Friday, July 25, 2014

The Bakers NOT Losing Their Jobs at Fox C-6 Was Discussed on Donnybrook Last Night!

What is Donnybrook?

Donnybrook is a weekly discussion / debate program that airs on Thursday night on KETC Channel 9 in St. Louis, MO. It's hosted by 5 journalists that discuss topics of local interest. Past episodes can be viewed online or seen on TV on Sunday evening if you missed Thursday's airing.

This week's discussion on Donnybrook started with the recent announcement of Dan and Angela Baker being allowed to keep their jobs at Fox C-6 after they had been placed on paid administrative leave June 4, 2014.

If you recall, online defamatory comments were traced to the Baker's residence as well as the residence of Superintendent Dianne Critchlow and her husband Jamie Critchlow the former Director of the At Risk program.

It needs to be noted that many comments were linked to the Baker's residence. There may have only been one comment documented in the original lawsuit petition but many more were posted in defense of the school district and our school board that were linked to the Baker's residence.

This is the second time that Fox C-6 has been a topic of discussion on the Donnybrook program. Superintendent Critchlow and the Internet scandal was first discussed on the June 5, 2014 Donnybrook program starting 19:15 in that episode. The prior episode of Donnybrook can be viewed online using the link found at the end of this article.

If you missed last night's episode you can view it online using the link below. It was a great discussion by the Donnybrook panelists regarding Dan and Angela Baker getting to keep their jobs as administrators at Fox C-6.

I believe the Donnybrook panelist's unbiased views believing that the Bakers should have been fired speaks loud and clear to our school board and the community.

Of course, I'm biased because Dan Baker's defamatory comments were directed at me. I pointed that out during my Public Comments at this weeks Fox C-6 school board workshop.

As a Fox C-6 administrator and school district Section 504 Coordinator, Mr. Baker should have been fired immediately once our school board knew that he did in fact post online comments even if they weren't as vile as Troop's comments.

Mr. Baker spent July 2013 through October 2013 in discussions with Missouri DESE and the USDA's Office for Civil Rights attempting to correct issues in our school district and bring the district into compliance with federal law. Fox's school board members were copied on many of the correspondences with the USDA during that time period.

Fox C-6 had been found Non-Compliant by USDA OCR in August 2011. Superintendent Critchlow forwarded that letter of Non-Compliance to the Fox C-6 School Board back then informing the board that she had "received a really long letter from the USDA" but the district attorney found some mistakes in the letter. Dan Baker told me at the December 2011 school board meeting that the district filed an appeal. Mr. Baker said it wasn't fair that the district wasn't offered a chance to file an appeal. That's because it was a Final Agency Decision. In August 2013, the USDA OCR finally took action to enforce the August 2011 non-compliance notification and bring the district into compliance.

It's Not Just Bullying! It's Retaliation!
As an administrator you can't post defamatory comments abut parents that you've been dealing with while being under investigation by federal agencies. It's not just BULLYING! IT IS RETALIATION!

Mr. Baker may not have enjoyed dealing with federal investigations and Section 504 complaints, but that was his job. Mr. Baker was being paid more than $150,000 to ensure that our district followed Civil Rights laws and he failed to do so. That's why Fox C-6 was found Non-Compliant in August 2011. Not only did Dan Baker violate federal law, he violated our district's anti-bullying policy.

The comment from the Bakers house directed towards me were libelous and were meant to discredit me and my efforts towards getting our district to comply with federal law and and for my advocacy efforts on Section 504 issues at Fox C-6.

Since Dan Baker has been handling Section 504 issues for the district for the last 6+ years and working with us directly makes the comments from his residence even more damaging for him because of his position. The board needs to read the 2013 Dear Colleague Letter from ED OCR to understand why Dan Baker's comments were retaliatory.

