year for
a Commitment Fee and an additional $15,000 for Family Health Insurance Cost and a $200,000 Term Life Insurance. The additional $28,000 in addition to her salary is not reported to Missouri DESE. So, without reading her contract which is public information, the patrons of the district would not know about the additional money being paid out.

KMOV recently did a story about Superintendent pay in the state asking the question why superintendent pay was so high and also looked at why some school districts with so few students had such high salaries. Fox has roughly half the number of students of Rockwood, Francis Howell and Fort Zumwalt but is ranked higher in Salary than those district superintendents.

You can find a ranking of all of the superintendents in the state from MO DESE as well as from a nice report from the ShowMeInstitute,org. The ShowMeInstitute,org has also compiled many of the Employment Contracts from most of the superintendents in the state. An earlier post asked about the morality clause in Brown's contract and there is not one.


Fox C-6 Superintendent Pay and Rank in State
2006 -$137,859 - 42nd in State
2007 -$152,068 - 35th in State
2008 -$164,428 - 33rd in State
2009 -$192,586 - 16th in State
2010 -$207,393 - 7th in State


School Board Ethics
Gospel of Matthew wrote: If you are looking for ethical problems those don't stop at the administration. Those ethical problems go all the way to the school board. There isn't a single member of that School Board that hasn't used their position to benefit their family. EVERY ONE of them has at least one member of their family feeding off of the public trough that they control. Or how about using your position to make sure your own employer gets big time contracts with the school district and then puts you in charge of that contract. Must be nice.
Searching the School Board minutes you will find that Ms. Gee Palmer was appointed as the Director of Nursing for the school district while her husband David Palmer was the PRESIDENT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD in 2006. The announcement can be found in the May 16, 2006 Board Meeting Minutes:

As the Director of Nursing, Gee Palmer receives quite a bit more pay than the other school nurses. It is approximately another $30,000 above and beyond all of the other nurses' pay in the district.

STLTODAY has a couple of pages that make it very easy to search for the pay for ALL Educators in the state of Missouri from the MO DESE information for the 2009 and 2010 school years. You can search by name and/or job position. There are other nurses in the district that have many more years experience than Gee Palmer and makes a person question why one of the other nurses with more
experience was not chosen for the position of Director of Nursing.

You can use the following link on STLTODAY to search the 2010 Missouri Educators Salaries for all the districts in Missouri.

Searching the 2010 Missouri Educators Salaries for the Fox C-6 District, you will find that there are 10 nurses with more years of Public School Experience than Ms. Gee Palmer in the district and that the average nurses salary is between $41,381 to $42,881 while the Director of Nursing is getting paid $72,247.

Ms. Palmer is listed as having 10 years Public School experience. The Fox District has 3 nurses listed with more than 20 years of Public School experience in the district (28 years, 24 years, 21 years, 19 years, 17 years, 13 years, 12 years, 11 years, 11 years, 11 years). I have been told that the nurse with 28 years experience applied for the job for Director of Nursing but was overlooked and the job was given to Gee Palmer while her husband was the President of the School Board. These types of decisions truly make you question the Ethics and Morals of the School Board.

So, for the person asking what the patrons of the District would like to see in a school board member, I would say that it would be a person who would not be making or allowing decisions like this in the district. It's up to the patrons of the district to start demanding some answers and taking action in restoring Morals and Ethics in the District.


DOE OCR Investigation
Report wrote:
Interesting, perhaps this needs to be reported to the Education Department back in Washington D.C.
Well unrelated to Ms. Brown's personal issues, the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights is already investigating the Fox C-6 School District. Ms. Brown was informed of the investigation in March 2010. However, the School Board nor the administration has informed the public about the investigation. It has not been reported in any School Board Meeting Minutes. Maybe Dianne or Dan Baker has not told the school board or maybe the School Board does not want the Public to know about it. The SD Attorney tried to get the School District out of the investigation by writing a letter to Russlynn Ali, the U.S. Department of Education Assistant Secretary of Civil Rights. The DOE's office wrote back and informed the school district that the investigation would be forthcoming.

All of this happened right around the time the administrators decided to forgo their raises for the year. I think the Fox Community should start asking questions of the School Board members about what's going on to see if they are getting the full story. I've been told by a board member that Dianne let's them know what they need to know to keep them informed. Well, maybe Ms. Brown is not informing the board. I don't know. I can only speculate. I think a lot of people over the years have gotten fed up and gave up when confronting the system. However, when people are very knowledgeable about the law and the school board, the administrators and the staff are not, it costs the district a great deal of
taxpayer dollars and a makes a great opportunity for school district attorneys to take advantage of the administrators lack of education and knowledge. So, you are paying for the administrators and for the attorneys to do the administrator's job.

So, a lot of taxpayer dollars are wasted on attorneys! I guess that's just the cost of doing business.


DIVORCE NOTICE IN LEADER
Please wrote:
The proof will be there when you see her name printed in the paper in the divorce section! Ask any teacher they will tell you what administrator is sleeping with who. It is ridiculous. They should be fired for wrecking families.
DIVORCE NOTICE IN LEADER NEWSPAPER
"Dianne P Brown, Arnold v Harley B Brown, Arnold" was posted in the Leader newspaper today.

