45°
HOLDEN, Mass. — Almost a month after the discovery of a $1.2 Million over-expenditure in the Wachusett Regional School district's FY12 budget led to the termination the contract of Business Manager Peter Brennan, Superintendent Thomas Pandiscio is ready to bow out of the situation.
Though the school committee is yet to accept his Monday resignation, in his letter Pandiscio said he would stay on as long as he was needed but felt his "ability to provide the district with meaningful service was made difficult based on a legitimate outcry of accountability by the public."
In an interview Wednesday, Pandiscio said he stayed long enough to help with the FY13 budget so the district could open the school year.
"It was really my hope, the day I met the school committee about this, I told them we need to take a rational approach to this, and we need to solve it as a community, but it was my fear that I won't be able to be a part of this because of the political forces that will bear upon us," he said. "I said maybe you need to do something about me, but whatever you do you need to do it dispassionately and logically, and instead we've done things angrily, emotionally, and without reason — and we're actually destroying the very institution that we're trying to rebuild."
He said he told the school committee he had no problem falling on his sword for them on day one.
"I take the responsibility of this problem very seriously. There's no defense, there's no lack of accountability, there's no sense of this isn't my problem, it's Brennan's problem," he said. "All they had to say a month ago was leave, and I would have. So you've got a couple people kicking the corpse, and I'm totally emotionally un-invested, because it's on them at this point."
While he had expected it would eventually come to his resignation, Pandisico said, "what I didn't anticipate was the quick turnaround of some people who had supported me so much."
Now he fears that there is a belief that "somehow hanging me in effigy is going to restore credibility in the school system" and that "for a period of time the district is going to have a difficult time finding reasonable leadership."
Panadiscio may be leaving, but he's concerned about the ability of the district to find a replacement in the wake of the issue. When superintendents potentially coming to the district Google Wachusett, he fears they will read the anonymous comments written about the situation and say, "'if I can work some place, why would I work there?' My biggest fear is — everybody's replaceable, including me, but how are we going to get anyone to come here to clean up the mess because we just keep making a mess."
Furthermore, he said he has concerns that his leaving will not be enough for some.
"Peter left too quick," he said. "There's still blood in the water, so they want somebody. At some point hate burns itself out, but I've never seen anything like this so I'm not really sure. The important thing is that anything that has the appearance of malfeasance has been acknowledged, and had a light shone on it."
Pandiscio said that given the way the administrative team has handled the situation, he doesn't see why it requires the "off with their heads" reaction that has followed.
Part of what he says contributes to this getting traction is the electronic bulletin board provided to the community through media outlets "that allows complete anonymity."
"It's interesting, in our culture we finally have at our fingertips an available tool that allows for almost Athenian direct democracy, and the only thing it is is a mob of angry, misinformed people not even using their real names, unaccountable for truth and unaccountable for fact being able to take shots at people" he said. "We call it transparency, and we call it accountability, and we call it tapping into the parent community. I don't know what it is — but it's not that."
Pandiscio said that because of this vehicle of manipulation, there are "realities that are being created that don't exist," citing as an example the narrative surrounding last week's proposed teacher cuts and subsequent restoration.
"I proposed some reductions, and the school committee was hanging on to a $300,000 audit that they couldn't afford," said Pandiscio. "They thought they could have an audit and good schools, so what I did is point out to them, they could try, but we have to cut all these teachers."
The superintendent said this forced the school committee into a box where they had to cut the audit, which is now going forward in phases with the first stage capped at $50,000.
"It was the only rational thing to do," said Pandiscio. "So they knew that on Thursday night he's going to restore teachers — they had the paper in their hand."
Meanwhile, both online and in the community, public outcry was building over the potential loss of teachers — eight of which were from Holden elementary schools.
Yet Pandiscio said reasonable parents were manipulated into thinking they had to argue for teachers to come back, even though "there was a piece of paper in everybody's hand that already had all the teachers back."
"It's not just that they're pissed at me, and they disagree with me — be pissed, I don't care. They can be mad, but it's the manipulation that's sending me to the moon. I've never been in a circumstance in my life where people are able to so manipulate the truth," he said.
Pandiscio also addressed the letter written by Holden resident Jason Newton to Massachusetts Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester, which has been circulating throughout the community.
"It would have you believe that there was a $1.2 million error — that's true — but by some imagination that I can't even fathom, the $1.2 million error is a conspiracy, and we have somehow enlisted the support of an auditor in order to cover up some malfeasance."
While Pandiscio understands that it sounds good, he said it doesn't bear up to any fact line.
