Sacred Heart University professor Jacqueline Kelleher was elected president of the Board of Education Monday night at an organizational meeting of the newly elected school board in which the opposition bloc didn’t waste any time continuing the controversy that marred the school board prior to state control of city schools that was overturned by the Connecticut Supreme Court. The four minority coalition board members including three elected on the Working Families Party line questioned the legality of Leticia Colon serving on the board. Colon resigned from the City Council on Friday because the City Charter prohibits members of the legislative body from serving on another city board.
Riding the legal assertion of retired Superior Court Judge Carmen Lopez, a supporter of the school board’s minority coalition, WFP board members Maria Pereira, Sauda Baraka, John Bagley and Democrat Bobby Simmons suggested Colon had essentially resigned from the school board when she received the oath of office for the City Council last December following her election win in November. The elected school board at the time was in limbo as a result of the July 2011 school board decision to dissolve itself in favor of state control.
The organizational meeting was chaired by Mayor Bill Finch who opened by urging the school board to “move forward in a collegial and cooperative manner on behalf of the students.” Once Kelleher, nominated by Democrat Ken Moales, was elected board president she assumed the chair’s role in the organizational meeting and an olive branch was presented by the majority vote. Moales proposed Baraka for board vice chair, an offering that she rejected. It appears diplomacy is not a priority with this minority coalition, damn the consequences.
Moales was then elected vice chair and Democrat Hernan Illingworth secretary.
Former State Senator Ernie Newton who was among 75 people in attendance, criticized the action of the opposition bloc. “They’re playing right into the hands of Finch.”
The mayor has remarked on many occasions the cooperative arrangement that took place under the state-appointed school board, an argument he’ll continue to make as he urges voters to approve his proposal to appoint school board members in a charter revision question in November.
Picking up where they left off in July 0f 2011, it didn’t take long for the opposition bloc to weigh in Monday night. Shortly after Finch opened the organizational meeting urging cooperation Pereira, Simmons and Baraka questioned the legality of Colon’s service on the school board. They called for a postponement of the meeting until a legal decision was offered by City Attorney Mark Anastasi who happened to be in attendance.
Finch didn’t waste any time reminding the board members of the Connecticut Supreme Court decision that reseated the elected school board once the results of the special election were certified, a declaration echoed by Anastasi who declared that Colon has a rightful spot as a school board member. Anastasi cited decisions made by Superior Court Judge Salvatore Agati as well as the Connecticut Supreme Court.
Pior to Anastasi speaking, Pereira urged a postponement of the meeting saying “there’s a question hanging over how (Colon) could serve on the school board.”
Finch responded, “I would urge you to try to move forward in a collegial and cooperative manner. Judge Agati has ruled.”
Moales also chimed in, directing remarks to Pereira and company: “Stop the game, let’s take care of business.”
In opening remarks Finch characterized the school system as “a remarkable time in the history of the city … we’ve seen many changes take place in curriculum, staffing, school demeanor and student safety.” The mayor encouraged the new board to “Work together in the name of progress for the good of the city’s children. Nothing less than that should be expected for the city’s future.”
After the organizational meeting was completed a number of residents from the audience either in public remarks to the board or privately afterwards encouraged board members to improve the discourse on behalf of the students.
The minority voting bloc on the school board challenged the state takeover of city school’s that was reversed by the Connecticut Supreme Court. Judging by the first meeting of this elected body many issues will be decided by a 5-4 vote.
Superintendent of Schools Paul Vallas, the turnaround specialist, attended his first Bridgeport school board meeting with an elected body.
Leticia Colon issued a statement to OIB on Monday:
“I decided to resign my seat on the City Council, and will resume my term on the Broad of Education. While this has been a very difficult decision to make, I feel an obligation and responsibility to serve the children of our City. I have been heartened by the progress I have seen taking place during the past year under Superintendent Vallas and the appointed members of the Board of Education. I look forward to joining my previous colleagues, and the newly elected members of the broad, to continue working together to create a better education environment for our City’s children.”
Welcome to Bridgeport, Mr. Vallas.
Finch will Fluck-up the BoE so bad Vallas will head for the hills.
And after Finch gets his Charter and raises our taxes, he’ll tell you “that’s what you wanted when you voted for the Charter,” “I gave you a new Charter and Paul Vallas!”
Did the shit hit the fan yet?
The Frothy Four better knock it off or we will have a special master or a reconstituted board legally following the statute.
I feel they should be taking out a state ethics violation against Moales.