There isn't a morality clause in Ms Brown's current contract, unlike that in the Rockwood School District Superintendent's contract.

From the Rockwood School District contract:
==========
"12. This Agreement may be terminated prior to expiration of the term hereof or any extension hereof as follows:
...
b. For Cause. This agreement may be terminated by the School District at any time during the term of this Agreement or any extension hereof by giving notice in writing to Superintendent by certified mail, for one or more of the following causes:

i. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement;

ii. Immoral conduct or conduct unbecoming of the position of the Superintendent of the Rockwood R- VI School District, as the same may reasonably be determined by the Board of Education consistent with the state statute and judicial interpretation thereof; or"
==========

The C-6 School Board should be asked why this type of language IS NOT in the superintendent's current contract.

A School District Superintendent should demonstrate High Morals and should be held to a higher standard as they are Public Figures and represent Our School District and Our Community! It is up to the community to bring change by speaking with your School Board Members. Well, that is if Ms. Brown will allow you to speak with them.


MORALITY CLAUSES
#88 - Nov 5, 2010

It Is OUR Business wrote: BEAUTIFUL and dead on. Cheater is a cheater period. Do these clauses exist in all school districts? What about city officials and elected officials?
You can review the contracts of most of the school superintendents in the State of Missouri that were compiled by the ShowMeInstitute.org.

The ShowMeInstitute studied the salaries and contracts of the superintendents in the State of Missouri in an effort to see how much of their pay is disclosed to the public and how much additional pay is "hidden" in their contracts such as annuities, bonuses, vehicle allowance, health benefits, etc. that is not reported to Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). Educator salaries are public information and are available from MO DESE and can also be found on the STLTODAY.COM website. But, you have to make a Freedom of Information Act request from your School District in order to obtain employment contracts and other documents that are available to the public. This is what transparency in government is all about.

By following the link above to the ShowMeInstitute.org website, you will be able to review the contracts from the majority of the superintendents in the state. You will find that many of the superintendent contracts have morality clauses and termination language in them.


What Are Proper Channels
Mr. Vinson, I attempted to go through the 'proper channels' and address the school board. However, Ms. Brown blocked me from exercising my rights by telling me that the school board had decided that they would not speak to me on a matter. It is very strange that she told me this at a school board meeting while the school board president himself was speaking to me and the board secretary about putting me onto the schedule for next month's board meeting. The board president told me that he had forgotten to put me onto the schedule for that evening's meeting after I had already spoken to him on the phone earlier about meeting with the board on an issue. There were other board members present at the head table that heard Ms. Brown tell me that the board had already met and decided not to speak to me. I asked Ms. Brown how the board president was unaware of the board's decision not to speak to me. I was told that they had already decided not to speak to me. So, if this is how Ms. Brown conducts business, then I can see how others would have problems going through the 'proper channels' as well.

So, if Ms. Brown decides that she does not want an issue to be heard by the school board, she simply tells the parent(s) or citizens that the school board has decided not to speak with them making it quite easy for her to cover up any issues that may not be favorable for her or for the district that may reflect badly on her. So, if the board does not get to hear about negative issues, how will they know one exists? From what I understand, it has been known for many years about this type of behavior and that
people have feared for their jobs and that parents have been met with resistance and/or retaliation when attempting to communicate through the 'proper channels'. So, I then wrote to each of the board members. From that attempt, I received a letter from the school district attorney informing me that all communications needed to go through them. So then I called a few school board members that I knew and they told me that the school district attorney had informed them not to speak with me regarding my issue.

So, how open is our school district to discuss matters when your own school board is blocked by the superintendent and then by the attorneys? Writing to the school district then resulted in a letter from the school district attorney stating that "The school district did not wish to engage in a letter writing campaign.".

So, Mr. Vinson how do you propose that you engage your school board who is elected by the community to represent the community if they are told not to speak with the patrons of the school district? I believe that I followed the proper channels but got nowhere and I know of others that have met the same resistance.

So, does this seem like a healthy and friendly environment for teachers and staff to work in and where parents feel that their voices are heard?


What Are Proper Channels
#129 - Nov 16, 2010
Bullwinkle wrote: The school board president is a female and has been president since early last spring you dip stick. Again...more lies to harm others. Mr Critchlow, I will call you and we can start our own campaign against these crazy parents..LOL Perhaps we can find them something to do at your school...hahahaaa
So Bullwinkle you instantly resort to name calling without knowing all of the facts.

It is ashame that you have no first hand knowledge about the situations at the school district. The board meeting I was referring to took place two years ago. That school board president is no longer on the school board.

When Ms. Brown calls the district attorneys into the mix to get around the issue, they can drag things out for a really long time. Then you have to contend with not only the rewriting of history by the attorneys but also attorneys making false statements about the law thinking the parents don't know the law.

You have your right to express your opinion albeit not an informed one since you were not involved in the events that occurred. I am just providing facts from personal experience.