"Conspiracies are usually hidden," he said. "A conspiracy would have been, I come to work one day, find a $1.2 million error, and say 'we're screwed,' head down to accounting, tell everybody in accounting to change the books, fix the books and then hope when the auditor comes in they don't see the fix in the books. Then we fill out our end of the year report, give it to the school committee and we're on our way. That's a conspiracy."
Conversely, Pandiscio said he immediately shined a light on the error after its discovery.
"The first thing my paranoid mind goes through is, you can't let anybody think this is a cover-up, or you're screwed," he said. "There's no cover up here, the facts don't support there's a cover-up, 28 years of working honestly in the public don't support a cover-up, and the clear actions of a person saying 'we have a problem' don't represent a cover-up. If you're going to have a conspiracy, you do your deed and you don't tell anybody — I told everybody."
The superintendent said he did so because he believes the public deserves to know how their money is being spent.
The problem the district faced was "$1.2 million of goods and services purchased lawfully and appropriately by purchasing standards by the Wachusett Regional School District," for which they were then responsible.
With the money already charged to the general fund, Pandiscio said the two ways to deal with the sitution were to either find charge the expense to another account in a systematic way, or to be paralyzed in action and eventually have to charge the expense to Fiscal Year 2013.
"We do charge-backs every year," he said. "If we didn't do our routine charge-backs every year, we'd always be out of balance. We always charge things back to grants and the revolving fund. This was unanticipated charge-backs. If you went and talked to a CPA, they'd say, 'yeah this is what you do.' We've just never done it for this reason, and in this volume at this time of year."
Pandiscio also addressed the accusation of the district having "two sets of books."
While district auditor Powers and Sullivan stated that the cause of the error appeared to be "due to the fact that the internal spreadsheet used by the Business Manager to monitor budgetary spending was not routinely compared and reconciled to the MUNIS system" and management decisions were made utilizing the perceived available budget amounts based on the incorrect data, Pandiscio stressed this does not equate is to having two sets of books as has been suggested.
"There's one set of books," he said, explaining that because MUNIS cannot account for every transaction made, it requires human interpretation in an excel spreadsheet to "ascribe fact and things that are happening outside of the general fund to things that happen inside the general fund — because it's not as simple as a checkbook."
"To not deal with spreadsheets is unavoidable," he said. "If you talk to business managers, they would say this is not a good thing, but they wouldn't say 'oh my God there are two sets of books,' they'd say, 'do you know how many times I deal with spreadsheets? and oh, jeez, you've got to be careful.'"
Yet Pandiscio stressed that he doesn't believe this is not a problem, and that he owns the mistake.
"I know what I'm guilty of, and it's not malfeasance, and it's not conspiracy," he said.
The Wachusett Regional School Committee will meet again on Aug. 20 at 7 p.m. in the Media Center at Wachusett Regional High School.
Comments (43)
No Ms. Deminimus Maximus, the money isn't missing they just spent it twice.
They made a serious financial mistake and spent $1.2 Million more than they had in their checkbook. Then they underestimated their insurance and employee benefits costs by another $1.5 Million. Oh yes and there was that other $383,645 mistake....
Didn't Tom Pandiscio or Duncan Leith or Margaret Watson or Cindy Bazinet ever learn to balance a check book?
They don't know how to balance a check book and every year we are giving them $90 Million to spend? What's wrong with this picture?
To cstidsen:
Money that belongs to taxpayers is NOT missing, and that's a fact.
The rest of your post is incendiary polemic. Motive: Break up the school district, gain greater control of education funding, shrink it and drown it in the bathtub.
Spokesperson for this on the Holden Select Board? One-room schoolhouse Jim, past president of Holden Associated Taxpayers.
Parents beware. This is not in your interest.
"Parents beware. This is not in your interest." This is very much in our interest, Ms.Maxie. What did Shakespeare say, "M'thinks the lady doth protest too much"? Just move along, folks, nothing to see here. And by the way, Mr. Leith, turn on the mics at the next dysfunctional committee meeting so the rest of us can hear what you're really saying. And don't try to have us believe that many of your members don't scheme to cover up this mess with each other in violation of the "open meeting" law that you've been bringing up to silence those that oppose you, Dr.T, Maxie, Watson, Bazinet, etc....
I'm sorry but money is missing. Plainly put, money that was budgeted for items/personnel could not be spent where and on what it was budgeted for because it had to be re-allocated to make up for areas that were over extended. Consequently those "things" that had been budgeted now can not happen. Money was spent based on "perceived" surpluses for items not originally budgeted for. This does not have to mean anyone "pocketed" it this means planned spending has had to suffer losses. Did people think that it was free money because the account showed a surplus. What should but did not happen when the account/s showed surpluses, was to double check why. This is simple if all of a sudden your check book shows a large sum left over after you bills are paid do you book that European vacation or do you check the math and reconcile to what the bank says you should have. So money is missing because it was spent on things other than what was budgeted. This is a fairly simple concept. Now the question is was the School Committee made aware of the "surplus" and did they approve spending it on those "other items"? This is only half of the equation. The other half is going into a new budget when one sees a dramatic decrease in a given line item would that not also trigger a similar response.