Olive branch could have been some olive oil to grease the skids instead of the kids.
I agree wholeheartedly with the choice of Kelleher. It’s almost a sigh of relief that in putting her in the Chairperson’s seat, the BOE has shown that indeed the interests of the education of the students in the BPSS are not a trivial matter.
It is now up to Kelleher to deal with the dual-agenda issue. From what I have seen and read she has what it takes to stay the course likely better than anyone else on the BOE.
We are counting on you, Jackie. Don’t screw this up!
And I agree with you completely, she’s got every qualification to be a good fit for BOE Chair. Now if only Ms. Pereira would stop grandstanding and get over herself. This is not her horse and pony show, this is about the betterment of our educational system. Congrats to Ms. Kelleher!
Pereira just needs to change the order in which her internal mechanisms operate. Thinking should come before acting! And some thoughts should remain in the inner monologue because they make for pedestrian dialogue!
If only you would resign from your position on the Mayor’s staff, Godiva. You are clearly his mouthpiece!
But wouldn’t we all agree there is not enough free speech in BPT and questioning the DTC princess mentality we see with Leticia and Christina has to be done? The real decisions are still being made, such as the demolition of GE for a lucrative school project there, behind closed doors. None of the inefficiencies in the Board of Ed have been addressed other than a new face is put on the Board. Just more layering and expenditures on top of a festering sore.
Is Kelleher a Calamarian?
Finch is right. The board members need to check their egos at the door.
Yes indeed anna, there’s not enough room in the chambers for some of these overinflated egos.
Now that Rev. Moales has been ELECTED by the voters of Bridgeport to serve on the Bridgeport Board Of Education, I now expect to see Rev. Moales to show leadership in fighting to allow members of his church to keep their right to vote in the future to vote for BOE members. The right for blacks to have the right to vote was fought for by black ministers all over this country so Rev. Moales could have the right to have people vote for him. It is now the time for Rev. Kenneth Moales Jr. to make it known to the members of his church and to the voters of Bridgeport he supports their right to vote and for them to VOTE NO on the mayor’s charter change. Rev. Moales, how many masters will you serve?
How are B’port blacks denied the right to vote, Mackey? This is 2012 … not 1963.
yahooy, blacks, whites and Latinos will ALL lose their right to vote for members of the Bridgeport Board Of Education if Mayor Finch’s charter change is adopted, a right that was taken from them by Mayor Finch and the state but their right to vote for BOE members was restored by the State Court.
You should have said that in the first place!
The Working Family bloc has an obligation to demand from the City Attorney a written legal opinion and we will see if Ms. Kelleher will insist on the same.
Members of the Board received a legal opinion from a retired Superior Court Judge questioning the legality of Ms. Colon’s actions. This could all go away if the City Attorney issues a formal legal opinion but the CA is balking and that is probably because he knows he cannot craft a defensible opinion.
I cannot determine if Finch’s comments are simply sophomoric or totally moronic. Probably some combination of the two.
The judge did not rule Ms. Colon MUST return to the board. The city charter states all board members must be electors and residents of the city of Bridgeport unless provided for otherwise in the charter. Are the mayor and CA suggesting if Ms. Colon had moved out of the city, the city would still have to seat her on the board? Or would they instruct Ms. Colon she would be in contempt of court if she refused to move back? If Ms. Colon had her name removed from the registry, would the mayor and CA demand the registrar of voters reinstate her over her objections because of Judge Agati’s ruling or would they simply say she should be placed on the BOE contrary to the charter?
I realize my examples are extreme but that is how the law works. Interpreting the law is not simply what is convenient.
And the city had plenty of time to seek a clarifying order from the judge but failed to do so out of fear as to what he might say.
The mayor and CA will continue to force their will down the throats of the BOE until the BOE shows some independence.
Members of the board have a legal and fiduciary responsibility to pass balanced budgets. They can legally be held personally liable if they fail to do so.
Is it unreasonable for them to make sure all members are legally entitled to vote prior to allowing them to do so? If the city wants a functioning BOE the City Attorney should immediately produce a formal legal opinion and begin to act responsibly rather than continuing their might is right attitude.
Oh yeah, I forgot. VOTE NO to the charter question.
Just Vote NO!
And yes, Mr. Walsh … everyone should vote NO on the Charter revision. And start demanding the Mayor RESIGN!
I am no fan of the returning BOE members nor am I a fan of Rev. Moales. I do believe the election of Professor Kelleher was a good choice to lead the new BOE.