What Are Proper Channels
Bullwinkle wrote:
Channel person. You must be the disgruntled parents over the OCR case. get over it! you lost.
Bullwinkle, if you are referring to the OCR Case, then you are incorrect in stating that we lost the case. The Office of Civil Rights is still monitoring the school district from the original complaint that was filed in August 2008 from which the district signed an Agreement but has not yet fulfilled the requirements of that Agreement. Independent of that, the district is currently undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review by OCR to address whether the District provides Individualized Health Plans to students that do not comply with the requirements of Section 504 and Title II. There has never been any ruling made by the Office of Civil Rights stating that the District "won".


Good Role Models Needed
Very Concerned wrote: I agree with you 100%. When you take a position like this, you should AT LEAST follow the character traits you are trying to promote to the fox school district children. Affairs happen all the time in the workplace. However, when you take on a job in education, you have to uphold certain standards. That is a choice you make when choosing this career. Partying and screwing around and wrecking families is NOT part of it and is NOT a good example.
If you think about all of the different people that influenced your life the most while you were growing up (outside of your parents), I would bet that your first memory would be of some teacher, principal, coach, counselor or someone that worked at your school. Children ARE VERY IMPRESSIONABLE and it is VERY IMPORTANT for our children to have Excellent Role Models in their lives. Educators should be held to a higher standard and I believe that most of them do hold themselves to that higher standard. However, when an Educator does something that is not what you would expect from someone in their position or profession, it is a very big let down for both the students and the community alike. It also creates friction within the school workplace as well. And, I would also bet that it is something and someone you will easily remember for the rest of your life. This is why parents are so passionate about wanting their children to be educated by people that they can Trust and Respect. We need Positive Role Models for our children that will last them the rest of their lives!


To Parents Involved
START BY ASKING THE SCHOOL BOARD SOME QUESTIONS AT THE NEXT BOARD
MEETING!

Here are few questions:

Is the school superintendent expected to be a role model for the school district?

Is the school board interested in protecting the school community from anything that would distract it
from its purpose of educating each child that attends its schools?

What types of behavior does the school board consider to be inappropriate behavior for that of a school superintendent?

Are school district administrators expected to be held to the same high standards of moral conduct that the teachers and other staff members are held to?

Have teachers been fired in the past for engaging in similar conduct?

If so, then why would that rule not apply to administrators as well?

Was a person promoted to a principal position within the school district that did not possess the appropriate credentials required for that position? If so, then why did the school board approve that promotion?

Why did the school board renew Brown's contract in February 2010 when her previous contract was not due to expire until June 30, 2011?

Does the superintendent's contract contain a morality clause or any other type of termination clauses?


Coaching Qualifications
You are an idiot wrote: Do you even know the qualifications of said person: Second team All-Pac10 center at Oregon State Offensive Coordinator at Texas A&M-Commerce Head Coach Tyler Community College, Tyler (TX) I'm sure if he gets the position, it will be solely because of personal relationships (eyes rolling).
Those are good qualifications!

However, while trying to find out who everyone was talking about with those qualifications, I was very disappointed to find out WHY he was no longer the Head Coach at Tyler Community College. "Said person" was relieved of his duties in January 2007 after being arrested for a DWI after crashing his car into a fence in South Tyler. I understand that people make mistakes. Since he was in a "role model" position as the Head Coach at Tyler Community College, the college gave him 24 hours to submit his resignation. Since he did not respond by the deadline, the college fired their head football coach.

Now, as long as he disclosed this information on his employment application and it was OK with the school board, then it should not be an issue. Right?


Coach First Year Pay
According to MO DESE Salary data from the STLTODAY site, Coach was paid quite well in his FIRST YEAR of Public School Experience in the Fox C-6 School District where he was paid $98,589. His job title has him listed as a "Supervisor".

What did he Supervise?

For starting pay within any school district where funding is paid for by public funds, I consider $98,589 to be a very high starting pay. Especially since the records show that he has not worked in a Public School before. That salary is nearly as much pay as a principal who has been there for over 10 years in the district. I can see how this would be a morale issue for other staff within the district that have been there for many more years.

How did the school board justify his starting pay? Does anyone else see this as an issue?


Fox Board Responsibility
Concerned Arnold Citizen wrote: Somehow I don't think the board was aware of that fact. Similarly they are apparently unaware of many facts. Would they have allowed the hiring of staff not qualified? Do they even question what is going on? Or do they follow blindly because of the awards and somewhat skewed numbers that are given to them? The board has not done their job and there are those that have been given free reign to do whatever they choose to do and hire whomever they choose-regardless of their credentials or lack there of. It is time to wake up and see what is going on around there.
I agree that the School Board needs a BIG WAKE UP CALL!!

The School Board is responsible for overseeing the district and I would agree that the school board members have looked the other way far too long or have been blocked from seeing things by Ms. Brown. It is their responsibility to ensure that things are being done properly. By not verifying things themselves is simply Irresponsible and a Dereliction of Duty and violates the Trust of the Community that voted them into their positions.

It truly is disappointing to discover everything that has been going on.

For all Concerned Citizens of the Fox C-6 School District, the next School Board Meeting is Tuesday December 14. I hope to see many of you there looking for answers!