It would be refreshing if all five town Board of Selectmen issued a unified statement to the District & School committee that demanded the firing of Mr. Pandiscio and recall of all current sitting school committee members.
I think 3 million dollars lost or not accounted for or however you speak of it is deserving of a total change from Top to Bottom because something is not working. The current process of the district telling the Towns what they will or will not accept as money to run the district must stop.The fact that the district can without so much as a vote by the affected town dismiss a teacher or principal is simply wrong by any standard. The towsnpeople from all five towns comprise the "district". The district is not a separate individual or entity that dictates to us- we dictate the running of the district- or so it was set up when first the regional decision was formatted. As much as these shcool committee members want to think their positions are above the townspeole they are not - they are supposed to be our voice in making the budget but they are sidetracked by the many other thngs that are piled upon them and so the superintendent does their job. Well over time the district contract has been written to make towns only contributors to an ever growing, all encompssing business enterprise that no longer works alongside townspeople but only takes from townspeople. Through our own fault of not demanding more answers we have allowed this monster to grow and we should not be surprised that it may consume us. The district as it operates now has put neighbor aganist neighbor, town against town and used parents and their children to promote their agenda for bigger and better at the cost of all taxpayers. The regional school system of Wachusett should be dismantled and dissolved then redesigned with at least one member of the school committee being a town finance board member for each town involved. This district administration has no right to suggest any type of solution and especially should not be involved with any form of investigation. That is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house which is simply stupid! As for the children being educated - yes they are - educated that the truth and lies do not matter if the end result is what u want, that if u are hired to do a job and screw it up you can resign and get a handsome bonus by way of a severance pay and lets not forget how they are learning the in's and out's of legal manuvering so as to avoid any criminal action being taken. Money that belongs to taxpayers is missing and that is a fact. The superintendent has steped up to take responsibility and for that people want to let him help us find our way. An accountant who evidently did not have the schooling/experience needed to do the job he was hired to do when he was hired has been fired. This is the second time five towns have been taken for a ride by a greedy superintendent. School committee members have become puppets for the school administration instead ofthe voice for townspeople. And finally the simple fact that nobody can easily recognize right from wrong because that has been clouded by promises of more activities, more gadgets and better chances to go to college from an administration that preached only recently that perhaps the towns will have to dip into their reserve funds to help out the district with its funding inadequacies should send out a strong signal that they are about to conduct business as usual and their first line of action will be to ask for the towns to help them out. Many people involved in this scandal are good people but good people can do bad things and if they do they need to suffer the consequence of their actions and that should not include staying on idefinetely for benefits, salary or any other perks.
All I can say is that your screed evinces a sad misunderstanding of the facts and that you should educate yourself as to what has truly happened here before you go calling for the heads of all involved.
Brennan was never qualified for the position. No accounting degree, n,o accounting experience, no experience in the field, but a sister on the school committee.
Poor Maximus. All the cold hard facts in the world are never going to convince her.
Within weeks after the Inspector General's investigation Al Tutela was fired and his two top administrators, Paul Soojian and Steve Penka, resigned.
Within weeks after the revelation of more than $3 Million is financial mistakes Peter Brennan resigned then he was fired then Tom Pandiscio resigned.
What part of this reality doesn't poor Maximus understand.
The part where the position of business manager is advertised for $115,000. Where is that again?
First, trial by longevity, now naming names retroactively, reaching back into an administration that ended years ago.
By tomorrow it will be Ken O'Brien in the billiard room with a candlestick.
When will the community gag on this?
Paying Dr. Pandiscio a certain salary = current budget crisis. Being on the committee eight (nine, ten, insert magic number?) years or more = extra-special culpability. Makes no sense unless your purpose is to whip the public into a frenzy.
Where is the position of business manager advertised at $115,000?
You still don’t get it do you Ms. Deminimus Maximus? Please pay attention this time. Dr. Boone’s contract is extremely relevant to our current budget crisis because:
Mr. Pandiscio’s current annual FY13 salary is $198,603 - $3,819 per week (one of the highest salaries in all of New England). WHY?
The Worcester School System is roughly four times the size of the WRSD and their Superintendent, Dr. Melinda Boone, is far more experienced than Mr. Pandiscio but her current annual FY13 salary is only $183,600.
