Transparency and Accountability continues to be neglected by Chesterfield County School Board

For the past several months, there has been an unraveling of sorts in transparency and accountability regarding the Chesterfield County Public Schools and their management and oversight of school construction projects.  It appears that the schools can estimate a building's cost high and take the difference and do what it wants without the oversight of the funding source (i.e., the Board of Supervisors).

The CCPS Superintendent, Dr. Marcus Newsome, continues to make CEO wages without risk or accountability to the Taxpayer.  Meanwhile, "no one is doing anything illegal and everyone is following the rules".

So there are several recent stories in the Chesterfield Observer and the Richmond Times Dispatch related to this iceberg of data and information that lurks just below the Chesterfield sea. 

The Board of Supervisors moved quickly to fix the problem real good in an election year with a Gecker Proposal which was adoption in a 5-0 vote.  (CYA in  full effect.)

But what is needed is context... some additional information that newspapers do not have the space to print... Here's a good example... where the antiquated public participation process that the school board uses decreases transparency and accountability.

From: Rodney Martin
Date: January 17, 2015 at 11:15:21 PM EST
To: Debra Girvin <debra_girvin@ccpsnet.net>, ce_coyner@ccpsnet.net, Dianne Smith <dh_smith@ccpsnet.net>
Cc: Dan Gecker <geckerd@chesterfield.gov>, wallerr@chesterfield.gov, Steve Elswick <ElswickS@chesterfield.gov>
Subject: 1/20/15 Providence Middle Community meeting and Upcoming 1/29/15 Manchester Middle Community meeting

Mrs. Girvin,
 I am writing to you to ask about a situation that is very perplexing to me.  I am directing this question to you as my Midlothian school board representative, and Mrs. Coyner as the incoming Chair of the CCPS board and Mrs. Smith as the outgoing Chair of the CCPS board, to determine the process used by the CCPS Board in setting the Providence Middle Community meeting date, determining the invitees of the Providence Middle Community meeting, and for advertising the Providence Middle Community meeting.  I would also be interested in hearing when the CCPS Board actually mailed or emailed particular invitations.

I, several other citizens, and an active group involved in national, state, and local Chesterfield politics, have scoured the CCPS website, BoardDocs, BoardDocs web pages, and even CCPS Facebook pages to locate the invitation to the community for this important community meeting.  I have also generally googled and searched the internet as well for this topic and reviewed all of the “calendars” in each of these pages and sources, including the homepage of Provident Middle.  Though it’s possible we could have missed it, I consider the individuals and groups I mentioned above as technologically savvy and highly engaged as it relates to the CCPS Board activities and actions.  Many of us, individually and as a group, have email contacts embedded in CCPS event announcement distribution platforms so as to remain informed about important events occurring in Chesterfield County government and schools.  If we have missed it, please direct us to the location where this open invitation came to the citizens of Chesterfield County, and especially, the Midlothian Magisterial District.  If we did miss it, why did CCPS make it so hard to find if the event is as important as CCPS indicated it to be?  

While I did hear reference to a meeting at Providence Middle at the CCPS Board meeting of January 13, 2015 (in the early 3PM session which requires me to leave work early to attend) from your finance director indicating that a community meeting was planned for January 20, 2015, that appears to be the only public announcement forum.  I and other citizens would have been grateful to have more than three business days notice to plan calendars accordingly for such an important event.   Also, I was extremely surprised to find that neither Midlothian Supervisor, Dan Gecker, nor Midlothian Planning Commissioner, Reuben Waller, had any knowledge of this meeting.  In fact, at the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors meeting of January 14, 2015, which I attended, Mr. Gecker sheepishly admitted to the public that neither he or Mr. Waller were aware of this meeting, nor, more disturbingly, were they made aware of the “community” meeting via invitation of any kind.  This reference can be found as part of the public record at the at 1:48:10 mark in the recorded version of the Board of Supervisors meeting of January 14, 2015.

I would like to observe that it appears highly unusual that the elected officials of the Midlothian District would be excluded from this event, though I understand that CCPS may not have realized I may be interested in this topic.  As you know, I have been an active participant over the last year in Chesterfield political process review, inclusive of the CCPS Board and Administration actions regarding schools.  If fact, many times vocal in disagreement with policy and sometimes in agreement with policy.  Beyond what you may think of me personally, or my belief in limited government and government transparency and accountability, I have a higher interest level in this event and process than the average citizen might for several reasons.  First, I live in Midlothian and, though all taxes I pay go to support the county at large, I clearly have vested interest in seeing how the allocated funds impact my community and district.  Second, I attended Providence Middle, though back in the day, and like other alumni recently celebrated at a recent CCPS Board meeting, I want to see this facelift successfully implemented with a reasonable process and budgeted guideline, unlike that occurring with CTC@Hull.  And, third, I want to make sure that the timelines previously represented to the people of Chesterfield for repairing and maintaining aging schools follow the process outlined when CCPS Board promoted the $304 million bond referendum, thereby maintaining the integrity of the promises sold to the people.

