Conflict simmers among officials over job
JANESVILLE — A Janesville School Board member called on the district’s top administrator to show better judgment Tuesday, while other board members came to the defense of Superintendent Tom Evert.
The controversy was over a new limited-term position that Evert wants to create to take on certain administrative duties.
School board member Amy Rashkin said she might resign from the board to apply for the job.
Rashkin made that statement after board member Tim Cullen called on Evert to withdraw his proposal for the new position.
Cullen said the position had become too controversial and was not needed.
A tense discussion ensued after Cullen broached the topic, even though board President DuWayne Severson said he was pulling it off the agenda so the board’s personnel committee could review it first.
It was the second meeting in a row that the position was pulled from the agenda at the last minute.
Cullen said he hoped “better judgment would prevail” and Evert would change his mind and withdraw the proposal before the personnel committee takes it up Tuesday, June 10. Cullen is the committee’s chairman.
No one mentioned Rashkin’s name until she brought it up, saying that not only was she interested in this position, but she also probably would apply for other positions in the district if they came open and she thought she was qualified.
“I’m not hiding anything. I’m not trying to go behind anybody’s back. I’m just looking for a job, just like people do all the time,” Rashkin said.
Rashkin said she would resign from the board if she decided to apply for a district post. That’s what should happen in such cases, according to a legal opinion from David Moore, the district’s legal counsel.
Cullen had requested a legal opinion, Evert said in a separate interview.
Moore wrote that it would be proper for a board member to resign before applying for a district job. He said it would be improper if that board member had helped create a position in order to obtain financial gain.
Rashkin was a member of the district’s bargaining team for the recent teachers contract, and that contract calls for a revamped staff-development system for teachers. The new position would, in part, coordinate the new system.
Rashkin said, however, that she came to negotiations late in the process, and the need for a new position never came up. Evert proposed the new position long after the contract was settled.
Rashkin said in a separate interview that she is looking for something new to do. She has a law degree and a master’s degree in music education.
She recently finished co-writing a book related to music education and is considering future career options, she said.
Rashkin pointed out that she has been a teacher, a lawyer, has business experience and has been involved in a variety of school district issues since she was elected in 2007.
Board member Lori Stottler said she had no problem with a one-year position that would help the district implement the changes negotiated with the teachers, and she believes Rashkin would be qualified for the position.
Rashkin said she hoped the board would consider the position on its merits and not on who might apply for it.
“Does anyone believe here for one second that if a board member abstained from voting to create the position and then resigned from the board, that the superintendent would leave that board member high and dry and hire somebody else?” Cullen asked.
At least two board members indicated they could envision Evert hiring someone else.
Cullen said he had no problem with Rashkin applying for a job. He said the board must be concerned with the behavior of the superintendent.
Cullen said Evert handed the board a dilemma: “We either approve a job that in all likelihood will go to one of the members of this board, or we say no to the job, and unless that board member resigns, we are sitting here with a board member pretty unhappy with a board that voted no. …
“You (Evert) put us in that position, and that’s what I find most discouraging about the process.
“So that’s my concern, and if a board member or board members want to take it personal, that’s up to them, but my issue is how and why it got here, and this board is not a job-creating agency for its fellow members,” Cullen said.
THE POSITION
Superintendent Tom Evert was set to propose a new position before he withdrew it from the school board’s agenda May 13, saying he needed to discuss it with Quint Studer of the Studer Group.
The Studer Group is donating its services to help the district start an innovative management system.
Evert wanted the duties of the new, 80-percent-of-full-time position to include helping get the Studer Group process rolling. That part of the position was to be paid for by Studer.
The position was to last only one year.
Evert wanted that same person to help implement a new staff-development program for teachers that was part of the recently approved teachers contract.
And that person would be responsible for a “core values” program to develop character in district students.
Evert said in a May 23 memo to the board that he and Studer had discussed the position, and Studer wanted to hire and pay for a person to handle Studer Group activities, separate from any district hiring.
That left the other duties, so Evert proposed a one-year, half-time position to handle staff development and core values.
A half-time position is the minimum needed for those projects, and it would allow the district to provide benefits, which would help recruit “the most qualified individual possible,” Evert wrote.
The cost would not exceed $41,619 for salary and benefits combined.
A position description more than three pages long calls for a master’s degree in education, experience in coordinating multiple projects, the ability to communicate effectively and the ability to work with professional staff, business people and consultants.
The person hired would report to Evert.
OTHER COMMENTS
Other comments by Janesville School Board members about the proposed new administrative position that board member Amy Rashkin has expressed interest in:
-- “My constituents don’t want me spending any more money. There’s plenty of staff in this building, in the district, to do those things.” —Kevin Murray, who noted the poor economy, local job losses and people on fixed incomes.
-- “I just don’t see the slam dunk that this position … would go to Amy. … People have the right to apply for what they want to apply for.” — Bill Sodemann
-- “I will never question anyone’s ethics or integrity on this board or in this administration. I find everybody a very ethical group, very above-board, and whether we agree or not with the position—I think that’s something we can debate—I don’t think we can debate integrity or ethics.” — Debra Kolste
-- “I’ve been here longer than any of you. This is my 11th year, and I have never, ever in all that time seen him (Superintendent Tom Evert) bring forth a person who wasn’t highly qualified for any job that he brought to us to OK. Never, ever. … And he wouldn’t be asking for this job to be there if it wasn’t absolutely necessary.” —Dennis Vechinsky
May 29, 2008 at 11:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
I feel bad I voted for her. I felt she would work for our community as an ELECTED official. She would not work for her own agenda. Resign NOW. If your job search is a priority that is more important(to you) than the board possition. RESIGN NOW! This is a conflict.
