MASSENA Massena Central School District officials say an appeal filed by resident Robin M. Wolpin with the state Education Department was timed to coincide with todays school budget votes.
The petition is suspiciously timed in that it is believed that its intention is to draw negative media attention upon the School District and its Superintendent immediately before the May 15 board election and budget vote, said Frank W. Miller, the districts attorney, in a statement district officials released Friday.
But Ms. Wolpin said Monday that wasnt the case at all. It was simply following the timeline the state required, she said.
It wasnt timed, she said. There was no strategic timing on that. I had 30 days from the last board meeting on April 16 to base the petition on him saying people couldnt go to a Finance Committee meeting. Its just to call the commissioners attention to something.
District officials said they received notice Friday that Ms. Wolpin had filed a 95-page appeal with the state Education Department alleging that the district and Superintendent Roger B. Clough II had violated the states open meetings law, inappropriately used district money to pay Mr. Cloughs personal legal expenses and mismanaged the district.
They said the document is a compilation of items such as newspaper clippings, photocopied sections from New York state school law and its interpretation, district correspondence and a copy of the Massena Federation of Teachers recent survey results.
It wasnt all Robin Wolpins thoughts, Ms. Wolpin said. It was a collection of newspaper articles, bills from (Mr. Cloughs personal attorney D. Jeffrey Gosch) and Goschs letter in the paper. It wasnt as though I wrote some big terrible story about Roger Clough. I just put everything together that had been occurring.
Ms. Wolpin has been critical of the districts policy in not allowing community members to attend its Finance Committee meetings as it worked on the budget that will be presented to voters today.
During Aprils Board of Education meeting, she suggested that community members should have been allowed to attend district committee meetings based on a decision rendered by an official with the state Committee on Open Government.
Ms. Wolpin told board members that, based on her communications with Robert J. Freeman, executive director of the Committee on Open Government, the districts Finance Committee meetings should have been open to the public.
Massena district officials told Ms. Wolpin in an email message that under education law, the meetings were not open to public attendance.
All public schools abide by New York State Education Law, as you noted in your reference to the State Law Book. The Committee on Open Government is governed by the New York State Department of State. Until such time as the Commissioner of Education rules in favor of this advisory opinion, and nullifies the exemption from the Open Meetings Law, we will continue to conduct advisory committee meetings in the appropriate legal manner prescribed by the Education Department, Mr. Clough said.
The Finance Committee meeting you referenced had confidential, personnel information within its agenda, he wrote. As you know, we cannot allow the public to participate in a meeting of this type.
Ms. Wolpins appeal to the Education Department also addresses work done by Mr. Gosch that had been paid for by district funds.
Mr. Gosch submitted on Dec. 6 a statement for professional services rendered and disbursements paid through Dec. 5. The amount was $27,091.40.
The payment, which was questioned by Toni Fiacco-Price, Massena resident and former board member, during this months budget hearing, was approved by Mr. Clough, board President Leonard A. Matthews, board Vice President Gregory C. Fregoe and Treasurer Penny L. DeLosh.
However, Mr. Clough said, the payments were authorized under the terms of his contract. He said Mr. Gosch had been involved in defending the district last year against allegations of harassment and retaliation levied by Assistant Superintendent Cynthia M. Yager, which he said later were found to be unsubstantiated by hearing officer Michaela Perrotto of Canandaigua, an attorney for the Cayuga-Onondaga Board of Cooperative Educational Services in Auburn.
Mr. Gosch said he had been paid by the district in representing Mr. Clough in a school district matter in which the school districts attorney could not represent him as it would have been an ethical conflict for him to do so.
Mr. Miller said in Fridays release that the district had been served with the notice of petition by Ms. Wolpin, but that the petition makes various grossly inaccurate and insubstantial allegations against the Superintendent and the District. The claims asserted are without merit and we believe they will be dismissed and the District and the Superintendent will be vindicated.
State Education Department officials said Monday that education law allows people who consider themselves aggrieved by an action taken at a school district meeting or by school authorities to appeal to the commissioner of education for a review of the action. Education law also allows the commissioner of education to remove a trustee, member of a board of education and certain other school officers for willful misconduct or neglect of duty.
Appeals must be initiated within 30 days of a decision or action complained about, according to education law. An application for removal also must be initiated within 30 days of the decision or action complained of and must contain evidence of willful, intentional wrongdoing.
It gives the commissioner the power to step in, Ms. Wolpin said.
The burden of proof in an appeal to the commissioner rests with the person bringing the petition, whom state Education Department officials said must have a clear legal right to the relief requested and the burden of establishing all the facts upon which he or she seeks relief.
The person served with the petition has 20 days to respond.