School Committee: A `Swan Song’ Plus Two Insider Views

Image

Last week, Franklin Observer reported briefly on the School Committee meeting and also raised a question of the peculiar wording found in each and every School Committee agenda – and not in agendas of similar deliberative bodies in the region.

We received written comments about that issue from two current School Committee members. In addition, earlier, we received lengthy comments that relate to general aspects of School Committee operations from another current School Committee member, not running for reelection, Judith Pond Pfeffer. We share all three voices here, starting with Pond Pfeffer.

Pond Pfeffer is a Franklin native, product of local schools, an attorney, and a long-time activist in government and community organizations. She served on the Town Council for several terms before making a successful run for School Committee in 2019. Never one to mince words, she shared her “Swan Song” (her title), reproduced here in full and verbatim, with her observations and suggestions for the future of that body.

School Committee (“SC”) members are elected by the Citizens of Franklin to represent these same citizens in front of School Administration. Our mission, our job as an elected SC member, is to warrant that all Franklin school children obtain the best quality education possible. SC members are there to ensure that Franklin Citizens are getting the most for their tax dollars allocated to School Administration from the Town Council.

To do our job property, we need to ask questions. Why are we doing things certain ways?

Why is it, that unlike the Town Council, there is no space on the Agenda for SC members to ask question, to make statements, to make requests?

Our job is not to adopt nor promote any and all Administration procedures, protocols, proposals without a complete, comprehensive and thorough examination of said procedures, protocols and proposals. Included in this thorough examination is contained an examination of the costs, man power, and ramifications possible or probable.

New SC elected members should have indoctrination meetings. New SC members should be shown how the School Administration obtains money, how the town gets money and distributes same. What the town is mandated, regulated, obligated to then distribute these funds. How the School Administration then obtains funds from the Town. Other sources available where the School Admin has ability to obtain funds from State or Federal sources.

All this so that newly elected members have a clear background of where the money comes from and where the money is spent, and exactly how much money comes into the Town and where that money goes.

New SC elected members should each be given a copy of Roberts Rules of Order, so they will know how a business meeting is conducted, and how to work, speak, within that business meeting. What can be said if there is a question on an item, what can be said to question something happening which is not clear to them. Generally, if something does not make sense to you, it is also not making sense to someone else as well. One needs to speak up and ask questions.

Elected SC members are present to warrant that Franklin Citizens are getting the most for their tax dollars.

I always believed that my election to a Town Committee was because of my commitment to do the best that I could do. That my experience, my background and knowledge would assist in making the committee better in some way.

It has been a privilege to have served the Citizens of Franklin as a current member of the school committee.

I wish that I could have done more.

* * * * * *

As noted, the questions Franklin Observer raised last week had to do with Agendas that almost invariably include implicit instructions on almost every item. (“I recommend” or “The Chair Recommends”); an agenda form that seems to be unique to Franklin.

In a direct response to that assertion, current School Committee Vice Chair (and candidate for reelection), Denise Spencer, wrote in an email:

“I had wanted to send a quick note regarding your recent article. The chair is not making the recommendations, they come from the Superintendent after the committee has discussion on the subject. Then the chair asks for a motion once the recommendations are made. That is why, for example, for the superintendent evaluation it reads “The chair recommends” because the superintendent cannot put forth a recommendation on her own evaluation.

I also reached out to our Massachusetts Association of School Committees [Tracy Novick at MASC] to ensure our process was not out of the ordinary and she ensured me we are acting properly.”

And, finally, Tim Keenan, a current School Committee member, who is not running for reelection, offered a fairly upbeat assessment of his term and the issues of agenda “instructions.” Again, via email, he wrote:

“I just read your last article about the language in the agenda for voting items (e.g., "I recommend approval for... whatever...") That "I recommend approval for..." language had zero influence over me... and I always just assumed that it was the type of formal language that typically is used in the meetings. There are many aspects of those meetings that have formal language that I believe is intended to keep everything "by the book." There are all sorts of rules that govern the way those meetings run.”

Keenan added, parenthetically, that based on those rules, Pond Pfeffer called a "point of order" on him a few times when he spoke at the “wrong” time.

Keenan closed his note by saying he always felt comfortable sharing his perspective and never felt he was being dismissed because he did not have a background in the field of education.

“I'm grateful to have had an opportunity to serve on the SC. I'm also looking forward to the next set of dedicated community members who will be serving on the next committee,” he added.

And, we look forward to hearing from more SC candidates as the election unfolds.

I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive