The PCHS Board of Directors issues a statement via e-mail according to the News Journal report on their latest formal review: http://delonline.us/Q2geoG which, parenthetically, is lead in by the benign headline: State to study Pencader
It it recapped here:
In a statement issued via email Wednesday, Pencader’s board of directors said it understand the state’s concerns and is working on moving the school forward so that it is in full compliance.
since PCHS Board of Directors have held zero noticed, legal meetings since the state board meeting how could they offer a statement without writing one and voting on it. Were all board members involved in crafting it? Did the Lawyer issue it on their behalf? Was the lawyer authorized by a legal board vote to offer a statement like this?
I realize this is a seemingly small issue, but for a board that is SIGNIFICANTLY challenged by protocol, their each and every action needs to be scrutinized. This is a prime example of behavior that needs to fall under the nebulous Formal Review that the SBE and DOE issued yesterday in the weakest and vaguest of terms. The statement could have been adopted and released after the next PCHS BOD meeting, held in public after proper notice.
Perhaps that’s why the NJ headline is so weak and unassuming about what this could mean for PCHS.
Further disclaimer: I am fully aware that the article author is NOT the headline writer.