Even worse was the fact that he was in charge of ensuring that the district properly followed the ADA and Section 504 law. In his anonymous online comment posted under the pseudonym of "Seriously", he called out my "weird eye" which is due to paralysis from a 1978 car accident. I don't think a disability coordinator for a school district should be publicly be making fun of a parent's disability. I doubt Mr. Baker would have posted the comment using his own name. So, I'm betting he never thought that someone could find out that he posted comments online. His comments should have been cause for immediate dismissal once our school board reviewed the current lawsuit petition and knew which post he made.

Retaliation Violates Federal Law
Retaliation in Section 504 Law is a very serious offense as outlined in this 2013 Dear Colleague Letter from ED OCR.  Mr. Baker violated Section 504 Law and should be dismissed. The board cannot be allowed to be "satisfied with the discipline" that the Bakers received knowing that his comments violated Section 504 Law and school board policy. He should have been fired!

KETC's July 24, 2014 Donnybrook Episode 
Below is the link to the July 24, 2014 episode of Donnybrook that aired on KETC Channel 9. The discussion by the Donnybrook panelists about Fox is the very first topic of discussion. Guest host Eric Reid starts off the conversation by saying he asked a Fox High School student purchasing books at a bookstore what she thought about what had been happening lately in the Fox C-6 school district.


Host Eric Reid started the discussion asking, "Bill, do you think that these two who weren't necessarily vindicated but didn't do as much emailing as the others, do you think they should get to keep their jobs?"

Panelist Bill McClellen of the St. Louis Post Dispatch said, "No I don't. I thought they should be fired. Matter of fact I thought the board members should resign as well. And the other thing that bugged me about this is the discipline they got was being disciplined with pay. I mean, I'd like to be suspended with pay. You know if my boss were to say to me that's enough McClellan we're going to suspend you from pay for a week, I'd say, teach me a real lesson. You know, the idea that somebody does something wrong and you suspend them with pay, is crazy. I don't know what the board is thinking."

Host Eric Reid said, "Well, obviously this has festered for a while. But I guess they figured they came back and said like these two basically weren't as bad as the other players in all this. Now I don't know if that's not enough reason but and as I said, I guess I could see them keeping their job."

Guest panelist Brenda Talent of the Show-Me-Institute said, "And maybe the contract didn't allow them to quite do that. But I would say this, what a statement, what role models are we setting up for our children when this is the kind of conflict resolution they engage in by posting comments, which are rather sophomoric on internet sites. I mean that's what really offends me. These are supposed to be administrators. They're supposed to be mentors to the teachers and they're role models for the entire district. Pretty sad comment on the district."

Host Alvin Reid said, "Well I agree and I would have, I'm one that I would have dismissed them just for being in this conversation with these people in the first place. Never mind that they said some really vile things about people. Just the fact that, you know I agree with you, in that, wait a minute, why are you even involved in this banter?"

Panelist Bill McClellan said, "And not using their names. I mean they had to be found out. It's one thing if a person that works for the district wants to stand up for the district and take on the critics. But to do all of this stuff anonymously, that, that's just wrong on many levels."

Guest panelist D.J. Wilson of KDHX was surprised that an assistant principal at a middle school would be paid over $100,000. (Everyone should now be aware that Fox's administrative salaries have been way out of line for some time.)

Brenda Talent said, "And you're not counting the benefits."

Host Alvin Reid stated that Fox wasn't one of the states lowest performing districts but that it also wasn't one of the highest. D.J. Wilson stated that Fox's Average Composite ACT Score was 23. (NOTE: DESE records for 2013 show Fox's ACT Composite at 22.3).

D.J. Wilson said, "I'd love to be a student in a classroom and someone corrects me about what I said on email. What will they say back to the teacher."

Brenda Talent then said, "Well their comments may not have risen to the level of being libelous, whereas the others might have. But again, it's just sort of, this is how you resolve conflict? We're supposed to be adults here."

Bill McClellan reminded everyone that, "This was the school board that, that one of the board member's daughters-in-law was it, who worked at McDonald's was made dietician over the schools." 

One of the guest hosts said,"I guess they thought she deserved a break today." They all had a pretty good laugh out of that comment and then another person said, "She had it her way!".

