(Statement to Cranfills Gap School Board--Part ONE--August 20th, 2007: Cranfills Gap school board member, Sue Lee, read the following statement to Cranfills Gap School Board members Jeff Rose, Kathie Witte, Shelly Stuart, Virgil Tindall, and Jackie Ray Sorrels. Board president Kenny Weise was absent.)
Cranfills Gap school board member Sue Lee is addressing the other Cranfills Gap school board members:
I want to start by saying that I think this school board did not act in the best interests of the students or the school this year. Bad decisions were made, and money was spent needlessly. We had a superintendent that was manipulative, vindictive, and a liar, in my opinion. Board members would not verify anything to be the truth. I think some board members were given favors through their kids or their wives. Others must have been given some sort of reward.
Jeff, looking back, I think you were right when you said this started at the convention in Houston when Susan Ward and I were left behind Friday night without any word from anyone. Susan and I talked to Superintendent Carla Sigler that night, then found out later that she had said "we had attacked her". "Attacked" was her favorite word. Lots of people got to hear that word this year.
The superintendent wanted complete control, and this board had no say. For instance, her trip to Louisiana for five days that cost about $4,000 was taken without board permission. Nice vacation for her! No one said anything about that. When the board voted to let the seniors have a trip, five of the seven board members did not think the superintendent should go. This board was to have complete control over who went and the rules for the trip, but it was never discussed again. Superintendent Sigler did not get approval for that trip either. What did she do? She went anyway-- with board member Kathie Witte and missed four school days. We did not pay her to be on vacation during school.
At teacher contract time in the March meeting, I asked Superintendent Sigler if Laura Rose was certified to teach Special Education. Superintendent Sigler said, "Yes." After that meeting, I requested copies of Laura Rose's certification for Special Education and teacher Doug Holmes' local permit to teach technology. I also requested Superintendent Sigler's certificate for PDAS training that is required to be able to evaluate the teachers. Cranfills Gap school policy states that, in order to evaluate the teachers, you are legally required to be certified in PDAS. At a previous meeting, I had asked Superintendent Sigler if she had received the PDAS training, and she replied, "Yes." At that same meeting, she was asked if all the teachers had been evaluated. She said, "Yes." When I received my requests, there was no certification for Laura Rose to teach Special Education or Home Economics, both being subjects she had been teaching for some years and was currently teaching. Superintendent Sigler also had no certificate to legally evaluate the teachers. Doug Holmes also had no local permit to teach technology. Superintendent Sigler had insisted repeatedly that Doug Holmes did not need a local permit. The board now finds out that Doug Holmes DOES need a local permit to teach technology. So everyone who was hired at that meeting was based on Superintendent Sigler's lies. Why not just tell the truth? Liars are always caught.
At that same meeting, the high school science teacher, Michelle Dubay, who was suspended with pay by Superintendent Sigler for asking about teacher Laura Rose's certification to teach Special Education, was present. Superintendent Sigler denied all requests from Dubay and school board members to act on Dubay's contract. The next day, Superintendent Sigler sent Dubay a letter stating that the board had decided not to renew Dubay's contract. Another lie! Dubay's contract was never discussed. What Superintendent Sigler did not know, but should have known, was that not taking any action on Dubay's contract put the board into a position where Dubay automatically had another contract for the coming school year. When Superintendent Sigler found this out, she really started trying to find a way out. She proposed trying to use the letter that she, Sigler, had sent Dubay as a consent item by the board, when the board had no knowledge of the letter!
Superintendent Sigler then proposed to fire this teacher for anything that she and the board could make up, and you board members went right along for the ride. If there had been any misconduct, such as having alcohol on campus as Sigler tried to claim, Superintendent Sigler would have suspended her right then without pay. Another lie by Sigler to try to fix her mistake! Superintendent Sigler had left a message on Dubay's answering machine stating that she was proposing to fire her for havingalcohol on campus, and she would see that Dubay would never teach again if she did not resign. Kenny, you said that Superintendnent Sigler told you the attoreny told her to leave that message. Don't you think you should have called and verified that? I don't think any lawyer would tell someone to leave a threatening message like that on someone's answering machine.
I would say the payout-- including lawyer fees, substitute teacher salaries, and the salary we were still paying the suspended teacher, Dubay-- was around $30,000 for that little fiasco. All the charges against Dubay were trumped up by Superintendent Sigler, and you board members were willing to go along with anything illegal to stand by this superintendent. WHY?
So who else suffered besides Dubay? How about the kids who were denied a certified Science teacher in the classroom, while the Special Education teacher, Laura Rose, stayed in place with no consequences-- though she was not certified to teach Special Education, as well as the Home Economics students she had also taught without certification? Does this make any sense?
(Continued in next blog article)
No comments:
Post a Comment