Saturday, July 31, 2010
Eastwood blocks Mauro's emails, further stifles freedom of speech
"I question the authority of Dr. Eastwood to block my emails from the district's public email system, and I'm outraged by his unilateral action without consulting the board of education. Dr. Eastwood is currently being counter-sued by me for attempting to use a frivolous lawsuit to intimidate my freedom of speech. In addition, Dr. Eastwood is also being sued by Mr. Francis Hoefer for his role in blocking his ability to speak at the public portion of a school district meeting. Dr. Eastwood's recent action appears to be a further attempt to silence criticism of him and his administration."
Mauro hails victorious in case filed by Carol Gillen
In a stunning blow to the attempts by some community members to cause disruption for board of education members, the case filled by Carol Gillen, a negative thorn in the side of the board, has been dismissed, again. After the initial appeal to have Dr. Mauro removed was dismissed, Gillen, who could not accept defeat, appealed the verdict, only to have it dismissed again. In an email statement released shortly after the ruling was announced, Dr. Mauro said the following:
" I have been informed today that the commissioner has refused to reopen
her case against me. His action is the final chapter in this matter. I
always have questioned her motivation for initiating this legal action, and
believe that she was advised wrongly to start these proceedings."
Hopefully the remaining hate-filled community members will learn a lesson from this and stop their polarizing actions. Maybe now we can move forward in the hopes of bettering the lives of our most precious asset: our children.
" I have been informed today that the commissioner has refused to reopen
her case against me. His action is the final chapter in this matter. I
always have questioned her motivation for initiating this legal action, and
believe that she was advised wrongly to start these proceedings."
Hopefully the remaining hate-filled community members will learn a lesson from this and stop their polarizing actions. Maybe now we can move forward in the hopes of bettering the lives of our most precious asset: our children.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Delay of new school caused in part by Eastwood's reluctance to meet with Mayor
If Dr. Kenneth Eastwood had his way he would like to blame the delay of the new elementary school a a few "dissidents" of anyone who doesn't agree with his viewpoints. The truth, however, is that the delay can be in part contributed to the fact that Dr. Eastwood has yet to meet with Middletown mayor Joe DeStefano about the sewage issue. In fact, he's refused to do so. Why? Perhaps it's because he knows the city has a good case?
In any event, the issue at hand is clear: the current sewage line is at full capacity and the building of a new school would jeopardize the current system to the point that raw sewage would leak into the homes of those who live in close proximity to the new elementary school. If you don't live in the area you probably don't care if raw sewage ends up in someone else's backyard, but if you do live in the area, is that what you want? We didn't think so.
So whose responsibility is it to upgrade the system? Mayor DeStefano says the answer is the school district. He has said that if any private developer wanted to conduct the same project, the responsibility would fall on their shoulders to make the necessary repairs. So why is this case any different?
Because Dr. Kenneth Eastwood said so.
In any event, the issue at hand is clear: the current sewage line is at full capacity and the building of a new school would jeopardize the current system to the point that raw sewage would leak into the homes of those who live in close proximity to the new elementary school. If you don't live in the area you probably don't care if raw sewage ends up in someone else's backyard, but if you do live in the area, is that what you want? We didn't think so.
So whose responsibility is it to upgrade the system? Mayor DeStefano says the answer is the school district. He has said that if any private developer wanted to conduct the same project, the responsibility would fall on their shoulders to make the necessary repairs. So why is this case any different?
Because Dr. Kenneth Eastwood said so.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
"Inside Middletown" Debuts on YouTube
We at "Inside Middletown Schools" are pleased to announce that we have created a page on the social media site YouTube. By doing this, we are enabling the public at large to be aware of the "going on's" of the Middletown Board of Education as it relates to video recordings. We are also creating this page to respond to the numerous videos uploaded against members of the Board and its biased content -- now both sides of the story can be aired. To access the YouTube videos you can either type in a search or go directly to the page by visiting: http://www.youtube.com/user/InsideMiddletown
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
New York State Comptroller says "Dissidents" were right all along!
Below is the report completed by the New York State Comptroller, in which he clearly backs up claims made by members of the Board of Education last year. In a previous post, we upload the letter which prompted this investigation, but here it is again. The results: The administration has not been following proper procedure relative to change orders. Period. Read it for yourself.
change order -
change order -
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Dr. Eastwood unwiling to negotiate with Mayor regarding sewer/water problems
Despite many offers to negotiate, Dr. Eastwood has been unwilling to sit down with Mayor DeStefano to discuss and negotiate their differences over solutions for the water/sewer problems for the new elementary school. Dr. Eastwood has drawn a line in the sand and refuses to work with the mayor towards a solution. Dr. Eastwood has attempted to work around the mayor on related issues and has contacted the mayor's subordinates rather than dealing directly with him. Although there may be substance to Dr. Eastwood's position, his stubbornness and unwillingness to negotiate with the mayor demonstrates a greater concern for his own ego rather than a concern for the district and the need for our students.
Here is the letter that was sent to Mayor DeStefano from Mr. Carl Thurnau, Director of Facilities for the state education department, and below is the mayor's response. This should clarify this issue.
from the mayor -
Here is the letter that was sent to Mayor DeStefano from Mr. Carl Thurnau, Director of Facilities for the state education department, and below is the mayor's response. This should clarify this issue.
from the mayor -
Times Herald Record hides the true story about change orders
Too bad the story that was buried on page 10 of yesterday's paper was not included in the on line edition. Rather than simply reiterating the "first he said, and then the other one said" melodrama found in today's article, yesterday's story softly pointed out that the New York State Comptroller found that Middletown has not been handling construction change orders properly... exactly as the so called "minority faction" have been saying for over a year. In other words, the board members who claim that big money decisions are being made behind their backs, now have the support of the New York State Comptroller.