Thanks to our soon to be retired Superintendent and former school board members and some current long time board members, our district has made national news and not in a good way.

Watch the June 5, 2014 Episode of Donnybrook on KETC
Superintendent Critchlow has touted our National District of Character award as a way to garner big raises for herself while at the same time bullying parents and critics of the district. The public and the board have been fooled for quite some time and the employees and taxpayers of Fox C-6 are now paying the price.

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Quick Overview of July 22, 2014 Fox C-6 Board Workshop

Last night's school board workshop was mainly about discussing the 2014-2015 budget as the board and the district work on eliminating our deficit spending. The board approved bill payments at last night's meeting and some of the board members just received the bill payments report at the meeting. The bill payments report should have been published on the district website ahead of time for the community to review as well. Transparency has improved and will continue to improve as that was commented on by the board last night. An audio recording of the school board meeting is posted below the meeting highlights.

Meeting Highlights
  • Public Comments were not listed on the original agenda for the workshop but did have them listed on the agenda on Monday July 21.
  • There was roughly 80 to 100 people in attendance at last night's meeting.
  • There were 3 Public Comments at last night's meeting.
  • Fox's CFO John Brazeal gave a presentation on the 2014-2015 proposed budget cuts.
  • Mr. Brazeal proposed $2.25 Million dollars in budget cuts for the current year which was approved by the school board.
  • Mr. Brazeal's presentation showed that Fox's salaries are around 90% of revenue which is too high compared to other districts that are in the 80% to 85%. Fox needs to be around 80% to maintain reserves.
  • It was announced that there is a pay freeze.
  • $50,000 in savings was from the CO Admins voluntarily taking a 5% pay cut. (People I spoke with after the meeting didn't think that 5% was enough. Fox had the 2nd highest average admin salary in the state in 2013 which doesn't match our demographics and budget. The public needs to know what the two pay increases were for last year for admins to give feedback on how much the community thinks should be voluntarily cut.)
  • I believe it was Mr. Crutchley that said that they hoped that the other admins such as principals and directors would voluntarily take the same pay cut.
  • Mr. Brazeal's presentation showed the savings through various items which totaled $2.25 million dollars. (Hopefully the district will post Mr. Brazeal's presentation on the website soon.)
  • The board went into closed session after comments from Cheryl Hermann, Dave Palmer, Dan Kroupa, Vern Sullivan and John Laughlin. I will post the audio in the next day or two so the public can listen to their comments. (Hopefully the district will begin recording meetings in the near future so they can be posted on the district website for those that can't attend.)
  • Mr. Laughlin explained that the board workshops were at 5:30pm rather than 7pm because a year ago when they started them they were meeting before board meetings. (I know that they were originally working on reviewing the board polices and regulations which took a lot of time for review. Our updated policies and regulations still haven't been adopted. At the moment there are issues that need more attention.)

Overall, the meetings have become more of what you expect from a school board meeting. The board is running the meeting and not the superintendent.

I believe the school board is working on doing the right thing. Without documentation, it's difficult for them to make the decisions that need to be made and that almost everyone in the community expects them to make. Providing the school board with documentation is critical towards implementing the changes that need to occur.

Many have feared speaking out in the past. That has now changed. Full and open communication is important to making improvements and rebuilding our school district. The school board is definitely listening and working on getting things moving in the right direction.

The board has been getting a lot of emails and they are working on responding to them. If you have information or suggestions that can help improve our school district, please contact the board.

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Did Comments Linked to the Baker's Residence Violate Section 504 Law?

When I saw the first news article about Dan and Angela Baker being allowed to return to work at Fox C-6, I thought it was a joke. They had been put on paid administrative leave on June 4, 2014. Being allowed to return to work with just a "slap on the wrist" sets a really poor example for our students and our community for a National District of Character.

To say that I was disappointed by the Fox C-6 school board's decision to allow them to return to work would be an extreme understatement. Since I was the person targeted by at least one defamatory post linked to the Baker's residence so far, the boards decision just seemed extremely disrespectful. 

