A battery of lawyers met in Waterbury Superior Court Tuesday morning to negotiate the litigation process arising out of the state takeover of city schools requested by the Bridgeport Board of Education and Mayor Bill Finch. One option is sending the case to the Connecticut Supreme Court. Lawyers representing the parties will meet again Friday morning in court to try to reach a resolution about the proper court venue to hear the complaints. The campaign camp of Democratic mayoral candidate Mary-Jane Foster is eternally optimistic (can you hear the symphony?) the Supremes will hear the case, as it states in the news release below. Norm Pattis, the attorney representing plaintiff Bridgeport Board of Education members, told OIB however a final determination has not yet been made about referring the case to the Supremes.
CT Post story www.ctpost.com/news/article/Board-of-Education-case-is-continued-2064172.php
From Democratic mayoral candidate Mary-Jane Foster:
Judge: Bridgeport BOE Did Not Receive Training Required by Statute; Sends Case to State Supreme Court to Determine Constitutionality of Takeover
Democratic candidate for mayor of Bridgeport Mary-Jane Foster scored a big victory today when the defendants at Superior Court in Waterbury agreed that the Bridgeport Board of Education did not receive the training required by statute. Foster has stated repeatedly that the State Board of Education did not follow the procedures outlined in the State statute requiring that the local Board of Education members receive educational training prior to any reconstitution by the State.
In addition, Judge Agati ordered that Ms. Foster’s Board of Education case be referred to the State Supreme Court with the following stipulations, agreed upon by all parties:
1. The Bridgeport Board of Education minutes leading up to the vote to dissolve are to be included as a part of the official record;
2. The State Board of Education meeting minutes pertaining to the vote to reconstitute the Bridgeport Board of Education are to be included as a part of the official record; and
3. The Bridgeport Board of Education did not receive the training required by statute.
“I am encouraged with today’s ruling, which moves this case to the proper venue for determining the constitutionality of the State’s unprecedented actions,” stated Foster. “I have always maintained that there should be an election and unlike the mayor, I am against the disenfranchisement of voters. I look forward to an expeditious resolution of this matter by the State Supreme Court.”
Foster’s campaign filed an injunction earlier this month seeking to ensure that the Bridgeport Board of Education candidates who are running on her citywide slate are placed on the primary ballot on September 13, if they submit the required certified petitions. In the complaint, plaintiffs Robert Walsh, Charles Coviello, George Pipkin, III, and Pertrinea Cash-Deedon v State Board of Education, et al. sought:
1. A declaratory ruling that Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 10-223e(h) is unconstitutional;
2. A declaratory ruling that the dissolution of the Bridgeport Board of Education was improper and in violation of the requirements of the Statute;
3. An ex parte injunction ordering the Democratic Registrar of Voters [of Bridgeport] to accept the petitions of the Board of Education Candidates and to place their names on the primary ballot;
4. A temporary injunction preventing the State Board of Education and Acting Commissioner of Education from taking further action to reconstitute the Bridgeport of Education.
5. Any other relief that is appropriate.
In July, Foster issued letters to the Bridgeport delegation and the leadership of the Connecticut General Assembly calling for the creation a Special Master to oversee education reform in Bridgeport. Such action would not only trigger funding that could help alleviate some of the local education budget woes but also would allow the State to avoid subverting the will of the electorate by not overturning the elected Board of Education.
Soon after the votes are counted in most elections and primaries, the winner and the loser start their acceptance or concession speech with the phrase, “The Voters Have Spoken!” The actions of: Finch, Ramos, Colemen; the six (6) members of the BOE; and the five (5) members of the State Board of Education, are a clear violation of the people’s First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech. I know quite a bit about this Constitutional right.
We are exercising that very right to free speech, Joel.
Congratulations to Mary-Jane (and to the others on the BOE the night of the vote to dissolve the BOE) who had read the new State law, and called attention to the ‘details’ set out in the law. Apparently one Judge agreed with the attention to detail. Now it will be interesting to see what multiple judges weighing in on the Supreme Court have to say.
2011-12 school bells will be ringing in a couple weeks. Wonder how things are in the Superintendent’s bunker? And exactly what direction did the departing Board leave with Superintendent Ramos when they washed their hands of ongoing participation in guiding the schools? If all of the new appointees have been sworn in, will they meet before the Supreme Court decides?
Fascinating leadership and governance that Bill Finch, working on this project since late 2010 at the State level, has exhibited as events unfold. Where does the buck stop at this moment for the Bridgeport Education institution, the largest single employer of people and the largest % of budgeted expense annually? Would anyone chance a guess on what Superintendent Ramos’ response might be as to his compass at this moment?
This should be about the education received by the students. This is turning into a political runaround with no one winning especially the kids. This board of education and current government has turned the schools into repellent schools rather than magnet schools.
MJF will call into the live TV show “Bridgeport Now” at 8:30pm tonight to discuss news appearing in today’s CT Post.
Also on the show, our renowned historian will discuss history in Bridgeport.
By the way, we are open to and waiting for Mayor Finch’s office to get back to us on appearing on the TV show. We want to be fair to all candidates and all have appeared except the Republican candidate, who will do so soon.
You offer some good questions. How can we ask our children to follow the rules when the adults don’t? How can a super-majority of six board members claim the board was dysfunctional? They would have to be Dysfunctional Literates to make this claim. Why is it in the state notes the Bridgeport leaders were fearful of a swing of the pendulum in the upcoming bd. of ed. elections? Why was the state board “arbitrary and capricious” by not following their own statute in allowing a reconstitution of the the board? Why can’t everyone agree that the best solution is a Special Master implementation similar to the Windham School District?
And finally, drum roll please, why would a Mayor make a statement that says democracy doesn’t always work and we should disenfranchise the people’s right to vote?
1) If the teachers take furloughs, what do you do with their classes??! Pay a substitute (which won’t save much money) or split classes up, having 30 or 35 children in a class with no books or chairs to sit on?
2) The real reason the BOE was dissolved is the underlying fear more WFP candidates would be elected to the BOE–Mario would lose control.
3) A Mayor would make an asinine statement about democracy not always working, etc, because his back is against the wall–and he is desperate …
*** After years of no or slow positive change in Bpt schools, I welcomed the State takeover. Not excited about some of the new education picks but you can’t always have your cake & eat it too! However, this challenge concerning the BOE seems nothing more than political positioning for an election year and in the long run, “not about the kids!” Time will tell & in the end, good or bad the kids will carry the burden of proof, no? *** TIME ***