This is a comment from a couple of posts ago replying to why the TIP got voted down. For those that are new to the blog, it is a very good recap of the past few years....
Nevertheless, my view is that the TIP has not passed for two years in a row due to a lack of trust in our administrators. Simply put, a majority of citizens do not trust them to spend our money wisely. Not without cause, of course.
Those who are long-time followers of this blog are familiar with the great bidding controversy of '08, but for newcomers, I will recap: our school administrators did not follow District policy in awarding a contract for computer networking equipment to a favored bidder...someone who just happened to be a former employee of the District. The solution offered by the favored bidder was demonstrably inferior, and cost $74,000 more, yet the District chose his bid instead. Why? Because our District does not have a rigorous bid-scoring process.
This is but one story. If you ask nearly anyone familiar with the business affairs of this District you will hear many others much like it. Some, like this one, are true (and you can see the documentation backing that assertion elsewhere on this blog and judge for yourself). Others may be mere anecdote, but all of them are evidence of the District's failure to engage honestly and forthrightly with the citizens of the three towns.
As a parent of young children, I worry that the our administrators' actions (and the subsequent reactions of some elected officials) are gradually undermining citizens' support of the District. Not that I blame the citizens themselves--after all, trust is earned, not given--but I do blame our school administrators and our elected officials for failing to conduct themselves in a manner which inspires trust, rather than mistrust.
With one child in kindergarten and another several years away from entering the school system, I have a great deal at stake. I believe we are at an inflection point in the history of our District: either we begin the difficult process of restoring trust and accountability now, or we risk provoking a backlash that could ultimately end in the breakup of the cooperative.
I hope that the election of two new Board members marks a turning point, and that now the Board can begin make the changes that need to be made in order to restore the kind of transparency and accountability that are the necessary building blocks of trust.
I also hope that those who read and comment on this blog will remain as ongoing, active participants in the affairs of this District even after the election: please, attend School Board meetings, praise what you see as good, and protest the not-so-good as you see fit. The Board needs your input, even if they don't always welcome it."
This came from an anonymous poster. Reposting...
ReplyDeleteh, so now I know who "Durham Parent" is. Let's air out some more details that haven't come out. Seth Fiermonti is upset because his company didn't get the technology contract. That is what started this fiasco.
Two companies bid on a proposal, one was higher than the other. The lower proposal, which one might think would be the better choice, was a far less superior product (the bed request asked for wireless technology, his bid included technology that was 1. incompatible with the district's equipment (so was said at the board meeting) and 2. the technology was several years old. It was said publicly at the board meeting that I watched and it was repeated by the business manager. I don't know about you, but I hope the board spends my tax money in a frugal way - but not on technology that is inferior and two years old (in computer years, that is like a 100 years)
The winning bidder was a company (I forget the name of it) that is familiar with the district's equipment and sells the same brand materials that already existed in the district's facilities. When you start mixing different companies' computer equipment, it can be a recipe for disaster. Even I, without a college degree, know that.
So, when you hear Seth complain publicly about bidding processes, much of his frustration is because he didn't win the bid - pure and simple.
As to the other issues he raised, I am actually glad he brought them up. I am glad to see that there is now a requirement to obtain many bids in an attempt to get the best price. THat is to be expected and hopefully will continue for time to come.
Yes, I'm Durham Parent. And yes, I got involved with the school board when my company (Foundry Networks, at the time) was under consideration for the network upgrade bid. During that process, I found many inconsistencies in the purchasing policy, and THAT, in addition to the fact that I have two children starting in the district, is what has led me to become a vocal participant at School Board meetings.
ReplyDeleteI harbor NO resentment that my company wasn't chosen. Indeed, I'm almost grateful that Foundry was not, simply because I never would have discovered the issues so many people are now talking more about.
As for the previous poster's comments on my company's products, let me please correct his or her misinformation. Our product was not old or obsolete and performed up to ten times faster than what the district ultimately chose. All the details are posted at the beginning of this blog.
What we need to do is move forward with more accountability, transparency, and communication to the public from the school board. I am a big supporter of the Town of Durham's resolution and I hope to see the school board take it seriously.
I just want to be clear- regardless of what technological equipment the district has chosen, I will be involved because I want to be sure my taxes are being spent wisely and our children are directly benefiting from excellent educational opportunities.
- Seth Fiermonti
Mark Townsend as chair? Really? Mark Townsend? Seriously? Mark? Mr. Quiet? Mr. Personality? Mr. "I have to make one comment per night to show everyone that I am awake" Townsend?
ReplyDeleteHa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
Even worse, Henry Brackett as vice chair? Really? Mr. "tax cut's" best friend? Henry? Seriously? That is even worse than Mark as chair!
