Dolan: 'Same-old-same-old' thwarted voters' will

Republican Board of Education member Genard Dolan sent along the statement he read during last week's Board of Education meeting as well as a comment about today's story on the school board's split and its impact on the mayoral race.
Here is his response to the story today: Candidate Wilson was technically correct regarding the partisanship of the board in 2011. Wilson loaded the most important committees with his holdover cronies from the old Democratic board from Supt. Streifer's day.  Therefore the will of the voters was subjugated to the same-old-same-old of the previous board.  Since then there has been no partisan activity of the board.  Most if not all of the decisions of the board have been unanimous. 
The board split over the cafeteria issue simply because of the economics of the losses to food service.
This was an issue that was not going to go away. There were some savings to the city with the new contract, but not significant enough to stop the bleeding. It amounted to kicking the can down the road.  
We felt that this was as good a time as ever to resolve the issue.  
My comment that Wilson should have resigned when he decided to run for mayor was based uponhis tenure as Chairman of the Board of Ed making him a target for his opponent.  That caused everyone with an opinion of the board mostly based upon partisanship to rant.  
I have not voiced any criticism of Wilson's actions on the board or his credentials to be mayor.  I have, as have all of the other Republican members of the board intentionally refrained from publicly getting involved in the race for mayor.  Several of us have supported privately our preferences.  I for one,and I'm not authorized to speak
for the other Republicans on the board,feel that the BOE should stay above the fray.  Our mission is to advocate for the process of educating our children.  Two years from now we will have to answer to the voters for our actions.
Some will approve and some will not.
And here's the statement he read last week: The members did not know at that time the loss was so great.  The minority has felt it necessary to politicize their positions on the BOE in the blogs, and because of the misinformation by uninformed people, there is much confusion in the minds of the of voters.  Therefore I wish to clarify the position of the majority members of the BOE. I wish to address the negative vote by the full board regarding the proposed contract with Local 2267. The suggestion was made by one of the minority members of the board to investigate privatizing the food service because of the continuing losses being sustained every year.  At that time the estimated loss was $285 K.  By year end that loss became $330K. The members did not know at that time the loss was so great.   The cumulative loss over the years was over $1,000,000.  The only issue before us was “Do we have the right to privatize our food service?”  The old contract was expiring, but held a clause prohibiting the BOE from privatizing.   A committee was formed to study the matter.  The committee sampled lunches in several schools in nearby districts serviced by several vendors.  One vendor stood out and was selected from five applicants.  Their lunches served were tasty and nutritious, and the students seemed to enjoy the food.   The ensuing negotiation resulted in a surprising disclosure that this vendor would not only eliminate our losses, but would pay us $225 K to boot.   As it turned out that was a potential swing of $555 K.  It should be noted that the net savings would be slightly less because we still would have some minimal expense.  Plus where we thought because of our 40% free and reduced lunch students were causing our losses, it turned out that the district sampled had about 80% free and reduced lunch students.  So at this point it was a no brainer.  
Copyright 2013 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Dolan defends Board of Ed on lacrosse funding

For this story, I asked Board of Education members for their thoughts. I got this one, from Genard Dolan, after deadline. It still warrants interest, so here it is, in its entirety:

I thought that it was a very interesting exchange.  In fact the Board of Ed did include lacrosse in its budget for 2012-2013 even knowing that our entire budget would likely be cut. The mayor's comments regarding his side of the budget implied that he placed a higher priority on city services than the education of our children.  If anyone believes that football, baseball, soccer or lacrosse doesn't contribute to the educational experience of a scholastic career, they are grossly misinformed.  I don't believe that the mayor truly listened to the lacrosse advocates.
One concern that I have is that we will not be competitive with our surrounding towns. Bristol is a sports minded community.  We are, after all,  the home to ESPN.
I believe that the appearance of the lacrosse people were there to make the community aware of their desire to make lacrosse a varsity sport to be on a parity with our neighbors and to promote a good standard of sportsmanship, morality and citizenship. They were drawing attention to their plight.
The last thing that I want is to create a controversy between the City Council and other departments
within the municipal structure and the Board of Education.  We all have our place in the community
and are necessary to create a cohesive and attractive place to raise our families.   So let's not undercut the value of education to the market value of a community.  A good reminder of that is not many of the employees of ESPN live in Bristol.  Ask the mayor why.
I speak for myself not the Board of Education.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Educators Not On The Same Page

Related to today's story, the city's Board of Education appears to have its own rift.

Note from Board of Education member Genard Dolan on Friday morning:

Steve, you write that the members of the BOE are in conflict with the City Council.  Do not confuse the public by equating the Supt. with the BOE Commissioners.  The Supt. is speaking for himself on behalf of the Administration not the elected BOE.  The BOE members have been unaware of the discourse described in your article.  Unfortunately it gives your readers the misinformation of the Supt. speaking for the Board of Education.  You should correct this misinformation with a retraction or a corrected version of events.   Chris Wilson's quote regarding the cost per student seems unrelated to the conflict between Supt. Streifer and the Council.  In fairness to the Commissioners, you should explain the difference between the elected Board members and the Central office of the Supt.

Note from Board of Education Chairman Chris Wilson on Thursday afternoon:

Education reform is swirling all around the country, in CT and in Bristol.  All of this talk of reform causes anxiety and uncertainty for all those involved in education-students, parents, BOE members, staff and the community at large.  I am not sure about a rift.  We are all trying to do our best.  We may becoming at it from a different perspective.  137 cities and towns spend more $ than Bristol per student.  It seems that the city council wants to erode that position further.  I and some other board members support what we have accomplished over the past 8 plus years.  We do not want the quality which has been built here decimated.  WE have attracted a quality teacher staff and administrative staff which has delivered excellent results.  Since we have been level funded by the city for 3 years the fiscal constraints are significant.

We as BOE members have had to tackle difficult issues-closing schools, redistricting, program changes or eliminations.  All of these are challenging tasks without the fiscal constraints but the fiscal constraints make it more daunting.   

I am committed to public education.  I am committed to all students having the opportunity to attend college or some other post graduate experience in order that those 8500 students who pass through our doors have that opportunity.  Sometimes as we modify programs and reallocate resources to accomplish that goal the status quo is challenged.

As far as Ken’s point about the old guard.  3 incumbents ran for BOE and were elected so I am not sure what change he refers.  I think our rating within the state is pretty good and I am proud of that.  When one looks at quality schools systems throughout the state those that have a single minded focus are the successful ones.  Those where the leaders are not single minded are unsuccessful.  I am hopeful we will have the single minded and non partisan relationship which existed prior the this past election.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com