Fox Alcohol Abuse Grant
In 2007, Fox was one of only 16 districts in the country that was awarded a grant of $1 Million dollars for Alcohol Abuse Education. It was published in the Leader back in 2007. The name of the program was "Project Toward No Drug Abuse".

I would think that hiring a coach with a DWI Arrest would have been somewhat of an issue for the district if it truly is trying to educate the kids about Alcohol Abuse. This just seems quite hypocritical of the schools efforts towards battling Alcohol Abuse.


Uh Hmmmmm
Hmmmmm wrote:
I won't give my name cause I'm a well liked employee of the district for the past twelve years. I only made my comment because I grew up in a house where I learned loyalty and commitment to my employer. Believe you me moving from private industry to education was the best move I ever made but it annoys me there's people on here who claim to be teachers in the district that show none of these attributes. My father always told me to be loyal to who signs my checks because when grandpappy went through the depression the ink ran dry for the disloyal guy.
You would have to be a well liked employee of the district when you are the wife of a school board member and former school board president! Your comments sound like you are threatening any employee of the district with losing their job if they make any negative comments about the district.

So, thank you for confirming what others have already stated is a common practice within the district to hide the truth!


School Awards Perspective
TNT stated that Lone Dell is Blue Ribbon School. The award touting needs to be put into perspective. Missouri DESE has a PDF document listing all of the Gold Star and Blue Ribbon Schools that have been recognized by the program between 1982 and 2009. The document also explains the criteria for qualifying for the program and the changes in the criteria over the years. The last time that Lone Dell was recognized as a Blue Ribbon school was for the 2002-2003 school year.

MO DESE Gold Star / Blue Ribbon Program

Historical Awards Document

Here is a sampling of school districts compiled from this document that have had schools recognized as either a Gold Star or a Blue Ribbon School between 1982 and 2009 and how many times a school within each of those districts was recognized and the most recent school year a school was recognized:

Rockwood - 35 (2008-2009)
Parkway - 25 (1998-1999)
St. Louis City - 23 (2008-2009)
Blue Springs - 17 (2007-2008)
Kansas City - 13 (2007-2008)
Farmington - 11 (2008-2009)
Brentwood - 8 (2008-2009)
Lindbergh - 8 (2008-2009)
Kirkwood - 7 (2006-2007)
Festus - 6 (2001-2002)
Northwest - 4 (2008-2009)
Fox (Lone Dell)- 3 (2002-2003)
Normandy - 2 (2004-2005)
Meramec Valley - 1 (2006-2007)


LinkedIn Profile
Since people seem to be concerned about Mr. Critchlow's credentials, he has a LinkedIn profile that
shows he is in Education Management.


He doesn't list any K-12 Teaching or Education Management related work experience in his profile but he does list that he received a BS degree in Interdisciplinary Studies from Oregon State University in 1996 and an MA degree in Interdisciplinary Studies from The University of Texas-Tyler in 2000.
The University of Texas-Tyler Intercom Online Newsletter has him listed as a Master's Degree Candidate in Art in 2001.


What type of education, work experience or credentials does someone need before they can be a High School Teacher or a School Administrator in Missouri?


Sunday, March 9, 2014

Fox C-6's Revised School Board Policies - A District of Excellence?

So, why has it taken Superintendent Critchlow and the Fox C-6 School Board more than 3 years to update our school district Policies, Regulations and Forms?

That seems like a valid question. I wouldn't think that updating and revising Polices and Regulations would take more than a year. It's been 2 years since Superintendent Dianne Brown (now Critchlow) announced that the overhaul of the district policies were ready to be reviewed and were going to be placed on the district website. From my audio recording of the March 2012 board meeting, here is exactly what Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) told the public at that meeting:
"We are finally ready for the forms and manuals and policies to be reviewed.  This would be an overhaul of all of the school district policies. They will be placed, I believe tomorrow night, Debby, on the website? And, sent out to staff or we will have a place that staff can log into. We’re not sure if we can send that big of documents for download. And we’re going to leave them up until June so that staff can make recommendations and the public can make recommendations.  Then we’ll bring those recommendations back and my guess is....”
In 2012, it sounded like the policies would probably be approved sometime that fall if the district was going to "leave them up until June so the staff can make recommendations and the public can make recommendations". Those documents have been on the website now for nearly 2 years and haven't been updated during that time according to their PDF Creation Date.

However, the overhauled policies weren't originally posted on the district website like Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) said they would. I had to email the board secretary and former school board member Ruth Ann Newman asking when the revised policies would be posted for the public to review a week after the board meeting. The response I received from Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) wasn't at all what I expected considering what she said at the March 2012 board meeting. Her email stated that the draft Board Policies and Regulations were NOT for public review at this time. That's definitely not what she said at the school board meeting.

This is what Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) emailed to me on March 29, 2012 regarding the updated board policies:
"The draft of the Board Policies and Regulations are sent via email to the staff for comments (not for public review at this time in the process).  Policy review and adoption has always been handled in this manner. They then will be placed on the district web site after they have been adopted by the board."
Her email response contradicted what she said at the school board meeting. I was glad that I had an audio recorded of the meeting so I could quote back to her what she said at the meeting. Otherwise, it would have just been my word against her word as to what she actually said at the board meeting. Now you know why I record board meetings and it's probably why Superintendent Critchlow won't record board meetings like they used to in the past.

Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) sent me the following response on March 30, 2012 after I quoted to her what she said at the March 2012 school board meeting:
"Hello Rich! Debby will gather all of this information and shoot it to you electronically today. 
Please let us know if it all doesn't transmit."
Without my audio recording, there's a good chance that the public wouldn't have been able to review the revised policies for the last 2 years while the district and the board worked on making revisions.

I still had to make another request to get the documents posted onto the district website like Superintendent Brown (Critchlow) originally said they would.

I'm not really sure what Superintendent Critchlow's aversion has been for the last 4 or 5 years to posting documentation on the district website like they do in other school districts. Our school board policies state that she's responsible for keeping the board and the public informed. Making the public call and request documentation like bill payment descriptions gives the impression that she's trying to hide things from the public. Developing school district policies is a community effort. She even said at the board meeting that the public would get the chance to review them and provide recommendations. So why would she say one thing and then say something different after the fact?

With the amount of salary that Superintendent Critchlow and her assistant superintendents are getting by our school board, wouldn't you have expected a lot quicker turn around in reviewing and updating our district's Policies and Regulations?

Fox C-6 had the 4th Highest Superintendent Salary in the state of Missouri in 2013 and the 2nd Highest Average Administrator Salary in the state of Missouri in 2013 according to records found on Missouri DESE's website.

If the Fox C-6 school board is paying such high salaries, they must believe that Superintendent Critchlow and her assistants are doing a great job. Based on their salaries, they should be doing one of the best jobs in the state. So, why would it take so long to update and revise our district's policies?

After 3+ years of work on revising and updating Fox's School Board Policies and Regulations, why would the latest revision still have someone listed as a point of contact who retired from the district in 2008?

Shouldn't someone have noticed this mistake after 3 years of reviewing and updating the documents?

You can download and review the latest revision of Fox's School Board Policies from the Missouri Consultants for Education website here:


When the first draft was posted on the district's website in March 2012, I emailed the district and gave them a list of contacts that I found in the Policies and Regulations that had been retired from the district for years that needed to be updated. I also supplied several grammatical and typographical corrections as well. Many of those items have been corrected. But, it's now been 2 years since I notified the district about retirees being listed as contacts and they're still in the latest revision. It makes you wonder if anyone has ever fully read our Policies and Regulations.

So what are we actually getting for Superintendent Critchlow's $256,131 salary?

I think that's a really good question and one that everyone in our community should be asking our school board since the board is responsible for setting her salary.

Her salary doesn't include her other benefits and the additional 14.5% that the taxpayers put into her retirement account each year. If you are paying someone that much money to lead your school district, shouldn't they be making sure that people are doing their jobs and and checking their work? After all, Fox is a District of Excellence!

I'm not really sure how our school board has been able to justify Superintendent Critchlow's raises year after year when there are things that just never get done. I've asked them but I've never gotten a response. Superintendent Critchlow usually has an excuse as to why Fox can't do what they do in other districts. But when does it end and the Fox C-6 taxpayers start receiving the benefits that taxpayers are getting in other school districts?

I think the majority of people in our community are in agreement that Superintendent Critchlow's salary is outrageous and that she is way overpaid. My father always tells me that it's the school board's fault for paying her too much!

I think that her over the top salary has caused her to have an over the top attitude towards anyone questioning her salary, her conduct or the job that she's been doing as a school district superintendent. It's also created a lot of resentment and morale problems within the district for employees as well as the community. It's hard to believe that our Fox C-6 School Board members can't see that this is a problem or that they haven't had any complaints from people in the community.

If Fox was ranked as high as Lindbergh in academic performance or if Fox had the ACT Scores and the same high Percentage of Students Taking the ACT like Rockwood or Parkway, then there might be a reason to possibly pay her more than $200,000 per year. But, when speaking with people in the community, all I've heard is complaint after complaint about how high her salary is.

Perhaps, our school board doesn't realize that Fox's demographics, annual budget and academic performance don't warrant the salary increases that they have given Superintendent Brown / Critchlow since she became superintendent in 2005.

I've written numerous articles over the last several years concerning Superintendent Critchlow's salary. I've compared her salary to other superintendents across the state and provided demographic comparisons for those other district's and communities as well.

Superintendent Critchlow may not think that her pay is out of line. But people in the community talk quite a bit about how much she's getting paid with taxpayer dollars. Our school district is not a "For Profit" corporation. It's a publicly funded entity. Therefore, the public has every right to question our school board as to how much they are paying her and they deserve to have the school board respond and not Superintendent Critchlow or Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman.

The community expects Superintendent Critchlow to do the job that our school board policies document that she is supposed to be doing. The community also expects the school board to do it's job and provide proper oversight of our school district and be held accountable for their work. If the board just "rubber stamps" everything and they don't ask questions then we get into the situation that we're in now where Superintendent Critchlow is just raking in the money and not getting a lot done.