One of many comment linked to the Baker's residence was posted on Topix within a couple of hours after I spoke at the January 15, 2013 Fox C-6 School Board Meeting. I even stated in my Public Comments that night that I was hopeful that no more online defamatory comments would be posted against me and others in the community who voiced their concerns. I have voiced my concerns to our school board during Public Comments at school board meetings 14 times since December 14, 2010. I have asked questions about the federal investigations and District Wide Compliance Review and USDA Non-Compliance.

Both Dianne Critchlow and Dan Baker have responded on occasion to my questions dismissively.

Why would they not want the public to know about non-compliance issues that falls under their responsibilities?

Dan Baker's Position in the District
Since Dan Baker is the assistant superintendent of elementary education at Fox C-6 and is Fox's Section 504 Coordinator, his online comments were even more inappropriate because of his position. Posting comments online about parents in his position should be grounds for dismissal. His comments violate Section 504 Law which prohibits retaliating against anyone advocating for civil rights in a school district.

Dan Baker and Dianne Critchlow have both been directly involved with OCR investigations dating back to 2008 being conducted by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR). I have personally been dealing with Mr. Baker and Mrs. Brown-Critchlow on issues in our district since 2008. So directing comments against me for my efforts is retaliation. That's why I was extremely surprised when I was provided information that linked defamatory comments posted on Topix to Dan Baker's residence considering his position in our school district and his direct involvement with OCR complaints being investigated by ED OCR and USDA OCR.

I wasn't surprised by the comments linked to the Critchlow's residence. Information posted in comments from their residence was only known by a few top administrators and the cease and desist letters were requested to be sent by Superintendent Critchlow.

It's also disappointing to know that I spoke to many school board members and sent them emails with documentation regarding these issues since 2008 as well. It appears to me that they did nothing to stop it or even investigate the issues. Now they are having to scramble to rebuild the trust of the community.

Fox's School Board Needs to Learn About Section 504 Law
Our school board members need to learn about Section 504 Law and what is required of our district. They need to learn why comments like those posted by administrators in our school district in charge of federal programs or are responsible for overseeing those in charge of those programs should be a major concern.

I recommend that our Fox C-6 school board members and the public read the following Dear Colleague Letter from the U.S. Department of Education's Assistant Secretary of the Office for Civil Rights that was published on April 24, 2013. A link to that letter can be found below.

The Fox C-6 School District has become the "poster child" that this Dear Colleague Letter was intended to educate. Superintendent Critchlow has been keeping the district's OCR investigations and non-compliance violations from the public for years. So no one really knew that the district was being investigated other than those that didn't want the public to know.

Now that the Fox C-6 taxpayers and others in our school community have learned first hand how some of our school district administrators retaliate against parents in our school district, I hope they start holding our school board accountable for the actions of our administrators.



I wrote about the Dear Colleague Letter from ED OCR in May 2013 as well. You can read about it in this post:

Dear Colleague Letter On Retaliation Law from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights



It will be interesting to see how all this plays out for the Bakers and our school district as more information becomes available.



Online News Stories About the Bakers
The following news stories were published on Monday July 21, 2014 regarding the Baker's being allowed to return to work amid the internet scandal in our school district.

KMOX News Story:

KMOX Link to Fox C-6 Press Release:

Link from KMOX to other news article:

Post Dispatch Article:

Fox 2 News Story

KSDK News Story

KMOV News Story

KTRS News Story

Saturday, July 19, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Superintendent Critchlow Announces Her Early Retirement Amid Internet Scandal!

Tuesday July 15, 2014 was a big news day for Superintendent Critchlow and the Fox C-6 school district! Dianne Critchlow emailed a statement to news outlets announcing her early retirement. In her statement she said that her early retirement had nothing to do with accusations that she and other district employees harassed parents on internet message boards as reported in the KSDK news story.

I found her comments humorous knowing all that I know about the online postings on Topix and documenting and analyzing them over the past 4 years. People aren't as anonymous as they think they are and that's why it's not very smart to post things online that you wouldn't say in public.

