It remains unclear what prompted two former by Superintendent S. Dallas Dance to leave their reassigned positions.
Patch readers questioned if Assistant Superintendent of the Department of Human Resources Don Peccia, who was reassigned to a teaching job, and former Chief Communications Officer Phyllis Reese, who was transferred to distributions, were given payouts to respectively retire and resign from their new positions.
"Okay, so the real question with this: How much did it cost to get them to resign? I know this wasn't done for free. And don't let them tell you "we won't comment; it's a [personnel] matter," a Patch commenter who identified himself as Matthew wrote in announcing the departures.
When asked if payouts were offered, Board of Education President Larry Schmidt declined to comment Thursday afternoon.
"I actually got a call into the attorney's office to see if I can talk about that," Schmidt said.
Typically, compensation paid to school system and government employees is public record.
As first reported by The Baltimore Sun, the to approve the resignation and retirement, effective Aug. 1, at a Tuesday night meeting.
Patch that Peccia and Reese were set to begin their new assignments on July 11. Schmidt said it is his understanding that both had started working in the positions. Calls to the school system's media relations office to confirm this were not immediately returned.
Had the two stayed in their less-prestigious posts, Peccia would have made $158,652 annually as a social studies teacher at Woodlawn High School until his three-year contract expired on June 30, 2014, and Reese was slated to make $142,549 as a copy and print specialist before her two-year contract ended on June 13, 2013.
And the real reason this needs to be questioned: Why wasn't this matter pursued in regards to voiding the contracts in their entirety? An expenditure of this magnitude needs approval of the board, correct? Furthermore, what statutory authority did Papa Joe Hairston have to offer these contracts anyway? Just wondering why this school board is so willing to part with my tax money. And as a public school teacher, it bothers me that much more.
I reported a few weeks ago that Schmidt said he was consulting legal counsel on whether the "documents"—his words—were valid. Check that out here: http://patch.com/B-cf5S. I'll see if he can tell me more next time we chat.
Here's the issue, if the contracts (and they are contracts, as they are written agreements that two parties do something respectively) weren't valid, then we just paid these two off for nothing. Why not wait and find out? If they found out that the documents were valid, which seems likely if they bought them both out, under what premise were these backroom deals binding?
I agree with you about the changes as well; all a shell game thus far.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/bs-md-co-hairston-contracts-20120810,0,6459347.story
Your silence is deafening.