AND THEN AGAIN…… by Tamara Pettit

……Judging from its agenda, it appears that the newly-comprised Board of Education is getting down to business tomorrow (Monday) night.    The Board has already moved it’s meeting to 6:30 p.m. to make the meetings more accessible to the public, many of whom found their work schedules made it impossible to attend meetings at 5 p.m.   Also, two meetings will be held in the Northern sector of Hancock County and two meetings will be held in Weirton during the upcoming school year to improve accessibility. 

……Under “unfinished business” is  a discussion of the new members of the Board receiving all necessary information in regards to the Mick Grievance for future discussion.  The Administrative Law Judge’s ruling on Mick vs Hancock County Board of Education was appealed by the previous Board.    The current Board could make the decision to cease the appeal; settle the case; and adhere to the Administrative Law Judge’s ruling, but certainly not without access to all the information provided during depositions.  I would have thought they would have been provided that information by the Superintendent on July 1 when they took office.

…….Under “new business” is “discussion and possible action on Legal Counsel representing the BOE.”    The law firm of Dinsmore & Shohl has represented the Board in the Mick grievance and continues to represent them in the appeal.  At their last meeting, the Board instructed Superintendent Dawn Petrovich  to meet with Prosecutor Stephen Dragisich  about an assistant prosecutor representing the Board and report back at tomorrow’s meeting.  In the past, the late Bill Fahey served as legal counsel to the Board when he was assistant prosecutor.  Fahey attended the Board meetings.  Following Fahey’s death, Assistant Prosecutor David Cross represented the Board under Prosecutor Jim Davis’s office.   Cross then worked out an arrangement to represent the Board outside of the Board office for a monthly fee.  To my knowledge, Cross never attended the Board meetings.  The Board terminated Cross’s  agreement several years ago under Superintendent Tim Woodward.  The Board at that time was continuing to pay Cross’s retainer every month, but had not availed itself of the services for which it was paying, choosing instead to pay big bucks to another law firm. 

……Whatever the Board’s decision on legal representation, I would hope the members require the legal counsel to be present at its twice monthly meetings.    The issues the Board votes on are complex and the ramifications of making a misstep have been and will continue to be costly and impact both personnel and the students.   Think about it.   Had an attorney been present to advise the Board (after it was brought to their attention by former Board member Michelle Chappell) that they didn’t have sufficient information on the scoring system used to rate the candidates for Director of Human Resources to take a vote, the County wouldn’t have spent the money on attorneys to defend their action.

…..Also on the agenda is discussion on the New Manchester Elementary available classroom issue. 

……With school starting in a few weeks, sounds like this might be a good meeting to attend.