That's why I also found it funny as to how friendly Dianne Critchlow and Dan Baker were at the May 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting. I already knew before the May 2014 school board meeting that some of the defamatory posts on Topix had been traced to their residences.

They had been contacted by their ISP's weeks before the May 2014 meeting and were asked if they could release their names after the ISP's had been subpoenaed for their account information related to comments posted on Topix. That's why the attorney had to file a motion to compel on April 14, 2014 because the owners of the accounts refused to release their information. So, stating that she was retiring early had nothing to do with accusations about the internet scandal was really funny to hear.

I guess that knowing that your name has been released due to a subpoena request related to your internet account changes how you act around those that you know must know as well. It doesn't mean that those involved aren't going to deny doing anything wrong. But, it definitely changes how they behave!

I laughed when I heard Superintendent Critchlow's statement on KSDK saying that the recent internet scandal had nothing to do with her early retirement. I also found it funny when I read in the Post Dispatch that her statement said that she had approached the board in May before the board was made aware of the allegations in the lawsuit.

The Fox C-6 school board probably didn't know about the internet allegations in mid May. But, Dianne Critchlow certainly knew that something was coming down the pike. In fact, I let the cat out of the bag when I commented on my Twitter account on March 15, 2014 that we had obtained IP addresses from Topix. I deleted my post a couple of days later so we wouldn't tip anyone off. But, I think I already had.

In March, we didn't have the account names to go along with the Topix posts. Critchlow's statement said she told the board that she was retiring early because of health issues. I could see that it might be stressful knowing that your internet account and home address had been traced to online defamatory comments. That's why I found her comments funny. For her to not know about any comments being posted online is just laughable considering my efforts to get our school board to do the right thing for the last 6 years.

Superintendent Critchlow's statement about her retirement reminds me of the time when she told KSDK that the district has enough books for all of its students. However, if you talk to parents, teachers and some principals in the district you'll find out that the district doesn't have enough books for all of our students. It just sums up all of what's been going on for a very long time in our school district. It's a very sad ending to what could have been a good career had things been handled differently.

Anyone can deny being involved in nefarious behavior. Embattled leaders do it all the time. It doesn't make their statements true. But, it looks good in print and that's what you'll be able to Google for a very long time just like the comments that were made on Topix.

I believe that the majority of the community now realizes that they haven't been getting what they've been paying for over the last 9 years. They definitely haven't witnessed behavior that suggests that our district leadership represents a National District of Character that has been so heavily promoted by Superintendent Brown-Critchlow during her tenure.

Here are some of the recent news media stories related to Dianne Critchlow's retirement announcement:






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?


Thursday, July 3, 2014

Some Investigative Reporting Would Reveal Systemic Problems

You have to wonder why it would take a school district more than 5 years to comply with a Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR).

You may also wonder why it would take more than two years before a school district would start working towards becoming compliant with the USDA's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) federal regulations and guidelines after being found non-compliant in August 2011.

So, why does it take so long for a school district to meet the obligations that school district administrators agreed to do when they signed their name on a Resolution Agreement that was dated May 1, 2009?

Fox C-6 isn't the only school district in the country that's signed a Resolution Agreement that is still being "monitored" by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR). School districts have been signing Resolution Agreements with ED OCR for years with the understanding that once the district agrees to and signs a Resolution Agreement, the case that was being investigated by ED OCR goes into a "monitoring" status.

What does "monitoring" mean?

This typically means that ED OCR will "monitor" the district's progress on meeting the obligations that the school district and ED OCR mutually agreed that the school district would do in the Resolution Agreement by occasionally sending out monitoring letters to the school district informing them of their progress in meeting those obligations. The Resolution Agreement typically spells out in detail what the district agrees to do in order to become compliant with Federal laws and regulations. A Resolution Agreement also specifies dates that the district agrees to complete the items spelled out in the agreement. The school district and ED OCR mutually agree upon the dates before the district signs the agreement as well.