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. (exaggeration meant here)
Oh, alors! Quel domage. WHat a shame. There goes the neighborhood.
From another anonymous poster....reposting...
ReplyDeleteSeth, I think you agreed with the previous poster's last paragraph. Re-read the post again. Kudos for the district for sticking to the policy.
Unfortunately, I think people lash out at decisions think they were made deliberately. I think everyone will agree that after this event came to the forefront, the district began to follow this policy - to a "T". It happens in business all the time. With the turnover on the board, in the SAU, etc. things got sloppy. SInce then, they are back on track.
Anonymous #4's points above are well-taken, but don't think that the District is completely "back on track" when it comes to fiscal policies.
ReplyDeleteI'm no finance expert, but I can read an audit report. And the audit report that came out at Wednesday's School Board meeting contained a finding of a 'significant deficiency' in controls over disbursements, and also recommended that the District begin to conduct internal audits (which is a standard best practice). Details are elsewhere on this blog, if you care to read them.
And that's a great example of why this blog is so important...it represents one way for the citizens of this district to hold our elected officials and the administrators they oversee to be held accountable.
At the time of its creation, it was pretty much the only way...when we brought our concerns over the networking bid to the Board back in 2008, we were pretty much given the middle finger. In fact, the Board Chair at the time purposely and deliberately misled the public about the actions (or more precisely, the lack of action) the Board had taken to correct the problems we discovered.
So what do you do when your school administrators aren't following the rules, and the elected officials that are supposed to oversee them are actively engaged in a cover-up? You go public--and in the age on the Internet that means something like this blog.
Have things improved? Yes. But only because a group of engaged citizens pressed for change.
Are things where they should be? No. That's why we need to keep at it until they do.
And in the meantime, you should all thank Seth Fiermonti for the time and effort he has invested over the past several years to create and maintain this forum where we all can freely express ourselves.
Seth should definitely be thanked. Thank you Seth.
ReplyDeleteAnd the "Board Chair at the time" was none other than our elder statesman board member JoAnn Portalupi. The one who kept reminding everyone (at the meeting on Wednesday night) that she is so much more experienced than the rest of the "very junior" board members. Hmm. Experienced at what?? Deception? I'll trust those junior board members over her any day.
Joanne is like a rock...only dumber.
ReplyDeleteI am shocked that Seth has the cohunes to say he harbors no ill will that his company didn't win the bid.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone else see him pooh-poohing for weeks on end complaining about his company's loss of that bid.
AFter reading his response to an earlier blogger, as I recall, his company's product that they wanted to install in the district's networking hardware was a complete unknown entity. As anyone in the industry knows, you don't install unknown, untested hardware in a system worth tens of thousands of dollars. The equipment was unreliable because it was unknown, and who would support such equipment.
That is why the district, as I recall the discussion went, purchased Cisco products. Now, could they have shopped around for better prices? of course. That is probably the only point on which I agree w/ him.
It wasn't his company's loss of the bid that he was upset about. It was a blatant refusal by the board to shop around and get a better price. And frankly, who cares at this point? He ended up being one of a group of people who are working to make the school board and administration more accountable and responsible. Are you upset that he wants to help save you money? Do you have money to burn?
ReplyDeleteAlso, the previous blogger seems to have a problem with untested entities. Does it then follow that you don't support your new, "untested" board? Your line of reasoning would have us never taking risks, never trying new things, never being progressive. That's the sort of thinking that has stumped the school board for years. I support Seth and this breath of fresh air on the school board, even though it is unknown. Time for a change.
And by the way, it's spelled cojones. And Seth must have them to stand up time and time again in front of the school board. I think he's doing a great job.
Give it up, dude...this stuff happened three years ago!
ReplyDeleteAnd Seth continues to bring it all up
ReplyDeleteNo, YOU do...probably because you have a stake in keeping the public in the dark and the money flowing!
ReplyDeleteYou know, the attack on Seth Fiermonti is, at this point, unwarranted. Did he complain about the bid THREE YEARS AGO? Yes, he did. Did the discussion go on too long? Perhaps. However, after that, he has done more than just complain about not winning a contract. He worked with others in the community to look at why the district was so unresponsive and didn't follow policy. It led to a much longer and complete bidding policy revised a year or so ago. There have been several new fresh faces on the board and most recently, while I don't think this was all him, David Taylor was voted off the board by over 400 votes. That just doesn't happen in Durham.
ReplyDeleteSo, please stop bringing up history. It's done with and I think even Seth has moved on. I hear him talk now about being on the strategic plan and offering up this blog as a voice for the board and administration to post and comment.