It’s time for ALL of the fighting to stop. It’s time for ALL the BOE members to start thinking about the kids and I mean the kids. The entire BOE will say they are in this for the kids but we all know that is bullshit. It’s time to mean what you say. No matter what happens with the charter vote, this board will sit until 2015. We do not need three years of infighting and bullshit. Here is hoping both sides do their jobs for the kids.
When you have someone like Rev. Moales on the Board whose family is making a nice buck off of his position with millions in contracts for what are private religious schools, how can you expect the fighting to stop? He is ripping off the city and his combative and bullying attitude does not belong on the Board. Maybe he should go work for Linda McMahon’s WWE … he looks like he would fit right in.
BRG, I fully agree with your assessment of Moales. He seems more concerned about renaming Harding High School for some local person.
Today is the 11th anniversary of the twin towers incident along with the Pentagon incident and the plane crash in Pennsylvania.
Today 11 years ago 343 firefighters, numerous police officers, EMTs and 3000-plus people died in the airplane bombings.
To the public safety services and their families I say May God Bless you and your families for your sacrifices.
To the civilian families May God bless you and your children. I for one will never forget.
I was impressed to see things moving forward last night at the first meeting!
Some interesting comments made last night and some, not sure if new procedures. Members of the public get two minutes to speak and BOE members can’t respond. And according to bylaws, any member of the public who verbally attacks any BOE member during the meeting will never be able to speak again at the meetings. How loosely would verbal attack be defined?
Then former independent BOE candidate mentioned there were sitting members of the BOE who had conflict of interest, and she went into specifics.
Lennie,
There was another City meeting last evening other than the BOE. Unfortunately the City Council Budget and Appropriations Committee toils alone with little public oversight. Last night Angel DePara, co-chair, called the meeting to order around 6:35 PM and approved a motion to close the meeting about one hour later. Present in addition to DePara were co-chair Bob Curwen, Council President Tom McCarthy, member Sue Brannelly and Amy V-Paniccia. Tom Sherwood, director of OPM, was present to speak for the three agenda items–all having to do with various levels of authorization and approval of eight separate projects that have the City paying a portion to be funded by bonding.
The good news is though a reasonably thick packet of material was provided to the Committee, there were questions that could not be answered from the paperwork. Most notable was new digital signage for the Arena with total costs of $2.6 Million, for which the City is being asked to provide $1 Million. THE ONLY MATERIAL FOR THIS REQUEST WAS A PHOTO!!! B&A members have been asking for more info, provided to them in advance of meetings, with parties from the various projects present to cover details, and not presented regularly at the last minute to handle some grant deadline. I have heard them say that before. Last night they procedurally kept all three matters alive until Monday evening, previous to the Council meeting where they will reconvene and deal with a vote on the three agenda matters.
One of the bondings has to do with Sikorsky Airport and with funding improvements through bonding over 20 years or more. The B&A does not ask the hard question as to why the Airport management continues to operate with $1.1 million of expenses but only $700,000 of revenue. Why are City taxpayers funding an operation that used to be self-supporting, but since this administration, is running annual deficits? And we should bond funds for years into the future?
In between they passed over the standing item of “monthly financial report.” No report for July, and none yet for August though we know they can print one any time they decide to do so. (The Charter revision would have them supply such a report in time for their meeting each month on the second Monday.)
Tom Sherwood has handed all the details to the auditors. Reportedly the Acting Finance Director was not present at the meeting (as the B&A expected) because she was meeting with the auditors. It would be really special if B&A asked the City to provide a final 2012 report of revenues, expenses and variances as fully provided to the external auditors. IT WOULD LIKELY BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT PROVIDED TO THE CITY CLERK AND B&A IN JULY (as fully advised by the warning language on the report). Of course that is what would make such a line item report very interesting at this time. Hide and seek is the name of this game. It is not fair, but must be pursued. By the way, as a participant of Budget Oversight Bridgeport for over two years now, we are currently looking for other folks to join and learn about the fiscal machinery. Time will tell.
THe majority on the Board clearly don’t care about the people in Bridgeport who go without.
More BS with the “new” board of Ed … Getting those WFP people off the board is unquestionably necessary and it’s obvious they’re only interested in pursuing their party’s political agenda than developing a meaningful approach to education in the city.
Their obstructionist agenda, unwillingness to compromise and inability to effect change will be the reason voters approve the charter change and give appointing powers to the mayor … as they should.
I really don’t care how many of you old guys don’t agree with me. This board is a joke and I’m tired of paying oppressive taxes because they can’t get their act together.
