In a previous post we released a document purported to be an "amendment" to the Board of Education-Pearson Education, Inc. contract of June 8, 2010. That document showed that on November 4, 2010 the Pearson payment to MCPS had been cut from $4.5 million to $1.25 million.
But the beauty of doing things behind closed doors, without Board of Education approval, and without public disclosure is that no one ever realizes what is actually going on! Not even the media.
And so, on January 18, 2012, when the Gazette newspaper ran an article about Superintendent Jerry Weast taking a trip to Australia in the summer of 2010 courtesy of the Pearson Foundation, they repeated the $4.5 million payment figure as if it was fact.
Now we know that after Superintendent Weast took the Pearson Foundation trip to Australia he came back and cut a new deal with Pearson Education, Inc.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Janis, thanks for posting. You are too easy on the elected Board of Education (Chris Barclay, president, up for re-election). This is their main job: to be responsible for the finances of MCPS. Weast was only a public employee. This suggests the elected Board of Education shirked their duty -- at the least. Similar for the County Council, who has overall fiduciary responsibility for this 'quasi-state' agency that spends upwards of $2.1B every year. I believe Essie McGuire is the council staff member who works on BOE matters. Did she not tell the Council what was going on? Was the Ed Committee not curious in the least? These are elected officials.
ReplyDeleteWHAT??? how is this even legal?
ReplyDelete@subishi - Please ask your elected Board of Education members that question.
ReplyDeleteIn the real world, an employee can't just go out and change an organization's signed contract. But this is Montgomery County. Laws don't apply here and our elected leaders turn their heads and ignore this.
I'm not a lawyer, but a social worker, so I don't fully understand contract law, except to say that I was under the impression that one person cannot change a contract that another entity entered into. Unless I'm unclear about the role of the superintendent and the board of ed members - I didn't think that the superintendent could sign in place of the board of ed on contracts. and if the board needed to vote on the original contract (which we all know it did without even reading the thing thoroughly as members stated prior to the vote) wouldn't they need to vote on amendments?
DeleteHi Subishi, you may be right, the superintendent (a public employee of the BOE) may not be able to change a contract just like that. However, he did. Now what?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Montgomery County Public Schools Board of Education Publication: About Us and How We May Help You, this is the function of the BOE vs. the Superintendent.
ReplyDelete"The Board holds legal title to property and enters into contracts for services. The superintendent monitors the provision of goods and services required under the contract."
The superintendent amending the contents of a contract seems different from monitoring the services required under the contract.
but, as Paula pointed out, he did, now what? I have no idea. Who is contacted? Does this need to be addressed in court? a motion filed by someone?
This tells us who is really in charge of our public school system. We elected a group of individuals to look out for our interests and they willingly ceded their authority to one person whom we did not pick.
ReplyDeleteD. Wilson
Mr/Ms Wilson, you are right that our elected officials on the BOE and the county council, as well as county Executive Ike Leggett, have ceded authority. There are also other government officials,though; where are they? Where is the IG? Where is the AG? And when the BOE falsely provides information to the federal government for cash prizes (see blog post on USDA awards to BOE), where are the federal government legal authorities?
ReplyDelete