Perhaps, everyone in our community should start calling the anonymous hot line to report to the school board what they think about Superintendent Critchlow's salary and how much they've increased it over the years. If the community was given the chance to speak anonymously without retribution and retaliation and without fear of being sent Cease and Desist letters, they might speak out more often.

If you read the recent state audit of the Hickman Mills School District, you will get a sense of understanding as to why this occurs. An article in the Kansas City Star said, "That's what happens when not enough people are watching." It also occurs because people don't speak up when they see problems.

Speaking to our school board for 3 minutes a month doesn't mean that they're going to listen or respond. They just say, "Thank you!"

Superintendent Critchlow or now Assistant Superintendent Andy Arbeitman responds for our school board even on matters that only our school board can answer. So, without more voices from the community, everyone will have to continue to watch our school board overpay Superintendent Critchlow for not doing the job that she is supposed to be doing per our school board policies.

According to Superintendent Critchlow and her supporters, the district is doing great and there aren't any problems. According to a recent letter from one supporter, 99.9% of the people think things are great. My father recently told me that I'm not the only one complaining as Superintendent Critchlow would like everyone to believe. He called her comments "propaganda" to try and discredit me.

My father recently heard enough complaints from some of his friends at a trivia night that it was the first time I really heard him voice his concerns about the district. He was really concerned that the school board wasn't asking questions about bill payments especially if there weren't any descriptions on the bill payments. He said if the school board isn't asking questions then they should be voted out. I told him that there are a couple of board members that have been helpful with improving transparency and that they shouldn't be voted out. It's just a matter of time before we get enough responsible board members on our school board that don't have spouses or daughter in laws in supervisory positions to make a difference.

Superintendent Critchlow isn't going to allow the community to know what questions I bring to our school board when I speak at school board meetings. She's not going to document Public Comments in board meeting minutes with enough information to let you know. My Public Comments are documented as "Concerns within the district." or commented on this or commented on that.

Since the school board votes to approve the board meeting minutes each month, it doesn't appear that they are following the school board's Code of Ethics policy that states, "As member of the school Board, I shall: Maintain the public trust through full and open communication."

The board is responsible for approving the generically written minutes for the Public Comments that our board secretary writes each month documenting what I said at the meeting. However, if someone comes and praises the district, there will be quite a bit more detail for those Public Comments. Their letters will even get included in the board meeting packets. My letters to the board have never been included even though they were handed to the board and requested to be included as a matter of public record. Superintendent Critchlow is purposely failing to include them. That's how she can give the appearance that she's doing a great job and that everything is great within our district.

I have even emailed and asked for board minutes to be corrected to include more details after they were posted the month after a meeting. Superintendent Critchlow responded and informed me that the Missouri School Board Association told the board secretary that the board meeting minutes follow state law and won't be changed. It sounds to me like Superintendent Critchlow isn't doing her job of keeping the pubic fully informed.

If you want to see changes occur, it's time for you to start contacting your school board and showing up at school board meetings and start asking questions. After all, it's your school district and the Fox C-6 School Board represents you as a taxpayer.

Please be sure and tell your friends and family what's been going on with the leadership in our school district so they can contact our school board members as well. Your voice can make a difference!

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Emailing Fox C-6 School Board President Results in Superintendent Response

In trying to help educate our community as to how your current school board members handle concerns from patrons in the school district, I am sharing with you an email exchange from May 17, 2011 that I sent to Ruth Ann Newman. She was the Fox C-6 School Board President at the time I sent the email.  I also copied John Laughlin on the email since he was a neighbor of mine at the time. Mr. Laughlin had just been elected to the Fox C-6 school board. I emailed Ruth Ann Newman as board president since I had not received a response from the school board regarding the questions I asked the board during Public Comments at the December 2010 school board meeting.

I also hadn't received any responses to my questions that I asked at the April 2011 school board meeting.  School board policy states that "The Board is very interested in citizen viewpoints and problems." and "All questions will be responded to by an appropriate person within the week whenever possible."  Since I hadn't received a response from either meeting, I sent our school board president an email on May 17, 2011.

Mrs. Newman forwarded  my email directly to Superintendent Brown. Mrs. Newman never respond to my email. Since Ruth Ann Newman was the school board president and I had presented my questions to the board, I expected to receive a response from Mrs. Newman rather than our superintendent.

In reading Dianne Brown's response, you may sense a bit of hostility. Questioning board members about the credentials of a school district employee must not sit well with Superintendent Brown.

The teaching credentials that I questioned in my May 2011 email to Mrs. Newman where the same questions that I brought to the school board at the December 2010 school board meeting.  The person in question whom I did not name at the time due to Public Comments guidelines did not obtain a teaching certificate until January 2011. This was almost a year and a half after his original hire date.  The person in question, Mr. Jamie Critchlow, may have obtained a provisional status by MO DESE when he was hired by the Board of Education in September 2009 but he didn't obtain his Initial Certification until January 2011 after taking the Praxis tests in 2010.