Why does the WRSD need to pay Tom Pandiscio so much more than the far more experienced Dr. Boone? Why did the WRSD need to make Tom Pandiscio one of the highest paid superintendents in all of New England? The WRSD paid Tom Pandiscio far more money and they still ended up with a multi-million dollar mess. WHY?
Apparently having one of the highest paid superintendents in all of New England was NOT the correct answer to the district’s problems.
We need to educate children and that costs money. We also need to be sure that our tax dollars (some $90 Million per year) are being spent wisely. We need to ask the tough questions before we end up in yet another multi-million dollar crisis situation. We tried giving ex-Superintendent Al Tutela a blank check and we all remember how that ended.
No, no Max, that's not what I meant. I will need to go back to my post and change "you" to "we." The point is that there is an editing tool with this electronic bulletin board, and if you or I or Ed or Viola make a mistake or want to take something back, we can. I restated something yesterday that was murky, and now it reads much better and clearer since I edited it. No one is going to send the Feds in after you for expressing your opinions! But you or I or Ed or Viola may want to take something back as events evolve. Calling people names or insinuating that someone thinks someone is a "child-hating psychopath," as Viola posted before you, is just not helpful in coming up with solutions or encouraging progressive discourse.
Wow, all this advice and condescension too! Thanks, guys.
Take the time to read Dr. Boone's contract? Did you seriously suggest our District woes will be solved by my reading Dr. Boone's contract? No, no, Mr. Ed, that seems to be your very important job. You are the one who thinks a close examination of the contract of the Worcester superintendent of schools is relevant. Sleuth away. I note you, who made assertions, answered neither of my questions about the contract.
Where is the position of business manager advertised at $115,000?
And the Feds are going to come and get me or something, Very Patient Taxpayer?
These posts are becoming spooky.
The WRSD made more than $3 Million in budget mistakes and all Ms. Deminimus Maximus is worried about her own misspelling of the word ‘crocodile’? What’s wrong with this picture?
If she had taken the time to attend the SC meeting she would have heard them approve a $115,000 salary (an 8% - $8,400 raise) for the Business Manager’s position. She didn’t.
If she had taken the time to read a copy of Dr. Boone’s contract she would have known the answer to her questions. She didn’t.
The ‘pesky school committee’ Ms. Deminimus speaks of is the one that made Mr. Pandiscio one of the highest paid superintendents in all of New England in the first place. Obviously paying a lot of money was not the correct answer. How about they offer a more reasonable salary of $175,000 and spend the extra $30,000 or so on school supplies.
We need to educate children and that costs money. We also need to be sure that our tax dollars (some $90 Million per year) are being spent wisely. We need to ask the tough questions before we end up in yet another multi-million dollar crisis situation. We tried giving ex-Superintendent Al Tutela a blank check and we all remember how that ended.
Maximus, use the edit button next to the reply button on the bottom of your posts to change misspellings and second thoughts on previous posts. A nice feature of this electronic bulletin board. And when you come around to a new view of events, you can even change your comments to erase embarrassing previous statements. This is particularly useful if the DA, State, or Feds come in and investigate.
I spelled crocodile incorrectly and made a verb agreement error in my last post. Mea culpa.
Where is the position of business manager advertised at $115,000?
Is Dr. Boone's salary quoted with or without benefits? Does her district provide a car?
Mr. Ed now dictates what a superintendent will be paid? It's so annoying to have to bother with that pesky school committee. Oh, well, maybe they will all resign, or at least the old group Ed doesn't like.
We could hire a really cheap superintendent at a bargain and Ed could pull his strings! Yea!
Throw the sludge. See what sticks.
Here's an idea: Mr. Ed, after his torch and pitchfork crew are finished with their "kill all the lawyers" crusade against the school committee, should throw his hat into the ring to be the District's new superintendent. He has all the answers. Need a dollar figure? As an individual routinely unencumbered by fact, he can pluck one out of thin air in nanoseconds. And all those years he vociferously opposed every single initiative the District supported to improve the education of the region's children, like decent schools, small class sizes, teacher training, literacy improvement, the study of humanities, etc.? Why, that never happened. In this new Orwellian universe, up is down, the sky is green, school committee members are child-hating psychopaths, school administrators are the devil incarnate, and--wait for it--Mr. Ed thinks children are a treasure worth investing in. Mr. Ed? Doubleplusungood.
Why is the School Committee giving out raises in the middle of their budget crisis?
The School Committee recently fired Business Manager Peter Brennan and Superintendent Tomas Pandiscio resigned.
Mr. Brennan’s FY12 salary was $106,600. The SC voted to advertise this position with an annual salary of $115,000 – an 8% - $8,400 per year increase. WHY?