Most cases investigated by ED OCR are closed in less than 180 days. So, you have to wonder why Fox C-6 is still being "monitored" for a Resolution Agreement that district administrators signed on May 1, 2009.

So, why hasn't Fox fully complied with a Resolution Agreement that was signed more than 5 years ago?

Well, for starters, when a school district doesn't meet the deadlines that they agreed to in a Resolution Agreement, ED OCR simply extends the deadline and continues to "monitor" the school district. ED OCR checks in with the school district when they don't meet the new deadline and simply sends the district an updating monitoring letter with a new deadline telling them to meet the new deadline. It may be a year before ED OCR checks in on the district. If the district hasn't met their agreed upon obligations, ED OCR sets a new deadline again and the cycle continues.

You're probably wondering, how long is this allowed to continue before the federal agency enforces an agreement?

That's a really good question. An ED OCR attorney told me that they have cases that have been in "monitoring" status for more than 10 years. So it's no wonder why districts can get by with doing little to nothing in meeting their obligations in a Resolution Agreement. It would seem that if ED OCR actually enforced their Resolution Agreements by providing consequences for a school district for not meeting their deadlines that ED OCR wouldn't have a case load that may take decades or more to close out.

It seems pretty simple. But, there's a lot of red tape that the federal agencies have to go through in order to use their only true method of enforcement that they have and that is the removal of a school district's federal funding. In order to remove a school district's federal funding, it ultimately has to be approved by Congress. That's probably why school district administrators don't seem too concerned when they receive letters informing them that their school district has been found Non-Compliant by a federal agency. They simply inform their school board that they received a really long letter from a federal agency and that the attorney found several mistakes in the letter. Don't worry, the attorneys will take care of it.

Perhaps the Missouri School Board Association's training that all new school board members are required to attend doesn't go into much depth about the federal laws that school district administrators are supposed to follow. That's just my opinion based upon conversations that I've had with several school board members over the last 6 years. So, it's no wonder when a school board isn't too concerned with the fact that the Fox C-6 School District was found Non-Compliant by USDA OCR in August 2011. It also hasn't been that much of a concern that the district hasn't been able to meet the requirements of an ED OCR Resolution Agreement that was signed by district administrators in May 2009. And, it probably hasn't been much of a concern that the Fox C-6 School District has been under a District Wide Compliance Review by ED OCR since March 2010.

It's certainly easy for school district administrators to get by for years without having to meet the obligations that a district agrees to do with federal agencies. It's also very easy for them to ignore letters of non-compliance.

Should not meeting these obligations or being found non-compliant by federal agencies be a concern for our community or our school board?

Does not meeting these obligations violate school board policy?

How long should federal agencies extend deadlines in Resolution Agreements before they enforce them?

There's been a huge paper trail generated by the federal agencies as they have been investigating and "monitoring" the Resolution Agreement and non-compliance findings in our school district over the past 5+ years. One would think that by having some of the highest paid administrators in the state of Missouri that they would have been able to manage to come in compliance and fulfill the obligations of the Resolution Agreement they signed by now.

I covered this issue before in a July 2013 article titled:

Perhaps now is a good time for someone to begin looking into why the Fox C-6 School District still has an open District Wide Compliance Review from 2010 and why the district is still being "monitored" by ED OCR for a Resolution Agreement that was signed by district administrators back in May 2009. 

A google search for Resolution Agreements will reveal many more cases across the country. You can also find ED OCR's Case Processing Manual and read about out how they are supposed to handle their investigations and case monitoring.

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

A New Era in the Fox C-6 School District

The June 30, 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting was very different than the board meetings that I've attended over the last several years. First, there were more than 200 people in attendance at the meeting. This was the largest turnout of citizens that I've ever seen at a school board meeting.

For many people attending the board meeting, this was the first time they've ever attended a school board meeting. It's important to stay involved in your school district and ensure that your concerns and suggestions are heard. Thank you for attending and showing your support and desire to see changes in our school district.