Brick,
What part of your tax bill pays for BOE expenses currently? Did their dissonance have much to do with your oppressive taxes, or is more due to a Mayor with an unclear fiscal agenda, and an administration that fails to provide basic budget info more than 50% of the time to the public, and a City that will require qualifications to be on a BOE in the future if the revised Charter is passed, but has no qualifications for people handling fiscal decisions? I am not kidding. The lack of a qualified Board of Finance is our City’s biggest joke and one reason for “oppressive taxes.” Come on over to a B&A meeting. Your blood pressure will no longer be tested by the rhetoric and prickliness. Help the City look for change where the grossest mishandling of public funds occurs. No genuine check or balance mechanism for lack of info, for lack of training, for lack of legislative support, for failure to utilize public input. WOW!!! Time will tell.
Firstly, I know plenty about what goes on in the B&A meetings. I don’t need to be there, there’s already an armchair politician sitting in the cheap seats constantly complaining about fiscal reporting … you! Besides, it’s my contention mishandling by the BoE of greater than 40% of the budget is directly responsible for the outrageous taxes in Bridgeport. There are plenty of other areas for improvement, sure; but the board of ed is the biggest single source of wasted tax dollars in this city without question.
Beyond that, realize you’re looking for audited 2012 revenue and expense analysis yet that type of reporting typically takes about 3 months in any public organization at the end of the fiscal year (which was only 2 months ago!). You act like there’s some kind of neglect, when in reality this is a normal timeframe.
Brick,
You are wrong on multiple accounts. Please read carefully:
1) You indicate oppressive property taxes are due to the Bridgeport Education system yet the City pays only about $40 million towards education expense. The rest is from CT-ECS, State and Federal Grants, and other grant funds. Forty million is less than 20% of City operations side budget where ghost positions and expenses bloat the mil rate.
2) If the City Charter has said there should be monthly fiscal reporting for over 20 years it is clear as to intention, isn’t it? In other words does Mark Anastasi have to offer an opinion? But Mayor Finch, his Acting Finance Director(s) and OPM head have trouble performing that duty even half of the time. Look at the numbers, Brick!
That is not accountable behavior on the part of this administration by my standards, is it by yours?
(Why didn’t the City ask the Charter Review group to change this requirement if it was so onerous? Because it is routinely done in other cities.)
3) Have you gone to the Bridgeport Public Schools site in the past week and seen the information about the school budget posted? If not it is time to replace your unfounded charges with some facts. Where is the 40% of the education budget for last year or the coming year that is wasted and why? If the City number was around $12,000 per student currently (excluding grants that cost the local taxpayer nothing), 40% would be $4,800. Can you find a way to educate 20,000 students for $7,600 per year?
4) Neither you nor I are accountants and neither of us claim to be. But I have been asking for only the monthly financial report, not an audited report as you suggest. Those do not take three months to prepare, though I will admit closing a year may involve more adjustments than do routine monthly reports. So my request is entirely reasonable and possible, yet you argue against it. Where are you getting your information?
Are you part of the City financial reporting machine? If you are you know better than what you are suggesting. If you are not, open your mind to different facts than you currently consume. New facts and a new reality might change your opinions. I am not the tax oppressor. Failing to regularly inform yourself about City business. Failing to vote regularly is oppressive behavior. Wallowing in ignorance is oppressive. Time will tell.
Actually, I have an accounting and finance degree with over 10 years experience in corporate and government accounting.
40% – Page 33
www .bridgeportct.gov/OfficeofPolicyMgmt/Documents/2012%20Adopted/BudgetSummary2012.pdf
45% – Page 57 (education expressed as a percentage of total expenditures)
1) Could the city government be leaner … sure. However, the BoE has substantially more bloat and ghost positions than the city ever could. It’s where old politicians get put out to pasture.
2) Monthly reporting is performed, doesn’t mean that unaudited figures should be disbursed to the public. Especially since they are full of timing issues and performing annual accruals on a monthly basis to provide the kind of reporting you are clamoring about is completely inappropriate and only goes to show you are definitely not a finance guy and lack the essential knowledge to even understand the processes involved.