Mr. Pandiscio’s current annual FY13 salary is $198,603 - $3,819 per week (one of the highest salaries in all of New England). WHY?
The Worcester School System is roughly four times the size of the WRSD and their Superintendent, Dr. Melinda Boone, is far more experienced than Mr. Pandiscio but her current annual FY13 salary is only $183,600.
Given the WRSD’s dire financial situation we trust the SC will reconsider the $115,000 posted salary for Mr. Brennan’s position, that common sense will prevail and they will post Mr. Pandiscio’s position at a far more reasonable $175,000 per year salary. The estimated $30,000 we save in salaries will buy a lot of classroom supplies for the kids every year.
Note: Given the failure of the Director of Human Resources to catch any of the more than $3 Million in financial mistakes including the $1.5 Million mistake in her own budget, she should not be considered as a replacement for Mr. Brennan.
We need to educate children and that costs money. We also need to be sure that our tax dollars are being spent wisely. We need to ask questions before we blindly give the school committee nearly $90 Million per year to spend. We tried that with ex-Superintendent Al Tutela and we all remember how that ended.
Poor Deminimus Maximus she just doesn’t get it does she? Duncan Leith, Margaret Watson and Cindy Bazinet presided over more than $3 Million in mistakes (financial mismanagement) just over a nine month period and Ms. Maximus is trying to tell us ‘Don’t worry be Happy!’
Ms. Maximus has apparently forgotten that Duncan Leith, Margaret Watson and Cindy Bazinet have all been around since the dark days of the Al Tutela regime. You remember the $1.4 Million reporting error in special education funding. The $139,000 in “Wasteful Spending” caught by the Inspector General’s thirteen month investigation of their budget. The $15 Million in cost overruns on the high school building project plus the $6.4 Million in lawsuits we lost on that project. The $383,645 accounting mistake they made last September. Now a $1.2 Million mistake plus another $1.5 Million mistake and neither Duncan nor Margaret nor Cindy Bazinet caught even one of these major mistakes but apparently Ms. Maximus thinks we should just forgive and forget – AGAIN!
To restore any semblance of credibility Duncan Leith, Margaret Watson and Cindy Bazinet must immediately and permanently resign from the school committee. The SC has some very capable new members who are willing to step up and do the job. Members who are willing to ask the tough questions and make the tough decisions that Duncan, Margaret and Cindy failed to do year after year.
Mr. Pandiscio had the guts to admit his mistakes and resign. It is time for Duncan Leith, Margaret Watson and Cindy Bazinet to do the right thing for the good of the district and follow suit and let these new members step up to do their job.
Without their resignations the credibility of the school committee will remain at ZERO!
We need to educate children and that costs money. We also need to be sure that our tax dollars (some $90 Million per year) are being spent wisely. We need to ask the tough questions before we end up in yet another multi-million dollar crisis situation. We tried giving ex-Superintendent Al Tutela a blank check and we all remember how that ended.
Oh. My. God. You're just a broken record, Edwin. You've posted here over 20 times in the last three weeks, and you haven't said anything new since day one.
We get it already.
Also.
My posts will never deter Mr. Meyer. He is bent on destroying the reputation of the District to the point that his Holden Associated Taxpayer group will use this crisis in perpetuity to deny money for education. To that end, he rinses and repeats his propaganda because that's how propaganda works.
I'm posting for the general public who may not realize that Mr. Ed's crockadile tears over class size and his new-found solidarity with parents are a ruse. He and his group want to break up the District in the belief that they will then have more control over school spending. They can then shrink it and drown it in the bathtub.
Is this a mess born of a huge error in the District financial practices? Yes. Was the person directly responsible for it fired? Yes. Did the superintendent take responsibility to the point of resigning? Yes. Is there an ongoing investigation? Yes.
But Mr. Ed, who is Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Jumonville's "numbers man" are looking far beyond the immediate goal of exploiting this crisis. The three, all members or past members of HAT, want more heads to roll. They want the District so damaged that the community rises up against people who have given a good part of their lives to make our District flourish. Then Mr. Jumonville makes his motion to break up the District K-8 and we're off to the races.
Maybe the community will go for it but they deserve to know the history. If they believe Mr. Ed and his group are merely guardians of good financial practices they are in for a rude awakening. If that were the case he would not be waving his list of names and demanding resignations in order to pick off his perceived enemies one by one. The piling on is the giveaway.
Maximus:
HAT has not taken any public position on this issue so stop saying it! Maybe a court summons will shut you up. Your sour grapes are causing you to lose focus. We ALL pay taxes. We all have children and grandchildren in this school district. You and your vocal cohorts do not corner the market in caring for the education of children!
Well said, Max. Very well said.