This finding by the State's chief financial officer doesn't exactly follow the unwavering story line that the Record has developed over the last year and a half: "dissidents impede superintendent from the excellent work he is doing." What the audit shows is that board members were right to raise questions about the construction projects. And by implication, it should make us ask why the superintendent and his supporters - including those here at the paper - worked so hard to ridicule those who were asking the right questions.
Maybe someone from the newspaper can join in this discussion and explain the journalistic decision making behind these articles and their placement. Here is yesterday's complete story, now available for your comments.
"M'Town district advised to alter construction policy
The state comptroller's office has recommended that the Middletown School District tighten up its policy on construction change orders to better safeguard public funds.
The state recommended that the school board change district policy so that the board is notified in a timely manner of proposed changes, so the board can review and approve all change orders before completion of the work.
District officials have agreed to follow the recommendations.
From July 2007 to October 2009, the district spent $26 million on its Phase I construction project - the new athletic facilities and high school renovations - of which $1.8 million or 6.9 percent was in change orders. Seven percent had been budgeted for changes.
Auditors found that without a comprehensive policy, about half the change orders were approved after work was done.
The board adopted a change order policy in September 2009; the auditors said that policy needs more changes to provide better control over the public's money."
By Fred Isseks
Dissidents Allegations
This finding by the State's chief financial officer doesn't exactly follow the unwavering story line that the Record has developed over the last year and a half: "dissidents impede superintendent from the excellent work he is doing." What the audit shows is that board members were right to raise questions about the construction projects. And by implication, it should make us ask why the superintendent and his supporters - including those here at the paper - worked so hard to ridicule those who were asking the right questions.
Maybe someone from the newspaper can join in this discussion and explain the journalistic decision making behind these articles and their placement. Here is yesterday's complete story, now available for your comments.
"M'Town district advised to alter construction policy
The state comptroller's office has recommended that the Middletown School District tighten up its policy on construction change orders to better safeguard public funds.
The state recommended that the school board change district policy so that the board is notified in a timely manner of proposed changes, so the board can review and approve all change orders before completion of the work.
District officials have agreed to follow the recommendations.
From July 2007 to October 2009, the district spent $26 million on its Phase I construction project - the new athletic facilities and high school renovations - of which $1.8 million or 6.9 percent was in change orders. Seven percent had been budgeted for changes.
Auditors found that without a comprehensive policy, about half the change orders were approved after work was done.
The board adopted a change order policy in September 2009; the auditors said that policy needs more changes to provide better control over the public's money."
By Fred Isseks
Dissidents Allegations
Monday, May 3, 2010
Exclusive Bombshell Report: Eastwood allegedly 'attacked' female student
In a bombshell exclusive report, we at "Inside Middletown Schools" are reporting that Dr. Kenneth W. Eastwood allegedly attacked a former female student in Oswego. Several witnesses gave testimony during the course of an investigation that brought Dr. Kenneth Eastwood to his knees. Throughout the investigation, people who witnessed the 'attack' testified against Dr. Eastwood and presented information that proved that Dr. Eastwood had physical contact with the student (who we shall keep nameless).
Apparently Dr. Eastwood could not see the student's I.D. and upon requesting that information, he laid his hands on her in an uncomfortable exchange that left people wondering: Who is Dr. Kenneth Eastwood?
Now, What's wrong with this picture?
Isn't the superintendent of schools supposed to protect children and students? He should not harm them or have physical contact with them. This type of inappropriate behavior is unprofessional and is reminiscent of the kind of attack on a student that was displayed during the Sigler era.
Apparently Dr. Eastwood could not see the student's I.D. and upon requesting that information, he laid his hands on her in an uncomfortable exchange that left people wondering: Who is Dr. Kenneth Eastwood?
Now, What's wrong with this picture?
Isn't the superintendent of schools supposed to protect children and students? He should not harm them or have physical contact with them. This type of inappropriate behavior is unprofessional and is reminiscent of the kind of attack on a student that was displayed during the Sigler era.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Rapid Depletion Of Fund Balance Reserves By Dr. Eastwood
Although Dr. Eastwood blamed the Governor for the increase in next years school taxes, he failed to to take any responsibility or share any blame for the district's current budgetary problems. Dr. Eastwood did not inform the public that he took $5.3 million out of the fund balance reserve to reduce last years tax increase, and to supplement the current year operating budget.
Dr. Eastwood also did not inform the public that in the proposed budget for next year, an addition $4.7 million will taken out of the fund balance reserve. It appears that items that were paid for out of the reserve fund this year will again be covered by the fund balance reserve next year. Instead of using the reserve fund to cover operating expenses, these monies should have been used to cover the current shortfall in State aid, and no job cuts would have been necessary. The fund balance reserves are suppose to be for emergencies, and not for general operating expenses. The budget increase for next year is 6.91%. If Dr Eastwood had obtained the $4.7 million needed for expenses from taxes rather than from the reserve fund, our school tax increase for next year would have been 16.3% and not 6.91%. For every $500 thousand tax unit, the tax rate is increased by about 1%. Clearly, our fund balance reserve fund is not being used for the purpose for which it was designed.
As of June 30, 2009, the fund balance reserve was $18,883,357. For this year and next year, we will spend about $10 million from this fund. This scenario brings to mind Mr. Hoefer's allegations about Dr. Eastwood when he was superintendent in Oswego about depletion of reserve funds. If the current rate of spending is not reduced, the district may face double digit school tax increases in the near future.