3) The cost to the city as a percentage is 40%, the supporting detail is above. I never suggested the entire BoE operating revenue was based on that figure. Yes, I have seen the BoE budget and it’s great they actually post it …
4) To be knowledgeable about the working of the city government is not just the right, but should be the duty of every citizen. You are wrong however to think asking for unaudited monthly public disclosure of all financial transactions in the city is either simple or practical. NO organization, business or government agency is going to publicly disclose unaudited financial statements. The annual close takes over a month for even a private institution, government institutions even longer, up to 3 months. Then auditors come in and their review can take over a month. Accuracy in the final account is paramount and in large organizations it is a complex professional business. You can harp all you want from the cheap seats and clamor for updates, but other than questioning specific projects on a small scale it is completely unreasonable of you to be asking for that type of reporting on a monthly basis!
Look, I’m born, raised, educated and I work in Bridgeport. I’m a taxpayer as well as financial supporter of our teams, the arts and entertainment, and spend a lot of time at the ice rink and parks. I want a responsive city government that provides a quality education, safety and provides services to its citizens as efficient and effective as possible. Furthermore I’m 35 years out from retirement so I’m even more invested because I’ll still be here dealing with this after you’re long gone. So don’t dare suggest I’m apathetic or ignorant about what’s happening in my city. I honestly applaud your efforts to dutifully watch the proceedings of the city government, however there’s a difference between being a hawk and an old goat. You’re an extremist and consistent naysayer always looking for something wrong and not acknowledging the good. It’s okay to criticize, but if everything is wrong every time maybe you should take a look at yourself.
Brick, what do you mean by Old Guys? I am proud to say I fall into the category of Old Guy. I suggest if you are tired of oppressive taxes, you join JML and myself at budget hearings and take a more proactive stance on taxes. Blogging is easy, attending meetings takes an effort. If us old guys can do it then you young people can do it also.
By old guys? I’m suggesting you and JML’s birth certificates were written on a scroll … in Roman numerals! hahaha
I mean you were old ‘n’ grumpy 10 years ago when I used to volunteer for you in the Babe Ruth league!
Seriously though, if I thought attending meetings was the best way to effect policy change I would go. However, it’s a waste of time because this is Bridgeport and private sit-downs are the best way to shake and bake!
Brick, my birth certificate is written on a stone tablet.
Hahahahaha! Cheers!
Brick, if you were one of my coaches in Babe Ruth, then you know what a nice even-tempered guy I was. I am glad to see you got a degree and to see you on the blog. Maybe one day we will meet up and discuss old times. I promises not to brink up shoeless Joe Jackson who was a kid I coached.
It’s important for people to attend the BOE meetings, especially parents. Last night’s turnout was not bad. More people should attend. As to location being far away, you’re never going to make everyone happy about location.
Suggestion: why not provide a school bus for parents, to and from the meeting, and maybe four stops in the city. More involvement by the public can help save money and reduce taxes.
Great suggestion.
Bricks are used to build walls.
Bricks are used to separate things not bring them together.
This Brick is just a Finch apologist and only throws bricks and does not use them to build things up.
All you are is just another brick in the wall.
Brick wall … that’s where the nickname comes from! Bob the prognosticator! Nice!
Seriously though, I’m no Finch groupie! A lot of things this administration or the DTC does I don’t agree with.
Most of the discussions on OIB however I felt were one sided that needed to have a different perspective. That’s why I’m here stirring things up because I don’t agree that some of the ideas put forth here are in the best long-term interest for the city I love. Unlike you Mr. Troll, I’m not eligible to retire and move to Florida for like another 30+ years. So I have even more of a vested interest in the future of the city.
Of course you do, Brick … you have a nice cushy job with Finch.
I don’t work for the city … and since you’re what, about 85 now, you don’t either. So bugger off! How about you sprout wings out of yer arse ‘n’ fly south!?!? hahaha
Thank you for revealing your “accounting and finance degree” as that indicates a facility with fiscal reporting. You also note “10 years experience in corporate and government accounting” so you are at least in your early to mid 30s. If you were employed by some level of government, you probably experienced some level of internal controls, whether this came from “internal auditors on staff” or IG inspections, etc. at other levels and departments. Now, at risk of your accusing me of negativity, I will repeat, our City eliminated “internal auditors” some years ago though “annual budget documents” continued to report what was a lie. Too negative? What if that is objective fact, confirmed by the President of the City Council? I am a proponent of “checks and balance” and point out where they are missing. Too negative for you?