It's not just him either, it's now several residents in all three towns who are concerned with the district's accountability. Even the Town council in Durham is stepping in. So, he's not just a vocal minority out there...I think it's bigger than that now
We need more Seth Fiermonti's who will pay attention and take action. He created this blog, which certainly seems to be waking up the sleepy Oyster River community. And it sounds like he is also involved with the strategic plan.
ReplyDeleteAnd there are more than a few residents or a vocal minority who are concerned with accountability. People are paying attention.
Seems to me that this "community" that you have woken up is a handful of outspoken people. I hear a lot around town that the blog has tens of thousands of hits. Well, yeah, that is true but if you really look closely, every time you hit the back button or go to a different spot on the blog, it adds another hit. One visit to the blog to read what people write will put about 10 hits on the counter at the top of the page. Multiply that by how many other people read this and you get my point.
ReplyDeleteSo, divide that 33,000 hits by about 30,000 and that is how many people actually look at this vehicle for spewing hate, lies, innuendo and occasionally some worthwhile facts.
Wow, so maybe we shouldn't try to communicate or share information at all??? Sounds like more of the arrogant status quo that people are fed up with in this community. You go ahead and spend your time disecting the hits on this website and we will continue supporting and challenging our school leadership. Do you really think that 1200 voters are a "handful"??
ReplyDeletePlease wake up.
Divide the 33,000 hits by 30,000??? So 1.1 people actually read this blog??? Thank you for this very helpful and informative information... NOT!!
ReplyDeleteLack of communication is what people are complaining about. People are finally communicating, and you spend your time trying to minimize the NUMBER of people who are communicating. This is unbelieveable!!
Losing the forest for the trees comes to my mind.
ReplyDeleteInteresting fact. I just noticed that visitor counter fact.
ReplyDeleteSo the number is inflated and it is probably a few hundred at most - out of a district with what, 10,000 voters? Now THERE'S a mandate.
Wow!! Bunch of sore losers on here. Who cares how many people visit here. The polls speak for themselves. See the fosters editorial.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, they cannot talk substance and must come up with a distraction. Some things never change.
ReplyDelete"A few hundred" is an insignificant number? Will you please get a life?
ReplyDeleteOK. Can we please keep this to the issues rather than point to how the blog visitor counter increments? I have added a unique visitor counter so that every time someone visits the blog, it won't increment for every click. Hopefully, this will quiet down the comments above.
ReplyDeleteIt's been up less than a day and we already have more than 100 unique visitors! So much for the idea that only 5 people looks at the blog...
ReplyDeleteTo the other Anonymous comments on this topic. If you would like to sit down with me, please contact me. I will discuss the issues with you and talk about what happened in 2008 and why myself and so many others became involved. However, please stop the remarks about myself, David, Joann, Mark, Henry,Howard, etc... It serves no purpose and only turns the community off.
ReplyDeleteIf you really want to invoke change, then participate in the school board meetings, write letters both good and bad to the school board, get involved in the strategic plan or any other school event.
Seth,
ReplyDeleteThank you for finally asking for civility. It is a welcome change from all the other attacks on this blog.
Let's hope this continues - for everyone and by everyone.
Can we force everyone to use their names?
ReplyDeleteEveryone seems to use my name: anonymous.
The reason I don't ask people to use their names is for the teachers' sake. I have heard that people are afraid to post things here or speak up elsewhere. I want this to be an open and honest forum where people can voice their concerns or opinions without fear of being called out or come under fire at work. It would be helpful if more people actually used their names but I won't enforce that.
ReplyDeleteThe counter is up for less than two days and already we have more than 220 unique visitors!
ReplyDeleteAs for that old, discredited argument about a "vocal minority," I hear that philosophers have come up with a new name for it: "Portalupi's fallacy."
previous blogger:
ReplyDeleteUn-necessary and uncalled for. Your negativity spoils the intent of this blog -- Haven't you read any of the above remarks? YOur comments turn people off from this unique service and moves away from the intent of the blog.
If you want to spew hate and insult people's integrity, I suggest you start your own blog.
And yet I bet we'll still hear Joanne try to trash anyone who criticizes the administration as a "vocal minority"...
ReplyDeleteJoanne has become the "vocal minority."
ReplyDeleteAre we really going to have to listen to her incessantly remind everyone how inexperienced the rest of the board is (for the next year)? JoAnn, if you are reading this... please stop. It merely annoys people and makes you look arrogant. And I really mean this as a helpful hint, so hold back the claws.
ReplyDeleteThat's only the runner-up in her "most annoying endlessly repeated falsehood" contest.
ReplyDeleteThe winner is: anyone who disagrees with Joann is part of a "vocal minority" or an "interest group"!