Dr. Eastwood also did not inform the public that in the proposed budget for next year, an addition $4.7 million will taken out of the fund balance reserve. It appears that items that were paid for out of the reserve fund this year will again be covered by the fund balance reserve next year. Instead of using the reserve fund to cover operating expenses, these monies should have been used to cover the current shortfall in State aid, and no job cuts would have been necessary. The fund balance reserves are suppose to be for emergencies, and not for general operating expenses. The budget increase for next year is 6.91%. If Dr Eastwood had obtained the $4.7 million needed for expenses from taxes rather than from the reserve fund, our school tax increase for next year would have been 16.3% and not 6.91%. For every $500 thousand tax unit, the tax rate is increased by about 1%. Clearly, our fund balance reserve fund is not being used for the purpose for which it was designed.
As of June 30, 2009, the fund balance reserve was $18,883,357. For this year and next year, we will spend about $10 million from this fund. This scenario brings to mind Mr. Hoefer's allegations about Dr. Eastwood when he was superintendent in Oswego about depletion of reserve funds. If the current rate of spending is not reduced, the district may face double digit school tax increases in the near future.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Report: Teacher claims Eastwood requested accelerated grade for daughter
In a legal claim, Ellen Dillon, a former teacher for the Oswego school district claimed that Dr. Kenneth Eastwood's wife, Suzanne, requested that she increase their daughters grades after learning she wasn't doing so well in gym class.
The document reads, "Petitioner [Dillon] claims that two board members and the wife of Superintendent Kenneth Eastwood (formerly the assistant superintendent) complained about the grades earned by their children in petitioner’s physical education classes and allegedly attempted to have petitioner change their grades."
Ellen Dillon was described as a phenomenal teacher who according to sources was the subject of a vindictive pay-back scheme.
The document also states, "Petitioner contends that two members of respondent board and the superintendent of schools were dissatisfied with the grades their children earned in her physical education classes. She alleges that, as a result of that dissatisfaction, respondent made a teaching assignment that, although still within her tenure area, precludes her from exercising sole responsibility for student grades."
To some within the Enlarged School District of Middletown, the idea that Dr. Kenneth Eastwood would retaliate against outspoken people is not unbelievable. What's the saying, "Some people never change".
The full document can be read here.
The document reads, "Petitioner [Dillon] claims that two board members and the wife of Superintendent Kenneth Eastwood (formerly the assistant superintendent) complained about the grades earned by their children in petitioner’s physical education classes and allegedly attempted to have petitioner change their grades."
Ellen Dillon was described as a phenomenal teacher who according to sources was the subject of a vindictive pay-back scheme.
The document also states, "Petitioner contends that two members of respondent board and the superintendent of schools were dissatisfied with the grades their children earned in her physical education classes. She alleges that, as a result of that dissatisfaction, respondent made a teaching assignment that, although still within her tenure area, precludes her from exercising sole responsibility for student grades."
To some within the Enlarged School District of Middletown, the idea that Dr. Kenneth Eastwood would retaliate against outspoken people is not unbelievable. What's the saying, "Some people never change".
The full document can be read here.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Reasons For Proposed Higher School Taxes
On April 8th, the Middletown Board of Education rejected the superintendent's 2010/11 budget proposal due to its inclusion of a large increase in school taxes. Although Dr. Eastwood attributed this tax increase to the state's withholding of funds, he failed to mention the contribution his unbridled development of programs has had to the current budget problem. Last year, for the 2009/10 fiscal year, approximately 5.3 million dollars was taken from the unstructured reserve fund to supplement state and local taxes to underwrite program development and minimize an increase in school taxes.
Unfortunately this year, the governor's recent withholding of state funds has exacerbated an already tight fiscal situation. In the proposed budget, funds for some of last year's new expenses need to be financed by taxes rather than being paid for by the reserve fund. In addition, the deficit in the state's appropriation of funds also must be supplied by more taxes or budget cuts. Given the district's unrestricted development of new programs, the administration must share some of the blame for the current fiscal shortfall. Although the quality and need for these programs has never been brought into question, Dr. Eastwood does not appear to recognize that the cost for financing these programs has gone beyond the capacity of the people within the district to pay. In addition, many of these programs were developed by grants, and the cost of these programs will eventually fall onto the district taxpayers.
In the current proposed budget, Dr. Eastwood has placed the taxpayers between a rock and a hard place. Either accept his large tax increase, or accept an equally large tax increase mandated by a contingency budget. On April 8th, the board rejected Dr. Eastwood,s budget based on an understanding of this situation. At that time , the Board directed him to further reduce the projected school budget for next year. Rather than take the board's suggestions, it appears that Dr. Eastwood will attempt to ram his previous budget through during a special meeting called on April 14. It is now up to the taxpayer to reject the current proposed budget. Granted, by default, they will be accepting an equally costly contingency budget, but the public will send a clear message to Dr. Eastwood to stop the growth in program development which they can not afford.
Unfortunately this year, the governor's recent withholding of state funds has exacerbated an already tight fiscal situation. In the proposed budget, funds for some of last year's new expenses need to be financed by taxes rather than being paid for by the reserve fund. In addition, the deficit in the state's appropriation of funds also must be supplied by more taxes or budget cuts. Given the district's unrestricted development of new programs, the administration must share some of the blame for the current fiscal shortfall. Although the quality and need for these programs has never been brought into question, Dr. Eastwood does not appear to recognize that the cost for financing these programs has gone beyond the capacity of the people within the district to pay. In addition, many of these programs were developed by grants, and the cost of these programs will eventually fall onto the district taxpayers.