What was unusual was the fact that Mr. Critchlow was promoted from a Behavior Intervention Support Teacher to the the Director of the Bridges program after working for the district for only 2 months. It was also odd in the fact that Mr. Critchlow had never taken the School Leadership Licensure Assessment (SLLA) test and he did not have a Masters degree in Education Administration according to Missouri DESE records and his online resume at LinkedIn. Taking the SLLA and earning a Masters in Education Administration is required by the State of Missouri to teach as a principal. I called Missouri DESE to confirm the information located on the MO DESE website. Apparently Fox doesn't require a person to have the same credentials that a principal must have in order to be a Director of the Bridges program.

It should be noted that the Director of the Early Childhood Center at Fox DOES have a Masters in Education Administration and has taken the SLLA. This may not have been much of a concern if Mr. Critchlow had retained the title of Director. However, he addressed letters to the school board and signed them as "Principal of Bridges". His emails were sent with the title of Bridges Principal. I felt that he was falsely advertising credentials that he did not have at the time and still doesn't have.

I called our MO DESE Area Supervisor Tim Ricker to speak with him about this issue. Dr. Ricker subsequently contacted Superintendent Brown to discuss the matter and Mr. Critchlow's information was corrected short after Dr. Ricker spoke with Superintendent Brown to more accurately reflect his title and credentials.

I also contacted MO DESE regarding Mr. Critchlow's salary amount that I inquired about at the December 2010 board meeting and in my May 2011 email to Mrs. Newman. MO DESE informed me that the salary amounts listed on their website were entered by district personnel at Fox. Therefore the data I provided in my email originated from Fox. So, if my "facts" were incorrect as Superintendent Brown stated in her response email, then the district incorrectly provided the "facts" to MO DESE.

Below is the email I originally sent to school board president Ruth Ann Newman on May 17, 2011 which is followed by Superintendent Brown's response. Superintendent Brown didn't address any of my concerns regarding Mr. Critchlow confronting me at the April 2011 school board meeting which I brought to Ruth Ann Newman's attention in my email.

My email below to Ruth Ann Newman and John Laughlin details the comments that Mr. Critchlow made to me at the April 2011 board meeting.

My email which was sent to Ruth Ann Newman was forward directly to Superintendent Brown:
From:  RuthAnn Newman
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 9:09 AM
To: Brown, Dr. Dianne
Subject: Fw: School Board Web Page Photos and Other Issues
Importance: High
Let me know that you received this.--Ruth Ann

----- Original Message -----
From: Rich Simpson
To: 'Ruth Ann Newman'
Cc: 'John Laughlin'
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 6:24 AM
Subject: School Board Web Page Photos and Other Issues

Ruth Ann Newman,

As you heard me mention at the last school board meeting, the school board member photos were not working. The photos have been added to the school board member’s page now. However, the images that were placed onto the page are the original digital camera size image and are 3+ megabytes in size and cause the page to load very slowly. The images are scaled down to 160x240 or so but are the original image size and should only be 50kb to 150kb in size. Could you please let the appropriate person know about this so corrections can be made as it causes the page to timeout on occasion as well?

Secondly, I have not had any responses to my questions that were presented at the December school board meeting from the school district. School board Policy 0403 states that (direct quote from current board policy which includes typos) “Questions director to the Board cannot always be answered immediately. All questions will be responded to by an appropriate person within the week wherever possible.” Apparently, the board has not read Policy 0403 in 14 years and is unaware that an appropriate person will respond back to persons making public comment.

One of my questions at the December 2010 board meeting was regarding the hiring of a person making $98,859 and his lack of credentials. I did not mention names at the December meeting but everyone on the school board and the administrators were aware of who I was speaking of. In fact, he was then appointed as the head coach of the Seckman Football team in closed session after I spoke to the board. MO DESE records show that he was paid a salary of $98,859 in 2010. However, he was not on contract for the $98,859 position for the entire 12 months of the school year according to the Seckman Middle School Student Handbook. The 2009-2010 Seckman Middle School Handbook states that he was the BIST person at the middle school and did not start that position at the beginning of the school year. So, it was sometime after the start of the school year that he was promoted to the director of day to day operations of the Bridges program. Please explain how this person was paid a 12 month contract salary amount for a Supervisor when he did not hold that position for the entire school year?

Additionally, Mr. Critchlow approached me at the April 2011 school board meeting and introduced himself to me. I had never met the man before. He told me that he did not appreciate the fact that I went and spoke to the school board regarding his hiring and that if I had any questions, that I should contact him directly. He also told me that he did not appreciate me not returning his phone call when he called my home in February 2011 and left a message on my recorder to call him and discuss some topics. I told him that I had no reason to discuss anything since I had not posted any comments since January 11, 2011. Mr. Critchlow also informed me that he did not appreciate the fact that I spoke to the reporter and told her that he had a DWI to which I told him that I did not mention any names to the reporter and that I was very careful not to. Mr. Critchlow told me I was simply trying to “stir the pot”. I told him that I had found information regarding his DWI on the internet and he told me that you cannot believe everything you read on the internet. I guess that a Press Release from Tyler Junior Community College and the news station report cannot be considered credible sources. I have no need to discuss this matter with him directly. This is a matter of the school board hiring a person that had no prior work experience in K-12 and was not qualified for the position which does not abide by the School Board Organization’s Code of Ethics in stated Policy 0333. His resume was
online for almost 2 years which did not show ANY K-12 experience nor any teaching degrees or educator education. He removed his resume from LinkedIn shortly after it was pointed out online.

