The BOE FOI Dance Continues
This is an excerpt (#50) from the December 11, 2007 FOI request to the WBOE-
“Any information or correspondence regardless of subject by and or between any Board member, Board attorney, the Superintendent or any employee of the Board and Mr. Joseph Breen for the time period June 2004 to date…For the purposes of this request, information shall include but not be limited to: handwritten notes, paper and electronic documents and emails to or from any participant in any of the above mentioned events…”
See what was received in response to this request -HERE- dated January 8, 2007- but not received until a few days ago.
First, let’s keep in mind that it took the BOE somewhere near 2 months to come up with this. It would seem obvious that what was received was heavily scrutinized before release. Second, it will be interesting how much we were charged by Shipman & Goodwin for the first puff of this smokescreen on the next batch of legal bills, we’ll see those soon.
As we have already seen voluminous email between Mrs. Paul, ‘Board member’, Mrs. Leavitt, ‘Board employee’ and Mr. Breen on all sorts of subjects, I have to assume they did not understand the request, or more likely, just have no intention of complying with it.
Another point that struck me as funny is that Mr. Loftus, ‘Board member’ & Mr. Breen who are long time friends and were on the WDTC together for years haven’t had email correspondence with each other in 3+ years? I was born at night, but not last night.
Further review reveals that Mrs. Paul sent email to Mr. Breen on March 27, 2007 with two attachments regarding the Academy negotiations, but yet there is nothing in the body of the email. Could it be the copier cover up trick again as we saw on her notes See them -HERE- that are the subject of this separate request? If it was, at least this time they did manage to match the paper.
And so the dance continues while the counselors at Shipman laugh all the way to the bank with our children’s education budget regarding issues that could have been cleared up quickly and cleanly by simple admission and apology or by fully complying with the FOI request as required.
It would appear that arrogance and lack of common sense will continue to prevail until folks decide they have had enough and actually stand up and do something about it.
“Any information or correspondence regardless of subject by and or between any Board member, Board attorney, the Superintendent or any employee of the Board and Mr. Joseph Breen for the time period June 2004 to date…For the purposes of this request, information shall include but not be limited to: handwritten notes, paper and electronic documents and emails to or from any participant in any of the above mentioned events…”
See what was received in response to this request -HERE- dated January 8, 2007- but not received until a few days ago.
First, let’s keep in mind that it took the BOE somewhere near 2 months to come up with this. It would seem obvious that what was received was heavily scrutinized before release. Second, it will be interesting how much we were charged by Shipman & Goodwin for the first puff of this smokescreen on the next batch of legal bills, we’ll see those soon.
As we have already seen voluminous email between Mrs. Paul, ‘Board member’, Mrs. Leavitt, ‘Board employee’ and Mr. Breen on all sorts of subjects, I have to assume they did not understand the request, or more likely, just have no intention of complying with it.
Another point that struck me as funny is that Mr. Loftus, ‘Board member’ & Mr. Breen who are long time friends and were on the WDTC together for years haven’t had email correspondence with each other in 3+ years? I was born at night, but not last night.
Further review reveals that Mrs. Paul sent email to Mr. Breen on March 27, 2007 with two attachments regarding the Academy negotiations, but yet there is nothing in the body of the email. Could it be the copier cover up trick again as we saw on her notes See them -HERE- that are the subject of this separate request? If it was, at least this time they did manage to match the paper.
And so the dance continues while the counselors at Shipman laugh all the way to the bank with our children’s education budget regarding issues that could have been cleared up quickly and cleanly by simple admission and apology or by fully complying with the FOI request as required.
It would appear that arrogance and lack of common sense will continue to prevail until folks decide they have had enough and actually stand up and do something about it.
In case you skimmed the emails, does anyone find it curious that Mr. Breen is editing the 'WA Contract Structure' document and advising Mrs. Paul on June 12, 2006?
It is a wonderful thing to finally see the evidence of what has been going on in Woodstock for years, to finally show up in print. If anyone in Woodstock thinks that Republicans and Democrats in their town are traditional politicos, then they are nuts. Woodstock politics is made up of people who for their gain, pleasure, ego or special favors for their children in the school system participate in the political pig sty that is Woodstock politics. They are neither Republicans or Democrats, just special interest morons. They over tax us, waste our money and manipulate our educational system for their own benefit. They violate the law and are so unethical it defies description. Linday Paul, Joe Breen and Becki Leavitt are just newcomers to this corrupt system. They meet in private, communicate in private, scheme in private and lie in public.
