Pencader’s dysfunctional, soon to be illegal, board messes up again.

In the paper today, they indicate that the July Board meeting date of Thursday, July 2nd was a typo and that the real date is MONDAY July 2nd. So here is the amended posting.

Notice anything missing?

Public Comment?

Contracts?

I’ll see you at?

Also, old posting is there as well which raised legal concerns, again, about posting times and rules pursuant to Delaware Code Title 29, Chapter 100??

Will this confusion and seemingly purposeful circumvention end anytime soon?

 

 

Now the headline writing and the story have me confused: Is the upcoming meeting even legal?

Headline:

Pencader rebuilding board

Sub head:

Panel will elect three new members on Monday

Quote regarding the  the situation from the story:

The Pencader High School board of directors will have just two board members Monday when it meets to appoint a new board.

Co-vice presidents Abe Jones and Judi Kennedy will be the only remaining board members for the meeting. The school’s bylaws require a minimum of five board members.

Here’s where confusion and questions come in:

What panel? The panel is not names in the article, yet teased in the headline.

There is no word “panel” in bylaws or state code about seating Board Members at a charter school, if there is, show it to me please.

Abe and Judi?

They are two people, the board must have 5 and a quorum of 3 to do business?

Has the state informed them that they have the power to assign people to a taxpayer entity absent a democratic process and FOIA as outlines in Title 29 Section 100?

Later in the article is notes that Abe Jones, co Vice-President, says that Jay Anderson is THE staff representative to the board, when he is A) an applicant and B) the bylaws require 2, not one.

The “typographical error” as Judi Kennedy asserts in the side bar of the story may amount to a FOIA violation per Title 29 chapter 100:

§ 10002. Definitions.

(a) “Agenda” shall include but is not limited to a general statement of the major issues expected to be discussed at a public meeting, as well as a statement of intent to hold an executive session and the specific ground or grounds therefor under subsection (b) of § 10004 of this title.

(b) “Meeting” means the formal or informal gathering of a quorum of the members of any public body for the purpose of discussing or taking action on public business either in person or by video-conferencing.

(2) All public bodies shall give public notice of their regular meetings and of their intent to hold an executive session closed to the public, at least 7 days in advance thereof. The notice shall include the agenda, if such has been determined at the time, and the dates, times and places of such meetings, including whether such meeting will be conducted by video-conferencing; however, the agenda shall be subject to change to include additional items including executive sessions or the deletion of items including executive sessions which arise at the time of the public body’s meeting.

(3) All public bodies shall give public notice of the type set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection of any special or rescheduled meeting as soon as reasonably possible, but in any event no later than 24 hours before such meeting. A special or rescheduled meeting shall be defined as one to be held less than 7 days after the scheduling decision is made. The public notice of a special or rescheduled meeting shall include an explanation as to why the notice required by paragraph (2) of this subsection could not be given.

(4) Public notice required by this subsection shall include, but not be limited to, conspicuous posting of said notice at the principal office of the public body holding the meeting, or if no such office exists at the place where meetings of the public body are regularly held, and making a reasonable number of such notices available. In addition, all public bodies in the executive branch of state government that are subject to the provisions of this chapter shall electronically post said notice to the designated State of Delaware website approved by the Secretary of State.

I contend this meeting may be 100% illegal as it relates to a quorum, a legally sized board, and noticed.

What are the odds that 2 of the quoted supporters are both in the checkbook for payments for “other services”

Again, from the News Journal:

Shirley Roccia, who teaches ninth and 10th grade English at the school, said she has full faith in Lewis running the school.“The things she’s done here to get us back on the road to success have been outstanding,” Roccia said. “She’s a woman of character.”

Again, from the checkbook:

SHIRLEY E ROCCIA 5 payments $28,547.55
Department Division Category Check Date Amount
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 11/14/2011 $5,709.51
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 2/14/2012 $5,709.51
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 12/2/2011 $5,709.51
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 1/9/2012 $5,709.51
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 3/12/2012 $5,709.51

 

 

Hold the presses! Pencader supporters are actually supported by Pencader?!?!?!?!

From the News Journal Article:

Ronald Carbine, parent of a recent Pencader graduate who spoke in support of school leader Ann Lewis at the meeting, said he’s pleased with the school’s performance under Lewis in comparison to the previous administration.“We have an administration that knows how to run things, and the kids seem to like her,” said Carbine, who also has a contract with the school to supply information technology services. “For the situation the school was in the beginning of the year, it couldn’t have been run more smoothly.”

Um, is this the same guy in the Delaware Online Checkbook under Pencader?

RONALD CARBINE 12 payments $22,094.53
Department Division Category Check Date Amount
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 8/18/2011 $1,291.66
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 9/9/2011 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 9/22/2011 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 1/3/2012 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 2/8/2012 $1,291.66
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 1/30/2012 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OPERATING SUPPLIES 3/22/2012 $136.25
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 12/1/2011 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 11/3/2011 $2,583.33
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 3/22/2012 $1,291.66
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 3/12/2012 $1,291.66
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PENCADER BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMPUTER SERVICES 3/1/2012 $1,291.66

“Pencader Charter supporters back Lewis” – This is why headline writing sucks.

The News Journal headline from today’s story suggests that if you are a Pencader supporter, then you back Lewis. Not universally true., AT ALL. There are many parents, and students, and educators who FULLY support Pencader who do not back Lewis.

While I cannot personally fathom why they are not being more vocal, I would suggest that the work environment with “Team Lewis” banners and such appears to be toxic, and one of workplace intimidation and harassment.

The headline is an embarrassing piece of bad journalism.