The Grover Norquist allusion to shrinking government to the size where it can be drowned in a bathtub is an apt one, as it takes the that concept which we usually see applied to the federal government and takes applies it to the place where it does its most harm and where it acts in its most pernicious way: at the local level. I referred to it earlier as "starving the beast."
Had they their way, the kids of this district would be learning in crumbling 50-year old buildings, with technology 10 to 20 years behind the times, and with a skeleton crew of teachers, administrators, and support staff. And then we'd hear them complain that maintenance costs are too high and that test scores (their be-all and end-all of teacher effectiveness) are too low.
But even that would not be a satisfactory enough circumstance for them. No, the real devil in all of this is the teacher's union. They will never say they have won until the union is destroyed or is reduced to the effectiveness of a sewing circle.
This is religion for them, and it grinds them to the bone that they can't win in spite of all the propaganda they repeatedly spew. Propaganda such as "the FACTS are simple," and "credibility is ZERO," and "so-and-so MUST resign." Well, the facts are never simple. Funding and maintaining a school district is--as you know--an astoundingly complicated process, and the errors committed here do not admit to easy explanation or correction. There are many moving parts, and finding the most effective solution is, as Dr. Pandiscio said, is going to take time and a lot of effort.
But I don't believe that the people of this community are fooled by the likes of Mssrs. Meyer, Ferguson, and Joumonville. They know what these folks and H.A.T. are all about. It just stands as a further testament to the good work of Leith, Watson, Bazinet, Hammond, and the other present and former members of the committee who have stood up to these folks, who have supported the district's teachers and administrators, that this district shines in spite of those who see it as nothing more than a tax expenditure and themselves as nothing more than taxpayers.
Good will out; I have no doubt of that.
A reminder that in spite of Mr. Ed's insinuations and the cries of the mob he incites, Mr. Leith, Ms. Bazinet, and Ms. Watson have been found guilty of nothing. Mr. Ed is conducting a bizarre "trial by longevity" of three school committee members in the court of public opinion. Two of them do not even sit on the Business/Finance subcommittee, yet they, uniquely, are pummeled day after day, their resignations demanded because now -somehow - their resignations will restore credibility to the school committee. They and they alone should have ferreted out the horrific wrongdoings. And they must go!
Some of the torchbearers have gone rogue and started demanding additional scalps, accusing more recent members of trading votes for favors, of being dishonest, of corruption. Has Mr. Ed lost control of his mob? That's what generally happens.
As Mr. Ethier has pointed out, the original targeted members have fought to build schools, pass adequate budgets, and improve education by their dedicated work on both the subcommittee and full committee levels. They were not in a corner cackling over a cauldron of cooked books, reaping monetary or any other kind of nefarious reward. That their service to the community could, in a few short weeks, be twisted into the mockery described ad nauseum by Mr. Ed, is a travesty.
I doubt their resignations will be falling into his basket.
Neither logic, facts, reason, ridicule, nor condemnation will ever sink in, Max. He's hopeless.
Peter Brennan got fired. Tom Pandiscio resigned. Duncan Leith and Margaret Watson have spoken out AGAINST doing a forensic audit and now Cindy Bazinet is filing charges against other members of her own committee. The clearly have not got their act together.
It is time to hold these senior members of the school committee accountable for their repeated failures to catch these million dollar mistakes. It is time for Duncan Leith, Margaret Watson and Cindy Bazinet to immediately and permanently resign from the school committee.
Until Mr. Leith, Ms. Watson and Cindy Bazinet are removed the credibility of the school committee will remain at ZERO!
We need to educate children and that costs money. We also need to be sure that our tax dollars are being spent wisely. We need to ask questions before we blindly give the school committee $90 Million every year to spend. We tried that with ex-Superintendent Al Tutela and we all remember how that ended.
The decision on teacher cuts was not miraculously reversed when parents showed up at the Thursday meeting. The superintendent told the committee on Monday that most of the teacher positions would be restored if they voted for a phased-in audit, did not reinstate the Chocksett principal, voted a lower salary for a new business manager, and gave staff a couple of days to reconcile all of this. Then he could come back on Thursday and restore as many teachers as possible. Note that administrative and other cuts remained.
The committee didn't want teacher cuts but they did ask to see what cuts the District would be facing if they did not reduce expenses in those other areas. The committee understood on Monday that the cuts would be reversed as much as possible on Thursday depending on subsequent votes at Monday's meeting. And that's what happened, just as the superintendent said it would. The presence of so many parents demonstrated how concerned they were about potential teacher cuts, particularly in Holden, but even if not one parent had attended the meeting, the positions would have been restored.
The assertion, which was also made at the Holden Select Board, that parental pressure forced a reversal, is not true. The plan on Monday was to reverse those cuts on Thursday dependent upon votes of the committee.