In the current proposed budget, Dr. Eastwood has placed the taxpayers between a rock and a hard place. Either accept his large tax increase, or accept an equally large tax increase mandated by a contingency budget. On April 8th, the board rejected Dr. Eastwood,s budget based on an understanding of this situation. At that time , the Board directed him to further reduce the projected school budget for next year. Rather than take the board's suggestions, it appears that Dr. Eastwood will attempt to ram his previous budget through during a special meeting called on April 14. It is now up to the taxpayer to reject the current proposed budget. Granted, by default, they will be accepting an equally costly contingency budget, but the public will send a clear message to Dr. Eastwood to stop the growth in program development which they can not afford.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Eastwood's legal 'threats' fall on deaf ears
Dr. Kenneth Eastwood has pretty much threatened anyone he cannot control with a lawsuit. He's threatened school board members Evelyn Isseks, Nick Mauro and Francis Hoefer. Once with a lawyer that's not even his from the New York State Council of School Superintendents, and twice from a lawyer from Greenwald Law Offices. All "legal" letters were poorly written and full of hot air; all flash and no substance. We at "Inside Middletown Schools" believe that Dr. Eastwood has no basis for any of his claims and is only trying to strong arm this Board into falling lock-step under his control, similar to that of fascists.
Truth be told, if Dr. Eastwood has a legal case, he would have filed it by now. So one needs to stop and ask why that hasn't happened? Perhaps it's because he has no case. As Dr. Eastwood continues to threaten people with frivolous lawsuits, something he is sure to do as long as he remains superintendent, one this is for sure: We at "Inside Middletown Schools" have no intention on backing down or getting rid of this site. In the words of Francis Hoefer, "Bring it on!"
Truth be told, if Dr. Eastwood has a legal case, he would have filed it by now. So one needs to stop and ask why that hasn't happened? Perhaps it's because he has no case. As Dr. Eastwood continues to threaten people with frivolous lawsuits, something he is sure to do as long as he remains superintendent, one this is for sure: We at "Inside Middletown Schools" have no intention on backing down or getting rid of this site. In the words of Francis Hoefer, "Bring it on!"
Saturday, April 10, 2010
"Inside Middletown Schools" gains traction on web!
We at "Inside Middletown Schools" have good news to share with you...Starting right now you can access our blog on popular search engines, such as Google and Yahoo!
All you have to do is go to Google, and type in "Inside Middletown Schools". Alternatively, you can type in the name of any person that appears on the blog, and the site should pop up as one of the search results on the first page.
Happy surfing!
All you have to do is go to Google, and type in "Inside Middletown Schools". Alternatively, you can type in the name of any person that appears on the blog, and the site should pop up as one of the search results on the first page.
Happy surfing!
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Question: Did Dr. Kenneth Eastwood support a convicted drug user?
When Francis Hoefer said that schools Superintendent Kenneth W. Eastwood supported a convicted drug user, Eastwood called him a liar, threatened to sue, and attacked his character. Well, now it appears that Dr. Eastwood is the liar after a letter surfaced in which Dr. Eastwood is clearly recommending that the Oswego School Board re-hire Daniel Harmony, a disgraced educator who in FACT was charged and convicted of possessing 7.8 grams of drugs during a search of his home. Liar, liar, pants on fire, Dr. Eastwood! Read the three page letter for yourself and determine who's the liar.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
My View by Michael Sussman
The following is an excerpt of an editorial submitted by civil rights attorney Michael Sussman.
"I am appalled at the editorial which appeared in the Times Herald Record this morning. It minimizes the violation of the First Amendment committed by Superintendent Kenneth Eastwood and the Board President Geiger and focuses on the wrong issue: "the dissidents" as if this were the Soviet Union.
For a full copy of the "My View" please visit the Democratic Alliance website at www.democraticalliance.com
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Eastwood's Insensitivity to Local Labor
Historically, Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) maximize the use of local labor, and assist the on time and on budget completion of construction projects. Currently, they are used by Orange County and Middletown for their building projects. Last Year, Mr. Paul and Dr. Mauro introduced and proposed PLAs for the construction of the district's new elementary school, but Dr. Eastwood, the board attorneys, and RSA, the district's Syracuse architects rejected the adoption of PLAs. Given the high rate of local unemployment, and the current economic downturn, it is insensitive to the needs of our local labor for Dr. Eastwood and others to fail to protect our local labor workforce.
Recently, Joseph De Stefano, Middletown Mayor requested that the district reconsider its position on PLAs. Given Dr. Eastwood's previous rejection of PLAs, and his propensity for hiring people from upstate New York and outside our region, it is unlikely that he will reverse his position, nor recommend to the board that they adopt PLAs for the new elementary school. In light of the fact that Dr. Eastwood is asking local taxpayers to pay a large increase in our school taxes, his rejection of PLAs shows a disregard and lack of concern for our local workforce, and the financial needs of the people in the Middletown School District.
Recently, Joseph De Stefano, Middletown Mayor requested that the district reconsider its position on PLAs. Given Dr. Eastwood's previous rejection of PLAs, and his propensity for hiring people from upstate New York and outside our region, it is unlikely that he will reverse his position, nor recommend to the board that they adopt PLAs for the new elementary school. In light of the fact that Dr. Eastwood is asking local taxpayers to pay a large increase in our school taxes, his rejection of PLAs shows a disregard and lack of concern for our local workforce, and the financial needs of the people in the Middletown School District.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Superintendent Ken Eastwood called ‘out of touch’ with local taxpayers
In May, voters within the Enlarged City School District of Middletown will be asked to go to the polls and vote for staggering increases in local school taxes that will undoubtedly be impossible for many residents to pay.
