The Clintonville School Board was again asked to revisit its decision to grant raises to administrators.
The board met Monday, Jan. 14.
Initially, the school board voted to give a 0 percent raise at an Oct. 8 meeting. The board had discussed the matter in closed session, which the agenda indicated as “Administrative/Supervisory Salaries for 2012-13 and personnel items.”
The board reversed that decision at an Oct. 22 meeting, after discussing the matter in closed session under the label of “personnel items and support staff negotiations.”
Resident Mike Krueger has asked the board to reconsider their decision – and the process that led to that decision – on numerous occasions. He reiterated his desire to see the board revisit the issue when he addressed the board on Monday, Jan. 14.
“I sent letters to all school board members on Dec. 3 with my concerns about holding people accountable for their job performances as well as how the board uses closed session. I outlined a legitimate way to correct your past actions about administration wages and what the proper procedures should be,” said Krueger.
“Now, is the board willing to reconsider and take the appropriate steps to correct this issue or are you willing to wait until the news media asks you this question prior to elections? The question is: why do you think it’s OK to go into closed session and discuss any personal item you wish at any time without clearly informing the public, and then come out and approve something without public knowledge that this will happen?”
Board Member Ben Huber told Krueger he didn’t feel the board was obligated to revisit the issue.
“We followed the rules – in a technical sense – but we still followed the rules,” said Huber. “That’s my take on it.”
Board President Tim Schultz said he felt the board was well within its legal rights to handle the issue the way it did.
“I believe that we did things right. We were well within the law. I wouldn’t want to do it any other way,” said Schultz.
Schultz also said that to his knowledge, the issue is not scheduled to appear again on any future school board agendas.
“You’re ignoring me on how to correct this item,” said Krueger. “You talk about people not wanting to come to these meetings; I know why. It’s because the board and administration ignore you until you go away.”
Krueger also asked about his previous request to receive the same packet board members receive prior to each meeting.
“I was told a few months ago that I could get a packet of the agenda without private information if I asked at least 10 days in advance,” said Krueger. “I asked on Dec. 13 for a packet for this meeting (Jan. 14) and I did not receive one. Why not? Can I or can’t I get this?”
Superintendent Tom O’Toole said the packet was never sent to Krueger because he was never directed to do so by the school board.
Krueger also asked why the name of the person was not listed on the agenda for a recommended hire to a Clerical II (secretary to the principal) position at Rexford-Longfellow. Huber responded that board members didn’t know who would be recommended for the position until they received an updated packet the night of the meeting.
The next school board meeting is scheduled for Monday, Jan. 28, at 6:30 p.m. in the middle school IMC.