Controversy and Budget Concerns Awaken Community
A little controversy and budget concerns within our school district appears to have awakened the community to the problems that have been plaguing the Fox C-6 School District for quite some time. It's going to take time to get things turned around but I believe we have enough new and concerned school board members to lead the school district in a positive direction. Board president John Laughlin addressed the public on many issues of concern during the meeting.

Public Comments
Four individuals made Public Comments at the board meeting. Kevin Harding, Rich Simpson (myself), James Osia and Matt Hay. It was good to see more people from the community voicing their concerns to our school board. I believe that the concern of the community is making the school board more responsive. The school board is realizing that they work for the citizens and taxpayers of the school district and not for the superintendent.

During my public comments I renewed my request to the school board to have open public discussions with the school board prior to board meetings like they do in the Rockwood School District.

I suggested that the school board and/or our acting superintendent request a State Audit to ensure that our district is following good accounting procedures and processes.

School Board Members Respond to State Audit Request
Board president John Laughlin and board member Cheryl Hermann responded to my public comments about requesting a state audit. Cheryl Hermann told the public that the district had a state audit before and that they "didn't find anything out of place". Perhaps Mrs. Hermann hasn't read Fox's 2002 State Audit Report for quite some time.

I've posted a link to the 2002 state auditor's report below her response to my public comments. The first sentence starting on page two of the 2002 Fox C-6 State Audit Report, states:
"The following problems were discovered as a result of an audit conducted by our office of the Fox C-6 School District." 
Here's what Cheryl Hermann told the public at the school board meeting in response to my request that the district ask for a State Audit:
"Yes, I would like to point out that we have had the state auditor here, and that was back when we had a lot of concerns about our operating procedures. Even before she came we cleaned them up. As a school board and as a district when she came in she didn't find anything out of place. Since then we continue to have a yearly audit to make sure that our procedures are done above board and honestly."
It's obvious that Mrs. Hermann doesn't understand the difference between the yearly audit the district pays for and the rigor at which a State Audit is conducted. I don't believe that Mr. Laughlin has read many of the state audit reports to understand how in depth they really are compared to the district's annual audit. However, he said that he would look into the possibility of having a state audit. Cheryl Hermann's lack of understanding of the district's annual audit probably contributed to her surprise about the financial state of our school district at the June workshop.


After reading the 2002 State Audit, do you think Cheryl Hermann's comments about Fox's last State Audit are accurate?

It would appear that Cheryl Hermann was not aware of the fact that the 2002 audit did in fact discover problems as a result of the audit. It was a nice statement to toss out for the public. However, her statement was not accurate.

It would also help the community and the school board if they reviewed the Rockwood School District's Annual Budget Report. The Executive Summary in Rockwood's Annual Budget report explains things very well. Fox needs to have a similar report and perhaps we will be getting one in the future from Fox's new Chief Financial Officer John Brazeal.

Audio of Public Comments at the June 30 Board Meeting
You can listen to my audio recording of the Public Comments from the Monday June 30 Fox C-6 school  board meeting by clicking on the link below. The audio levels were adjusted to help you hear everyone's comments since everyone doesn't speak into the microphones at school board meetings.




Some notable points about the meeting:
  • More than 200 citizens attended the school board meeting.
  • School board president John Laughlin answered patron's questions during Public Comments.
  • The school board procedurally approved the 2014-2015 budget but plans to be making amendments to the budget over the next several months.
  • School board president John Laughlin responded to Kevin Harding and informed the public that the school board did not request/authorize sending out Cease and Desist letters to citizens in the community. (NOTE: Board policy allows the superintendent to use legal counsel for school matters without prior authorization for most issues.)
  • The board has been operating without a Chief Financial Officer for several months.
  • The new CFO (John Brazeal) will start on July 9th.
  • No administrators told the audience that they could leave prior to Public Comments. (Typically Dianne Critchlow would inform the audience that now was their chance to leave the meeting just prior to Public Comments.)
  • KSDK, KMOX and Fox 2 News were at the board meeting and interviewed board president John Laughlin and citizens attending the meeting.