Moreover, and most importantly, the funds raised via debt in the public markets were part of a Comprehensive Plan that views revitalization of school surrounding communities as one of its key tenets.  I have yet to determine what this plan will exactly yield in terms of new free market investments in and around these schools.  Nor do I know exactly how this plan will truly and effectively resolve poverty in these areas, though I know each one of us as concerned citizens, business owners, taxpayers, and elected officials would like to cure or lessen poverty’s impact on those affected.  Neither the Board of Supervisors nor the CCPS Board has articulated how it sees these two questions being answered either nor has either board set forth a measurement stick or a process of how to measure this success on funds spent, if any, though I am hopeful that each has some type of analytical support.  But, what I do know is that when CCPS Board and Administration leave out citizenry and the elected or appointed officials responsible for governing the impacted area, you are dooming the process to complete and utter failure on all fronts.  Mrs. Coyner has opined and waxed poetic at liaison meetings, with citizens and press attending, that this is a crucial event for her and the county to combat poverty.  It is Mrs. Coyner’s number one priority as advocated by her at many an occasion and at many a function.  Moreover, she indicated the table needed to be open to everyone to address and combat this issue.  How then could CCPS condone this obvious snub by not inviting the people who will ultimately pay for these “government investments” in tax dollars handed over to the county and then appropriated to schools?  How then could CCPS condone excluding our elected officials who, by Virginia Code and Chesterfield Charter, have authority over the amounts and timing of funds to be allocated and appropriated to schools, after receiving input from and exercising the will of the people.  And, Mrs. Girvin, how then can CCPS condone this action and with a straight face tell the public and the Board of Supervisors via letter, as recently as January 9, 2014, that the CCPS Board and Administration are accountable and transparent?  Of course, as you and have discussed, they are neither transparent nor accountable.

It is continued actions like this that epitomizes the ongoing arrogance of the CCPS Board and Administration.  This action, coupled with the recent letter from CCPS to the Board of Supervisors discussed above (attached to this email and obtained via FOIA), continues to point to a CCPS Board and Administration that cares not for the citizenry, teachers, students, or other concerned groups watching these incompetent acts continued by CCPS.  The lack of public announcement and egregious attempt to not involve the public and their elected officials in this event (along with the above letter self-describing the CCPS Board and Administration as transparent and accountable) is a clear slap in the face to the intelligence of the constituents of the county.  Transparency and accountability are nothing more than canned jargon and sound bites used by CCPS, words they banter around for effect, but not true operating standards or guidelines.  It is clear their actions are anything but accountable and transparent.  Integrity should be the the gold standard, not manipulation, deceit, and obfuscation for the end all be all of increasing a budget or defending lack of process.

I feel compelled to copy Mr. Gecker and Mr. Waller since they were mentioned herein and obviously not invited.  I am also copying Mr. Elswick as he is now the Chair of the Board of Supervisors and has been a member of the liaison committee.  I expect that the rest of each board and each administrator will be copied but leave that action to each of the recipients herein as to what they believe the correct action there to be.  I expect, over time, the press will either see this letter, note that no meaningful community invite was provided, or hear this meeting occurred after the fact, eventually asking you and the other CCPS Board members why this path was taken.  A clear path of exclusion.
So I ask you again to answer my questions posed in the opening paragraph.  Please direct me to a meaningful public announcement of this event, if we the people missed it.  Specifically, an announcement that would have included the constituents that should be attending, their elected and appointed officials of Midlothian, and other ordinary Midlothian citizens like myself who have interest in seeing Chesterfield County move forward.

Respectfully submitted.
 Rodney Martin
  PS:  I know we have discussed the 99.3% efficiency rating CCPS routinely “quotes”.  KPMG did a normal and customary audit of the county.  It did not, and does not, measure the “efficiency” of CCPS.  Nor does, or did, MGT.  Each have told you this after citizen communication with those groups.
 

Then, the angst of the school board to fight to keep a lid on public participation.

Have you ever seen the rules to participate as a concerned citizen in a school board meeting? Here you go...

Following is the procedure by which the public may speak before the School Board:         

1. Persons wishing to be heard on action items must notify the Clerk’s office by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting; they will be heard when each item is considered.
2. Persons to be heard on non-agenda items will be heard during the specified section of the meeting.
3. It is requested that an individual conduct his/her presentation in three minutes.
4. Speakers will be courteous and respectful in their remarks and will refrain from personal attacks and the use of profanity.
5. Speakers who have prepared written remarks or supporting documents are encouraged to leave a copy of such remarks and documents with the Clerk to the Board.
6. Speakers shall not discuss matters concerning the candidacy of any person seeking public office, including the candidacy of the person addressing the Board, or promote any private business venture. Speakers should also refrain from discussing matters made confidential by law, including but not limited to, matters within the attorney-client privilege, anticipated or pending litigation, matters related to specific, identifiable personnel or students, real property acquisition, or the pending award of public contracts.
7. Please note that the School Board does not generally respond to citizen concerns or questions during the Public Comment Period. When the School Board deems it appropriate, it will direct that a response from the Administration shall occur within a reasonable time after the meeting.