The superintendent, Dr. Kenneth Eastwood, insists that the state is to blame and there is nothing that he can do about it. Many residents, especially local senior citizens, would probably take his concerns to heart if he himself paid taxes in the district. That’s right folks – the superintendent of schools, some times referred to as the “CEO” is responsible for setting your taxes, but doesn’t pay them, despite his over $200,000 a year salary and benefits.
Instead he and his wife, Suzanne, have opted to rent a luxury apartment on the outskirts of Middletown on Schutt Road in the Town of Wallkill.
How is it possible for Dr. Eastwood to sympathize with local taxpayers if he doesn’t contribute to the local tax base? A little birdie told me that as soon as Dr. Eastwood is finished building a resume for himself on the backs of Middletown taxpayers, he’ll just move somewhere else and forget that Middletown even exits.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Middletown Record's Editorials on Dissent
The Times Herald-Record's editorial on March 10th criticized the school board minority for their questioning of Dr Eastwood, and accused them of conducting an ongoing "inquisition" of the superintendent. The board members were performing their state mandated function as "watchdogs" for the school district, but paradoxically, the Record deduced that by questioning the superintendent they are hurting the students. In an earlier editorial, the Record chastised the board minority for their dissent in light of the "significant progress" the district has made. As can be seen in their articles, the newspaper has been consistently one-sided and biased in their reporting. The Record's editors appear to have allowed their paper to be used willingly as a public relations tool by Dr. Eastwood. The Record's view on dissent is not only wrong and harmful, but more typical of news media found in repressive totalitarian regimes. Their view of dissent is inconsistent with our American values. In our country, we support open and free public discourse.
At the March 4th Middletown School Board meeting, Mr. Geiger, board president, disallowed a nonresident from addressing the board, and Dr. Eastwood had him taken away in handcuffs. Rather than focus on these basic violations of constitutional rights in the March 10th editorial, The Record twisted its discussion around to a condemnation of the board minority. The Record's weak support for the freedom of speech is appalling, and its opposition to dissent is echoed by Dr. Eastwood, the current board majority, and some members of the public. These individuals fail to recognize that they are the ones harming the students. They are teaching students that dissent is wrong, and that dissenters can expect public condemnation, derision, and repression for questioning authority or expressing a different point of view. Their lesson turns education into indoctrination. They ignore or are unaware of the "market place of ideas" concept, in which all speech is tolerated with the belief that in an open debate, the better ideas will prevail. Dissent does not harm students, but public repression of dissent does.
At the March 4th Middletown School Board meeting, Mr. Geiger, board president, disallowed a nonresident from addressing the board, and Dr. Eastwood had him taken away in handcuffs. Rather than focus on these basic violations of constitutional rights in the March 10th editorial, The Record twisted its discussion around to a condemnation of the board minority. The Record's weak support for the freedom of speech is appalling, and its opposition to dissent is echoed by Dr. Eastwood, the current board majority, and some members of the public. These individuals fail to recognize that they are the ones harming the students. They are teaching students that dissent is wrong, and that dissenters can expect public condemnation, derision, and repression for questioning authority or expressing a different point of view. Their lesson turns education into indoctrination. They ignore or are unaware of the "market place of ideas" concept, in which all speech is tolerated with the belief that in an open debate, the better ideas will prevail. Dissent does not harm students, but public repression of dissent does.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Sources say Dr. Kenneth Eastwood supported drug user
As many of you already know, Dr. Kenneth W. Eastwood previously served as superintendent of the Oswego School District before coming to Middletown. But did you know that while as their superintendent, he supported the hiring of a convicted drug user? That's what sources tell "Inside Middletown Schools".
Daniel Harmony, who served as acting superintendent (right after Eastwood's departure) was charged by investigators of possessing roughly 7.8 grams of methamphetamines, which they found during a search of his home. The school board hired Harmony based on a recommendation by Eastwood, according to our sources.
Oswego school board member Francis Hoefer was opposed to the hiring but the school board rubber-stamped Eastwood's appointment. Shortly thereafter, the school board ultimately suspended and fired Daniel Harmony, with one board member reportedly saying, "Fran was right all along".
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Tips & Submissions
Shortly after Dr. Kenneth Eastwood left the Oswego City School District, the School Board discovered that the district reserve funds had been almost completely depleted.
Fran Hoefer
(Oswego City School District Board of Education Member)
Fran Hoefer
(Oswego City School District Board of Education Member)
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Media Coverage surrounding Fran Hoefer's illegal ejection from the March 4th School Board Meeting
Oswego school board member removed from Middletown school board meeting after trying to speak
Report: Hoefer escorted from Meeting in Middletown
Oswego Board Member and Superintendent Lock Horns Again, This time in Middletown
Oswego school board member jailed
School trustee backer ejected from Middletown meeting
Expert says Middletown school board was wrong to silence speaker
Please continue to visit this site, as more information will be posted on a regular basis.
Report: Hoefer escorted from Meeting in Middletown
Oswego Board Member and Superintendent Lock Horns Again, This time in Middletown
Oswego school board member jailed
School trustee backer ejected from Middletown meeting
Expert says Middletown school board was wrong to silence speaker
Please continue to visit this site, as more information will be posted on a regular basis.