At the April 2011 school board meeting, I questioned the board about the documenting of public comment in the board minutes as “Concerns within the district.” as not being an accurate recording in the board minutes as to what occurred at the meeting. This is also covered in our board policies as well for maintaining the public trust by accurately communicating openly with the citizens of the school district. Please read the section on School Board Code of Ethics as well as on documenting school board meetings. I also asked at the April 2011 school board meeting to have school board member names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses listed on the district website as the other district’s of distinction have on their websites so the citizens of the community could communicate with their school board. Organization charts for school districts show the Community at the top of the chart with the School Board below the Community and then the Superintendent below the School Board. The public is asking that the school board listen to the community rather than being a closed door or a “black hole” when questions or comments are made.

I still have not received any response on my question regarding the District Wide Compliance review as well. However, there is a law firm in Washington D.C. that is teaching seminars on Recent Initiatives and Enforcement Actions by OCR and in their presentation have documented the fact that Fox is one of two school districts in the entire country that are undergoing a compliance review for not properly providing access to appropriate services for students with medical and health conditions and impairments such as food allergies and providing Individualized Health Plans as opposed to Section 504 Plans. The reference to Fox C-6 is on page 10 of the PDF document on Slide #30. I have attached the PDF of their presentation (http://www.bruman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/6.4.28.1600.Recent-Initiatives-and-Enforcement-Actions-by-OCR.JMauskapf1.pdf).  Dianne and the School Board has not acknowledged to the public that the school district was notified of this compliance review on March 18, 2010. I asked the school board at the December meeting if the school board was even aware of this and Dianne asked me if I was asking about the OCR Complaint to which I told her that I was not. I was asking about the District Wide Compliance Review to which I was met with silence. Why has the public not been informed of this?

I also informed the school board that the 2011-2012 school calendar was inaccurate even though it had already been approved by the school board and posted on the district’s website and that the 1st, 2nd and 3rd semesters are totaled incorrectly as to the number of days in the calendar. We have 170 days in the calendar and not the 174 days as reflected at the bottom of the calendar pages. Also, please note that the start date back to school for 2012 is January 2. January 2, 2012 is recognized as a Federal Holiday as well as most other companies.

Thank you for your attention to these matters and your help in improving our school district.


Thank you,

Rich Simpson


Below is the email response that I received from Superintendent Dianne Brown later that morning.  I didn't send my questions to Superintendent Brown. I sent my questions to school board president Ruth Ann Newman. The school board is ultimately responsible for hiring employees within our school district as they vote to approve or disapprove the hiring of individuals that are recommended by our school superintendent.  They have a duty and agree to follow the Code of Ethics as documented in our school board policies in their hiring practices and are obligated  to "Employ only such qualified employees as are properly recommended by the Superintendent of schools."

From:  Brown, Dr. Dianne
Sent:  Tuesday, May 17, 2011 10:47 AM
To:  Ruth Ann Newman; Rich Simpson; John Laughlin
Subject:  RE: School Board Web Page Photos and Other Issues
Follow Up Flag:  Follow up
Flag Status:         Flagged
Mr. Simpson,

Thank you for your email voicing your concerns pertaining to the Fox C-6 School District. After reading your concerns, many are false and inaccurate. These will be addressed below.
Concern 1: The pictures were updated immediately after the BOE April meeting. Thank you for the information. No other community member has mentioned any issues that you seem to be experiencing with our web page. The district will look into this matter.

Concern 2: You were asked by President Cheryl Hermann at the December Board of Education meeting to contact the central office the next day and they would be happy to discuss your issues. A call was never made by you.

Concern 3: Mr. Critchlow is the Director of the At Risk Programs. He was NOT paid $98,859 for the year you are claiming. He, indeed, was a BIST teacher and paid accordingly. He then was hired by the BOE and paid for director pay for the remainder of that year, which was not your reported $98,859. Your “facts” are incorrect. Mr. Critchlow was NOT paid a twelve month contract for the year in which you are inquiring.

Concern 4: Mr. Critchlow is certified by the State of Missouri per DESE records.

Concern 5: The Board secretary contacted MSBA’s legal counsel the following day after the April meeting.  They informed her that the district was in compliance in the manner in which the BOE minutes are reported.

Concern 6: Per the district’s legal counsel. The compliance review is still ongoing. Until we receive a finding, there is nothing to report to the public. The other OCR complaints are intertwined, so we cannot discuss these without comprising the compliance review. In addition, the BOE has been informed from the initial complaint of matters relating to all OCR investigations and reviews.

Concern 7: The district calendar has been updated and corrected.

Please understand, it is my belief that the Fox C-6 School District does not receive the high accolades and continual performance awards without having an open, competent, and caring Board of Education. 
Please respond back if you would like a phone call from my office to discuss these issues and a time that would be best to make contact.

Sincerely,
Dr. Dianne Brown