Lindsay Paul submitted a budget a year or so ago that violated Prop 46. She basically told the crowd to stuff it because that budget met the requirements of good education in Woodstock and the BOE didn't care if it violated Prop 46. The BOF headed by Shirley Rapose was silent and allowed her to do it without publicly denouncing her and the BOE. It's obvious that the people of Woodstock don't care that these people lie, violate the law and manipulate their children in a mediocre school system. They just keep electing these creeps and think they have Prop 46 to protect them. Think again Woodstock, Prop 46 does a lousy job of protecting your tax dollars, you have been over taxed for years and gotten a lousy return on the money you have spent.
I left public office because it dawned on me that I cared more about everyone else's tax dollars more than they did. As long as their homes went up in value they didn't care if their taxes went up, just not by too much though. Well, now your value is imploding and maybe the good citizens of Woodstock will wake up and start asking questions. The Health Insurance account has been a debacle for the last 10 years. Laundering money through it for the school system. Where is the Board of Finance? Joe Breen has been behind much of the abuse for the last 4 years with no public accountability. Lindsay Paul runs illegal meetings, gives out priviledged information to Joe Breen, then hides behind Attorney/Client priviledge. How convenient. They scheme together for 3 years to undermine the Academy and basically blackmail them to get money for their beloved K-8 system. Yet they never question their own system or the money spent. We have been basically dealing with lowlifes, who lie and manipulate to get their way. With the likes of Bill Loftus and Frank Corden as their willing accomplices. What a sordid mess.
This comment may be totally ignorant, but this sort of stuff is new to me: Aren't these all private correspondences from private email addresses? Is there something illegal about this? So what if they were seeking private advice from Joe Breen, so long as they weren't paying for it with tax dollars?
Your comment is not ignorant. Until recently, the Board did not have email accounts within the school system that are archivable and to standard for doing the public's business as required; therefore, all personal emails to/from Board members regarding the public's business are subject to FOI and public information. The information revealed does continue to call into question the repeated statements by Mrs. Paul denying involvement in the Breen proposal by Board members and Board attorneys, and points to the very real possibility that it was paid for with tax dollars as many believe. Not to mention the ongoing smokescreen orchestrated by the attorneys on behalf of the Board, which is most certainly being paid for with tax dollars.
Further, Mr. Breen was not elected to the BOE and the Board has repeatedly asserted attorney/client privilege with regard to the release of documents related to strategy in dealing with the Academy which is an argument that many feel is disingenuous at best. As they have been shared with Mr. Breen, that argument now becomes moot.
I am quite amused by Joe Breen's statement that he is "glad the town of Woodstock doesn't have input into the academy budget--that it (the Academy) is the saving grace of our public school system."
Thanks Admin.
I find it impossible to believe that the email correspondence provided in response to the FOIA request is in its entirety.
The dialogue in what is provided supports the impression that there were more emails.
Is Mr. Breen a consultant to the BOE?
He certainly seems to have been working closely with the BOE members on Academy issues. I believe that it is a realistic assumption that the BOE was working with Mr. Breen on his legislative proposal.
They should all be ashamed of themselves.
Dear Woodstocktruth,
I love your writings and sane, ethical approach. I was directed to you by Preston Shultz whom I met while I was on the BOE (he was an engaged and concerned parent who really tried to improve the school system). I do not know how much I will be able to contribute, but I believe I can provide information from my years of service on the BOE from 1993 to 2005.
I found reading about the FOI request of emails interesting. I have not been contacted by anyone, although I would fall under the request as I was on the BOE in 04-05. And my email, which the school has, has not changed. I can, however, clearly state that I had no email contact with Joe Breen as I was always on the other side against the 9th grade proposal and the attacks on the Academy. I only had public debate and dialog with him; all rather unpleasant. It should also be made clear that as his wife is a well paid BOE employee (and I have been told very good at her job), he has had a vested interest in his public and political behavior in relation to the public school system. This obvious fact never seems to be stated (probably because she is always characterized as being so nice), but in several public meetings they certainly acted in concert, and not in any sweet manner. Of course my view of this behavior is skewed as I was the object of her vitriol. :-)
Yours truly,
Jay Livernois
(Woodstocker in exile)