Transcript of Mr. Hoefer's Statements He Was Unable to Make at the March 4th Middletown Board of Education Meeting
Here is the statement Fran Hoefer would have read if President Geiger had not violated his free speech:
My name is Fran Hoefer. I'm a member of the Oswego City School District Board of Education. I'm here tonight for a friendly visit and to observe. I'm also here to give your community a bit of a heads up about your superintendent. Dr. Eastwood was the "Golden Boy" of the Oswego City School District when he first ascended to power. His pristine appearance, charismatic personality, and technology mastery made him an object of admiration and respect. I personally thought he was a great guy. So did a great many other people. It wasn't until he packed his bags for Middletown that the Oswego School District discovered that our reserve accounts had been depleted. We discovered that our graduation rates weren't quite as high as we had thought. This was a bit of a bombshell for our community, and it also impelled a substantial tax increase to repair the damage.
I was not a member of the board when these discoveries were unveiled; because, I had preciously been forced off the board by Dr. Eastwood. Ken and his circle of board supporters charged me with misconduct and hired a very expensive law firm to bring charges against me. I was denied legal representation through a technicality, and was told that I had to defend my nonpaying board position with my own resources against a team of high powered lawyers being funded with the unlimited resources of the taxpayers. Does this scenario sound familiar to anyone in this room? There is something inherently unfair and reprehensible about an appointed bureaucrat using taxpayer money to remove an unpaid elected official from elected office. I was reelected in a landslide vote. Coincidentally, all the board members who voted to remove me are no longer board members.
I also would like to point out to this board, that it is against the rules of the Open Meetings Law to hold secret meetings of a select quorum to come to consensus. It is also illegal to come to consensus by telephone. Some of you may want to take a hard look in the a mirror before you choose to charge someone else with misconduct. Speaking of misconduct, anyone who is interested will soon be able to read about the scandals that happened in my district during the reign of Ken and company on a new website called insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com. That's insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com. This website is uncensored, and I will be able to speak freely about :
- allegations of Dr.Eastwood's abuse of a young honor student and the subsequent cover up
- Ken's attempt to rehire our district drug enforcement officer after he was convicted for
purchasing methamphetamines through the mail
- the good Dr.'s use of his position to aquire enhanced grades for his daughter.
- about secret emergency board meetings, abuse of power, self interest, and all the sordid aspects of your
superintendent that he is so good at hiding
My name is Fran Hoefer. I'll be on (insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com). You can access the blog by typing insidemiddeletownschools.blogspot.com into the http//space of your computer. I guarantee you'll be astounded!
My name is Fran Hoefer. I'm a member of the Oswego City School District Board of Education. I'm here tonight for a friendly visit and to observe. I'm also here to give your community a bit of a heads up about your superintendent. Dr. Eastwood was the "Golden Boy" of the Oswego City School District when he first ascended to power. His pristine appearance, charismatic personality, and technology mastery made him an object of admiration and respect. I personally thought he was a great guy. So did a great many other people. It wasn't until he packed his bags for Middletown that the Oswego School District discovered that our reserve accounts had been depleted. We discovered that our graduation rates weren't quite as high as we had thought. This was a bit of a bombshell for our community, and it also impelled a substantial tax increase to repair the damage.
I was not a member of the board when these discoveries were unveiled; because, I had preciously been forced off the board by Dr. Eastwood. Ken and his circle of board supporters charged me with misconduct and hired a very expensive law firm to bring charges against me. I was denied legal representation through a technicality, and was told that I had to defend my nonpaying board position with my own resources against a team of high powered lawyers being funded with the unlimited resources of the taxpayers. Does this scenario sound familiar to anyone in this room? There is something inherently unfair and reprehensible about an appointed bureaucrat using taxpayer money to remove an unpaid elected official from elected office. I was reelected in a landslide vote. Coincidentally, all the board members who voted to remove me are no longer board members.
I also would like to point out to this board, that it is against the rules of the Open Meetings Law to hold secret meetings of a select quorum to come to consensus. It is also illegal to come to consensus by telephone. Some of you may want to take a hard look in the a mirror before you choose to charge someone else with misconduct. Speaking of misconduct, anyone who is interested will soon be able to read about the scandals that happened in my district during the reign of Ken and company on a new website called insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com. That's insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com. This website is uncensored, and I will be able to speak freely about :
- allegations of Dr.Eastwood's abuse of a young honor student and the subsequent cover up
- Ken's attempt to rehire our district drug enforcement officer after he was convicted for
purchasing methamphetamines through the mail
- the good Dr.'s use of his position to aquire enhanced grades for his daughter.
- about secret emergency board meetings, abuse of power, self interest, and all the sordid aspects of your
superintendent that he is so good at hiding
My name is Fran Hoefer. I'll be on (insidemiddletownschools.blogspot.com). You can access the blog by typing insidemiddeletownschools.blogspot.com into the http//space of your computer. I guarantee you'll be astounded!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Middletown Graduation Rates Part I, II, III
Part I: Reporting and Doctoring
Annually, the RIC unit of Orange-Ulster BOCES reports Middletown's graduation rates for the previous year in the New York State Report Card. For example, in the spring of '09, the report card listed Middletown's '08 graduation rates. The false impression given by the report card is that the reported data represents official state rates, and that the information presented has been verified and certified by the state. As a point of fact, RIC Orange-Ulster BOCES only collects information from local school districts prior to printing the report card. District superintendents have the discretion to alter information and are solely responsible for reporting and interpreting graduation rates. On two occasions, we contacted RIC and requested confirmation and clarification of graduation rates. Their response was to direct us to Dr. Eastwood, and they later contacted him to assure him that they had not given us any information. Obviously, RIC staff are mere functionaries of local district superintendents, and play little or no role in authenticating the validity graduation rates. These observations also helps to explain the difficulties in obtaining correct and official data concerning graduation rates; since, only the superintendent can provide this information. Dr. Eastwood has never reported the official graduation rates nor cohort numbers to the public.
