3 thoughts on “Board of Education Meeting 06/18/12

  1. It is unclear to me whether or not the superintendent must have board approval to begin the work at Litchfield discussed at the recent board meeting. If board approval is not required, then why is the board asked to approve the action after the fact? If board approval is required, then shouldn’t the superintendent suffer a serious consequence for proceeding without board approval? If board approval is in fact required, how is it in any way possible for the board to give approval for work already completed that the superintendent allowed to take place absent board approval? Shouldn’t the cost of work already completed prior to any board approval be an expense born solely by the superintendent?

  2. My understanding is that district attorneys playing a prominent role in local school board meetings is very much out of the ordinary. Am I not correct? In any event, what is the justification for this, and is there a cost incurred for the attorney’s time spent at board meetings? Some would argue that the district would be better served by retaining another law firm given the history between the current law firm and the incumbent superintendent.

  3. One might assert that having the attorney seated next to the board president rather than next to the superintendent doesn’t scream conflict of interest nearly quite so loudly.

Comments are closed.