Now as to numbers where you refer me to 40% – page 33 and 45% page 57. What I have been saying is the City notes several types of BOE expenses on a pie chart on Council amended budget (p. 38) that total nearly $253 Million out of a total City budget of $511. That indicates public school expenses are approximately 49.5% of the Council approved and amended budget. (The monthly report indicated three line items totaling over $243 Million for last year, not far off from the pie chart.) However the City property taxpayer gets a big helping hand from the State of CT through ECS funds, Federal nutrition funds and other governmental transfers. Currently more than 80% of those expenses are NOT FUNDED by City property taxpayers. We fund 20% or less. And that percentage decreases even further when one begins to add the programs funded by grants worth tens of millions each year. None of these come from City property tax revenues.
Take a look again. And look at the Bridgeport Public Schools postings from the past two weeks. They will now cover grants programs in the 2012-13 fiscal year, something the BOE did not get in the past. And the number of employees funded is also shown. That is new. The public is entitled to OPEN, ACCOUNTABLE and TRANSPARENT procedure. That is a positive statement, Brick. Where’s the negative? If you disagree, once again, my phone number is 203-259-9642 and I will be happy to discuss the subject with you. Titles like “hawk” or “old goat” serve no good purpose in this dialogue. Nor is accusing someone of being “an extremist or consistent naysayer.” In the short post above, your “thin skin” is showing.
Put up or fold about real numbers for Bridgeport public schools and how much City PROPERTY TAXPAYERS are funding, please … Time will tell.
Now let me see if I have this right …
The Board of Education elected by the public establishes at its first meeting members of the board should not respond to questions from the public.
Do they still think they report to the state or simply report to Vallas?
Such arrogance.
That is why the brick wants to get rid of the Working Family members. They don’t buy into this “we don’t report to the public” mentality.
The only arrogance Monday night was by your supporting Brick Heads with the WFP who are helping Finch win this charter question. Troll and Carmen Lopez are frothing at the mouth with WFP advice.
People like Brick would like to see a fascist City State where we would all take orders from Generalissimo Finciolini!
anna, why does that bother you?
OFF TOPIC: Tell me I did NOT just receive a direct mail piece from the McMahon Campaign in which Susan Bysiewicz cross-endorses McMahon. Nothing against Linda, but as a voter I am saying this piece is not doing the job it’s supposed to be doing. All I see is Bysiewicz having a hissy fit. Unnecessary roughness, 20-yard penalty for SuBy!
anna, I believe when you are appointed or elected to a city board or commission, you must pledge your allegiance to the Mayor and Mario.
You are not there to serve the public.
You are not there to question the staff.
You are only there to nod your head and do as you are told.
Like little children, commissioners should be seen and not heard.
Let’s all go back to the good old days of Joe Ganim where this mindset really began.
And then ask yourselves who or what is the only constant through all of this.
Give up?
MARK ANASTASI.
That’s why Ganim was possibly the worst thing that ever happened to this city!
Although half of the population adores the man because of his beautification initiatives, but hey let me take over a city that was just awarded millions upon millions in federal aid and I could plant a few trees too!
If any sitting Board of Education members really cared about students they wouldn’t let some of the following things happen:
They wouldn’t allow 40 students in a class when the contract is 29.
They wouldn’t allow students to go without the appropriate text books, when Vallas illegally purchased 10.8 million dollars worth of books from a company in chapter 11.
They wouldn’t allow teachers access to the online components of the new text books to still not be complete.
They wouldn’t allow for the newly purchased materials still be sitting in storage closets and not in the students desks.
I am not sure any board member really cares about the students, teachers, staff or parents of Bridgeport Public Schools. They care about what being a Board of Ed member can get for them. Just ask the reverend … how he is gaining financially from all the school readiness slots.
They are all a bunch of self-serving jerks who don’t give a damn about the kids.
Any word on why the WFP waited until the first official meeting to bring up the potential Colon issue? The ruling was months ago. Or did they feel they had no official “voice” until they were re-seated? I mean the WFP certainly were busy with their letters and press releases, they could have brought this up before.
Also–judging from the comments here from the Post:
blog.ctnews.com/education/2012/09/11/is-it-back-to-the-future-with-the-bridgeport-boe/, it looks like the parents/students at least are excited about some of the changes–let them go at least a semester or half year before we call Vallas and the appointed efforts failures.
Again, let’s see how the Vallas changes work out over a reasonable timeframe–2-3 years.
It wasn’t working well under Connolly, Salcedo or Ramos. This deserves a shot.
No it doesn’t. Our tax dollars are being squandered on consultants and people with connections like Moales and NOT on the children. Time to give the Flim Flam Man his walking papers.
*** Since the Bpt BOE hit rock bottom, seems the only way they now can go is up, no? *** Can’t We All Just Get Along? ***