Last year, Dr' Eastwood changed the official size of the '04 and '05 cohorts; thereby, altering the the graduation rates for the '08 and '09 classes, respectively. The graduation rate is equal to the number of students who graduate by August 31 divided by the number of students who stared in that class in 9th grade (the class cohort). In examining Dr. Eastwood's actions, we need to ask the following question. Why did it take almost four or five years to correct the size numbers of the '04 and '05 cohorts? The Public relation advantage and effects of changing the size of the cohorts is easy to see. On Oct, 2009, based on Dr. Eastwood's modification, RIC reported a 19% change for the June '8 and '09 graduation rates, and by decreasing the size of the '05 cohort, the '09 rate spiked to 77% compared to the '08 rate of 68%. We must now asked this question : Was the change in the cohort numbers after so many years by Dr. Eastwood justified, or just a manipulation of the data to inflate graduation rates? Given the timing of these changes, it appears that the later point is more probable.
Graduation Rates
Part II : Analysis
After Dr. Mauro's report that the graduation rates for the Middletown School District have not not changed significantly for the last several years, we were not surprised by Dr. Eastwood's attack of Dr. Mauro at the board meeting and on the district web site. We interrupted his response as a recognition of the potential damage this information could do to his inflated image of the district's academic achievement, and as a defense against a questioning of his credibility. However, during his long attacks, Dr. Eastwood never reported an official listing of the district's graduation rates between '03 to '09. According to RIC, only the district can officially report graduation rates and clarify the information provided in the state report cards. Since Dr. Eastwood has neither clarified nor provided this information to the public, how can anyone outside the administration have the correct updated official graduation rates or cohort numbers?
Following a request by Mrs. Isseks , Dr. Eastwood begrudgingly provided to the board a copy of a state form from RIC updating the June '08 an '09 graduation rates to 62% and 74%, respectively. Later, the Record reported our August graduation rates between '05 to '09 as : '05-59%, '06-71%, '07-69%, '08-68%, '09-77%. Statically, between '05 and'09, the overall graduation rate mean is approximately 69% plus/minus a large standard deviation of approximately 11%. Hardly a stellar achievement, and clearly indicate that THE CHANGE IN OUR GRADUATION RATES IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT BETWEEN '05 - '09. The lack of a statistically significant difference is even after Dr Eastwood's alteration of the '08 and '09 graduation rates (See Part I). It is also interesting to note, with the exception of the '09 rate in which Dr. Mauro estimated the size of the '05 cohort, that the graduation rates which he stated at a board meeting were, for the most part, the same or higher than the graduation rates reported by the Record between '05 - '09. Since graduation rates are the prime indicator of student achievement. Dr Eastwood's comments and the Record's headline appear to have grossly exaggerated our student achievement under his administration. It is important to know where we are before we and move forward. The records headline is also puzzling given the Record's June, 2009 article by Mr. Paul Brooks. He reported on the '08 and '09 graduation rates of 33 districts in Orange Sullivan and Ulster counties. For '08, of the 16 districts in Orange county, only two districts had lower graduation rates than Middletown. Of the 33 districts listed, Middletown's graduation rates fall within the lowest 20% of the 33 districts listed.
Graduation Rates
Part III: Use of Number of Graduates
Without Use of Graduation Rates
Even more troublesome than Dr. Eastwood's exaggeration of student achievement are his statements in which he boast in the Record of almost a doubling of the number graduates between '04 and '09, and on the district web site, a more than doubling of the number a economically disadvantaged students graduating between '05-'09. His comments give the impression that the district has doubled our graduation rates. As a point of fact, in terms of achievement, an increase in graduation numbers mean nothing without a concomitant increase in graduation rates. I will illustrate an example of why reporting only the number of graduates is both deceptive and misleading. Let's compare two hypothetical schools A and B :
School A: 350 graduates total cohort 500 : graduation rate 70%
School B: 700 graduates total cohort 1000 : graduation rate 70%
If we compare school A with school B, school B has twice the number of graduates. However, without a higher graduation rate, there is no difference in student achievement. Observe, we have twice the number of graduates, but we also have twice the number of students who did not graduate. According to the New York State Report Cards, the graduation rates for economically disadvantages student have not increased significantly for the past few years. For '08, the graduation rate for economically disadvantaged students was reported as 65%. A copy of the '08 Report Card is currently posted on the district web page. Since both our graduation rate for economically disadvantaged students, and our overall graduation rates have not changed significantly for the past few years (see Part I), Dr. Eastwood's reporting of a doubling or almost doubling of the number of student graduating in the newspaper, and on the school web site have given a false impression to the public of increased student achievement when little has occurred. Granted, there have been many improvements in the district, but not of the magnitude reported by the district administration.
Although this approach to the reporting of information may be acceptable in politics or business, it is antithetical for educational institutions to manipulate information in this way. Educational institutions need to be held to higher standard, and objectively report the facts without using inflated information, spin, hype, or propaganda. To do otherwise, not only brings Dr. Eastwood's credibility into question, but may jeopardize the credibility of the school district.