"The superintendent told the committee on Monday that most of the teacher positions would be restored if they voted for a phased-in audit..."
You don't see a problem with that do you?
No.
The money was put toward restoring teachers.
A phased-in audit is a series of steps. It was approved by almost the entire committee --attorneys, educators, people with financial expertise, plus it was the route recommrended by most experts contacted by individual committee members. An independent audit will determine the scope of the next step. And so on.
There were other sources of funds identified in case you had forgotten.
No.
The money was put toward restoring teachers.
A phased-in audit is a series of steps. It was approved by almost the entire committee --attorneys, educators, people with financial expertise, plus it was the route recommrended by most experts contacted by individual committee members. An independent audit will determine the scope of the next step. And so on.
There were other sources of funds identified in case you had forgotten.
I think we should just blame Whitey and move on.
Until Jason Newton can explain why his salary history was so erratic during the Tutela years and why he experienced what appeared to be a 30% increase in salary from 2003 until 2004 (from $70,318 to $90,549), I am cautious about his conspiracy theories and his associations with past Wachusett administrators. Maybe it had something to do with a change in how payroll was done, but there were other oddities in his salary in other years as well like $75,000 in pay for 1999 dropping to $51,000 in 2000 then a nice increase to $62,000 in 2001. The SPED Dept. he was working in in 2004 jumped from a staff size of 3 administrators in 2002 to 6 in 2003 to 7 in 2004. These numbers all came from the District.
Pandiscio's failure was that he did not recognize that he had an incompetent business manager.He had a banker doing an accountant's job. Agree that spreadsheets can be dangerous, but a good accountant
will always reconcile to the books and take the danger out of it. They were rubber stamping incompetence.
This is manipulation in a big way and it shows a rather interesting lack of responsibility on the part of the man. Mr Pandiscio wants us to feel like he is taking heat for something that someone else did- but in reality this happened on his watch and was his responsibility. As the Superintendent he is the CEO of this venture- that business manager worked for him and he approved his numbers and methodology. What was he doing that somehow the numbers presented by his management team were off by $2 million dollars on $80 million? They lost track of 2.5% of their resources and he didn't notice?
The politics involved here are largely of Mr Pandiscio's own making and were aided by a complacent school committee that did not exercie due diligence in its fiscal oversight responsibilities. He clearly manipulated budget requests with predictions of doom unless certain funding levels were approved, then changed the song repeatedly as the circumstances changed. (Last weeks decision in Holden is a perfect example: 14 teachers/8 from Holden to be let go to. After the committee meeting at which the town expressed its strong objections - that decision was miraculously reversed for 13 of those teachers.) Bluntly -Tax payers and voters had no confidence in what was being put before them. Mr Pandiscio fostered an ugly, fundamentally untrustworthy environment and is paying the price now with his job- as he should. One hopes that the takeaway is that the School Committee becomes a hands on manager of our school district, so that the voters get their confidence restored in the integrtiy of the process and are given some intelligent options to vote for rather than up or down votes with promises of catastrophe if we vote against the budget. Good leadership can clear a lot of the cloud of mistrust that hovers over the school district- but that requires someone with open and honest management skills and unquestioned personal integrity.
He sounds angry, spiteful, and vindictive. And, contridictory. I just want the kids to get the education they deserve. This is all just ridiculous. Grown adults are fighting, arguing, name calling. It needs to stop.
What I never quite understood is : The difference between a $50k audit and a $300k audit is $250k. In reality, when one factors in the cost of salary, benefits, administrative and overhead costs and oer employee pension allocation, every $50k teacher costs the district in excess of $100k a year. And there's nothing wrong with that, it is simply part of the economics of employment.
But in the final analysis, it is hardly as if that $250k differential would have "saved" a great many of these teachers. 2 perhaps ? Maybe 2.5 ?
And, I find many of this gentleman's comments to be disturbingly Nixonian in nature. He actually references "Athenian Democracy' in one breath but then goes on to excoriate those participating in the public discourse with whom he disagrees and/or who happen to use language he deems to be unworthy of this "democracy"
This is the hallmark of one who espouses "democracy" but in truth desires anything but the democratic process.
Anyone who proclaim that anyone who questions his or her authority, or anyone who dares disagree with them, are "haters" have precious little in the way of credibility.
It's really grown old fast....
We're clearly far better off without this man in this position.
Having said that, let's not fall into the trap of thinking that all this was caused by "personalities" and thus can be changed by "personalities"
It is far more complex and challenging than that.
So let's all begin anew, get to the bottom of what happened, and learn from all of this.