May 29, 2008 at 10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
If she cuts and runs from her elected job before the job (term) is done, who says she won't do the same if hired for this new position? That is just bad form where I come from.
She made a commitment when she ran for the board to serve out the term. Quitting early to take a position she helped create is betraying those that elected her.
Maybe I just expect too much from our elected officials.
May 29, 2008 at 9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
correction to my previous post. Should've said a little more than a year ago rather than less than a year ago.
May 29, 2008 at 9:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Had Tim Cullen not addressed these issues now, we would all cry foul if Amy Rashkin was hired for this position and questioned the ethics of this Board. I believe he's trying to nip those sentiments in the bud by being upfront about it today. I furthermore don't see that Mr. Cullen is calling Dr. Everet unethical, rather bringing this issue to the table is putting the School Board between a rock and a hard place. I'm also concerned that Mrs. Rashkin is already looking for "something new to do". We elected her less than a year ago for this position.
May 28, 2008 at 11:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tim Cullen could not have framed the issue any better. Amy Rashkin's comments come off as if she is interviewing for the job at the School Board meeting. It has all the appearances of self dealing. I ask Dr. Evert whose Core Values are being served by a tainted hiring process that looks bad and smells worse?
May 28, 2008 at 10:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
A similar situation occurred in Beloit a couple of years ago when a sitting city council member wanted to apply for the position of assistant city attorney.
After a review of state ethics rules and court decisions, it was determined that he would have to resign from the council before he could even submit an application for the job. In other words, he could not be considered for the position while he was sitting on the council.
(BTW, he did resign but did not get the job and was re-elected to the council at the next election.)
May 28, 2008 at 9:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
If Mrs. Rashkin wanted to actively seek employment with the school District of Janesville she should not have run for the office. As far as I am concerned she has a term to fill and should set an example and fulfill that obligation the the voters and to the school district.
Paid compensation should be off limits for anyone who has been elected to serve as a commisioner. If this posistion is approved I hope that Mrs. Rashkin does not apply and finishers her term before resigning.
May 28, 2008 at 3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Wow, Dennis Vechinsky seems to have forgotten where he came from again. Time and time again he sides with Dr. Evert, with little exception. I thought when he was elected, he would truly represent the staff at every school as a retired teacher.
I commend Tim Cullen for his efforts to challenge an issue if he doesn't feel it is right. With members on the school board like that, maybe Tom Evert won't get his way all the time, and we won't have to keep cutting the lower paying jobs. What about starting at the top as an example, Dr. Evert?
May 28, 2008 at 12:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Good for Cullen. Tom Evert manipulates to get what he wants. If you have ever worked for him you would know - things are not that rosy at the ESC.
May 28, 2008 at 12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
lvbald
I don't feel it is out of Cullen's realm as a school board member to question this position by the administration. I don't feel it is micromanaging, especially since a committee at the board level makes the decision to add positions or take them away. Unlike Cullen, Sodemann recently launched a moral crusade against an anti-violence campaign, attempting to turn it into propaganda to enslave our children in the homosexual lifestyle and play it off as an attempt to be fair to religious groups in the schools. I have no problem with having a fair policy (not to mention a little off subject, I have received no further information regarding the policies of the school board from Dr. Carlson or Dr. Evert per my request which I view should be considered a written open public records request- which apparently is not valid in this school district when sent to the administrator with no further instruction to who to contact to obtain this information either).
School boards control the budget and policy which the administrator carries out. A proposed creation of a new position is only a recommendation by the administrator with it's creation tied to the budget and must be school board commissioner's approval to do so. I guess I do not follow how this discussion by Cullen is micromanaging when creation of a new position is the responsibility of the school board to approve, not the administrator.
May 28, 2008 at 12:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
jdowd, I respectfully disagree with your interpretation. The only one who constantly tries to politicize the school board is Cullen. He frequently refers to "my time in Madison" and seems to think the school board operates in the same way. His reference to the superintendent leaving the board member "high and dry" makes no sense in that the board members receive no pay, and is insulting to the integrity of Dr. Evert who has always operated above board and who goes out of his way to be transparent and respectful toward the board. Further, Cullen's statement that "we (will be) sitting here with a board member who is pretty unhappy with a board who voted no" is insulting to the integrity of Rashkin and the other board members who have consistently voted their honest beliefs in what is best for the students and other citizens of Janesville. I am disgusted by Cullen's behavior and think it is time for him to resign. If he wants to go back to Madison, he should run for a POLITICAL office.
May 28, 2008 at 10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Unlike some actions of school board members, Cullen is bringing up an issue which the board has control and responsibility: personnal and administrative supervision.
Do I think that there is an ethical breach here by Dr. Evert, certainly not, but there is the potential for citizens to develop a perception of ethical and closed door cooperation to "reward" a school board member.
Cullen was very appropriate to bring this issue forward and for debate.
Look at the list of useless and divisive moral legislating others on the board bring up. Commissioner Cullen is very appropriate and pro-active for attempting to head this issue at the pass before improper perceptions can be established. Many may view this as an unprodictive debate, but it certainly relays an impression that the school board is closely idenifying and asking the tough questions which need to be asked and an effort to change the perceptions that the school board is an elitist group with little concern for the general public (which does exist in the community - thus the Studer direction).
It is certainly a right of a member of the board, since they are volunteering their time, to seek employment within the school district and the need to be straight forward and direct regarding intentions is definately good communication and proper protocal. It is always perception is politics, whether appropriate or not, I commend Commissioner Cullen for bringing this issue into the open and also commend Commissioner Rashkin for being very open regarding her intentions. I tend to feel all involved should be commended for displaying such openness and providing citizens with detailed information regarding this subject. No matter what is decided, I am confident this issue will be debated respectfully among those involved and professionally by Dr. Evert.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.