Annually, the RIC unit of Orange-Ulster BOCES reports Middletown's graduation rates for the previous year in the New York State Report Card. For example, in the spring of '09, the report card listed Middletown's '08 graduation rates. The false impression given by the report card is that the reported data represents official state rates, and that the information presented has been verified and certified by the state. As a point of fact, RIC Orange-Ulster BOCES only collects information from local school districts prior to printing the report card. District superintendents have the discretion to alter information and are solely responsible for reporting and interpreting graduation rates. On two occasions, we contacted RIC and requested confirmation and clarification of graduation rates. Their response was to direct us to Dr. Eastwood, and they later contacted him to assure him that they had not given us any information. Obviously, RIC staff are mere functionaries of local district superintendents, and play little or no role in authenticating the validity graduation rates. These observations also helps to explain the difficulties in obtaining correct and official data concerning graduation rates; since, only the superintendent can provide this information. Dr. Eastwood has never reported the official graduation rates nor cohort numbers to the public.
Last year, Dr' Eastwood changed the official size of the '04 and '05 cohorts; thereby, altering the the graduation rates for the '08 and '09 classes, respectively. The graduation rate is equal to the number of students who graduate by August 31 divided by the number of students who stared in that class in 9th grade (the class cohort). In examining Dr. Eastwood's actions, we need to ask the following question. Why did it take almost four or five years to correct the size numbers of the '04 and '05 cohorts? The Public relation advantage and effects of changing the size of the cohorts is easy to see. On Oct, 2009, based on Dr. Eastwood's modification, RIC reported a 19% change for the June '8 and '09 graduation rates, and by decreasing the size of the '05 cohort, the '09 rate spiked to 77% compared to the '08 rate of 68%. We must now asked this question : Was the change in the cohort numbers after so many years by Dr. Eastwood justified, or just a manipulation of the data to inflate graduation rates? Given the timing of these changes, it appears that the later point is more probable.
Graduation Rates
Part II : Analysis
After Dr. Mauro's report that the graduation rates for the Middletown School District have not not changed significantly for the last several years, we were not surprised by Dr. Eastwood's attack of Dr. Mauro at the board meeting and on the district web site. We interrupted his response as a recognition of the potential damage this information could do to his inflated image of the district's academic achievement, and as a defense against a questioning of his credibility. However, during his long attacks, Dr. Eastwood never reported an official listing of the district's graduation rates between '03 to '09. According to RIC, only the district can officially report graduation rates and clarify the information provided in the state report cards. Since Dr. Eastwood has neither clarified nor provided this information to the public, how can anyone outside the administration have the correct updated official graduation rates or cohort numbers?
Following a request by Mrs. Isseks , Dr. Eastwood begrudgingly provided to the board a copy of a state form from RIC updating the June '08 an '09 graduation rates to 62% and 74%, respectively. Later, the Record reported our August graduation rates between '05 to '09 as : '05-59%, '06-71%, '07-69%, '08-68%, '09-77%. Statically, between '05 and'09, the overall graduation rate mean is approximately 69% plus/minus a large standard deviation of approximately 11%. Hardly a stellar achievement, and clearly indicate that THE CHANGE IN OUR GRADUATION RATES IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT BETWEEN '05 - '09. The lack of a statistically significant difference is even after Dr Eastwood's alteration of the '08 and '09 graduation rates (See Part I). It is also interesting to note, with the exception of the '09 rate in which Dr. Mauro estimated the size of the '05 cohort, that the graduation rates which he stated at a board meeting were, for the most part, the same or higher than the graduation rates reported by the Record between '05 - '09. Since graduation rates are the prime indicator of student achievement. Dr Eastwood's comments and the Record's headline appear to have grossly exaggerated our student achievement under his administration. It is important to know where we are before we and move forward. The records headline is also puzzling given the Record's June, 2009 article by Mr. Paul Brooks. He reported on the '08 and '09 graduation rates of 33 districts in Orange Sullivan and Ulster counties. For '08, of the 16 districts in Orange county, only two districts had lower graduation rates than Middletown. Of the 33 districts listed, Middletown's graduation rates fall within the lowest 20% of the 33 districts listed.
Graduation Rates
Part III: Use of Number of Graduates
Without Use of Graduation Rates
Even more troublesome than Dr. Eastwood's exaggeration of student achievement are his statements in which he boast in the Record of almost a doubling of the number graduates between '04 and '09, and on the district web site, a more than doubling of the number a economically disadvantaged students graduating between '05-'09. His comments give the impression that the district has doubled our graduation rates. As a point of fact, in terms of achievement, an increase in graduation numbers mean nothing without a concomitant increase in graduation rates. I will illustrate an example of why reporting only the number of graduates is both deceptive and misleading. Let's compare two hypothetical schools A and B :
School A: 350 graduates total cohort 500 : graduation rate 70%
School B: 700 graduates total cohort 1000 : graduation rate 70%
If we compare school A with school B, school B has twice the number of graduates. However, without a higher graduation rate, there is no difference in student achievement. Observe, we have twice the number of graduates, but we also have twice the number of students who did not graduate. According to the New York State Report Cards, the graduation rates for economically disadvantages student have not increased significantly for the past few years. For '08, the graduation rate for economically disadvantaged students was reported as 65%. A copy of the '08 Report Card is currently posted on the district web page. Since both our graduation rate for economically disadvantaged students, and our overall graduation rates have not changed significantly for the past few years (see Part I), Dr. Eastwood's reporting of a doubling or almost doubling of the number of student graduating in the newspaper, and on the school web site have given a false impression to the public of increased student achievement when little has occurred. Granted, there have been many improvements in the district, but not of the magnitude reported by the district administration.
Although this approach to the reporting of information may be acceptable in politics or business, it is antithetical for educational institutions to manipulate information in this way. Educational institutions need to be held to higher standard, and objectively report the facts without using inflated information, spin, hype, or propaganda. To do otherwise, not only brings Dr. Eastwood's credibility into question, but may jeopardize the credibility of the school district.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)