Most of all, as residents, as citizens let's all be a lot more vigilant and involved than we have been.
Thanks to this electronic bulletin board, I'm able to express my opinions to the public. When I had to take my newspaper down due to an unsigned threat letter and serious threats lodged against our children, I lost that option. And when the School Committee decided several years ago that all comments from the public at meetings needed to be reviewed by Chair Watson before given, I lost the right to freedom of speech yet again. In fact, everyone lost those rights, and now look at the mess we are in. And mess it is, even in Tom's words. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press without retaliation are integral to a democratic society. Electronic bulletin boards, newspapers, and public commentary sessions are integral to a free society to combat rule by a few. Controlling the press is just as egregious. Thank you, Holden Daily Voice, for providing this avenue to your readers to learn from each other, debate issues, and share opinions - whether they are misinformed or not. We're all adults and can sort our the truth for ourselves without a monitor. If you scroll back on the videos of school committee meetings, maybe back to 2006, you can hear Tom talk about the importance of spin and the value of being the first to comment on an issue because it "sticks" in the listeners mind. Now there's the real danger.
Based on Tom's description of a conspiracy, a conspiracy would be paying a former principal turned interim SPED Director a salary plus contract payments in the same year. Then, when the IG's office asks to see the 1040 for the contract payments, the school district can't come up with one. But then the 1040 magically appears 6 months later through the business manager, who claims it was there all the time and that his department never received a call from the IG's office. That's a conspiracy. Now how did I come up with that idea?
Tom, Why was there a paper ballot in Rutland? Teachers were reporting that you were bullying them and insisting that they vote for the bloated budget. They were told that members of administration would be at the town meetings watching whose hands went up. These admin were reported at town meetings even when they didn't live in town. So Rutland had a paper ballot to protect the teachers from your bullying. You have been a bully. You have threatened and intimidated teachers and parents. You are the most dangerous type of leader. One that feels you always know whats best for us. Hence the public outcry against the IPADS.. You bought them anyway. You are arrogrant. You have been a bully. This district will function just fine without you. And when future employers google Tom Pandiscio, they will also see the comments and stories about what type of person you have been. Your comment in the article says it all, "Be Pissed, I don't care". Maybe you should care. Maybe you should have treated parents and teachers with a little respect. You can't treat people like garbage for years and expect that it won't come back to haunt you. Good bye! You will not be missed!
This is not nelpful. How many times do you need to kick the corpse until you're satisfied?
And you have totally misunderstood his comment about being pissed (or have willfully taken it out of context). The full comment reads:
"It's not just that they're pissed at me, and they disagree with me — be pissed, I don't care. They can be mad, but it's the manipulation that's sending me to the moon. I've never been in a circumstance in my life where people are able to so manipulate the truth[.]"
What he's saying is that you have a right to be angry (pissed), but it is the manipulation of the truth that is wrong.
And there is no doubt about what he is talking about there: all this lying about "two sets of books" and all that it implies. As you have been told over and over again, there are not two sets of books. There was a self-created spreadsheet that was imported into the only "set of books" that was ever submitted--the budget. There was an error on the spreadsheet, and that error was carried over into the budget for '12 and '13.
And the worst part of all of this is that you know better and spread these lies anyway.
Again, you people are trying to gin up the hotility in the community for your personal and political gain, and you are in the process of destroying what is a fantastic school district.
So why don't you do what's right and tone down the rhetoric and work to solve this rather than throwing around accusations of criminality and corruption without any evidence to support such baseless charges?
The comment that MUNIS can't track every transaction is interesting. MUNIS is a financial system and tracks every journal entered. If you you do not enter the transaction it can't track it, that is true. MUNIS can't track what you are doing in an excel spreadsheet.
The Superintendent should explain why they are not using this financial system to track all of the financial activity. It is a financial system used with school districts throughout the State and without requiring two sets of books. It seems that this is a matter of management rather than financial system.
Also, if there is nothing to hide and the Superintendent is owning up to the mistakes, a forensic audit should be welcomed. This audit will question all that has been entered and not entered into these dual sets of books. It will identify any more mistakes and allow the true financial position of the district to be uncovered. Without this how can the participating towns justify their assessments at their Town Meetings? This forensic audit is the only way to restore the faith of the community.
Like him or not, he makes some good points. People are making serious accusations without proof. We need to know what has gone on down to the penny but lets stick to the facts as we learn them. And the vitriol in the discourse from many people is NOT helping our children at all. We need civilized constructive behavior to resolve this effectively.
The master manipulator is about to leave the building with the district in shambles. I can't believe that people believe this nonsense.
It was the superintendent who pitted teachers against the forensic audit. Now why would he do that...
There is nothing to see here everyone, just move along.