Dann chastised for doing his job

I have been reading with much interest, and, I must confess, some level of amusement, the reporting of the circumstances surrounding the K+ and Metro school affairs. It seems strange that Worthington school board members Schare and David Bressman saw fit to chastise Attorney General Marc Dann for doing his job. Having arrived at a finding, what was Dann supposed to do? Sit on the opinions until the end of the year? To clear the question of timing it might be useful to determine when the request for the opinions was made.

The issue of whether districts could charge parents for consumable materials came up in the late '80s-early '90s, when the practice started. Likewise the legality of "pay to play" emerged when districts found it necessary to do so. In both cases it was deemed that charging is permissible and does not violate the concept of a "free public education." It was deemed that co-curricular activities are not a component of "basic education," per se.

Unless things have changed since the '80s, it has been a well-established principle in case law that boards of education can only do that which is expressly authorized by the General Assembly. It would thus seem that it was the General Assembly, which should have been aware of the precedent, that was remiss by not giving authorization for the charges when it enacted the K+ program as an option for districts.

Under those circumstances, perhaps what is the strangest pronouncement came from state Sen. Steve Stivers, who in referring to the "specific authorization" requirement, has been quoted (Gongwer News Service, Volume No. 76, Report No. 190, Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2007) as saying: "That's a very Communist view of the world -- unless the government will let you do something, you can't do it." Perhaps, according to Sen. Stivers, following the law should be seen as "subversive." Maybe that explains why the legislature has been ignoring the deRolph decision regarding over-reliance on property taxes to fund education in Ohio.

Abramo Ottolenghi

Worthington

Committee should have shopped around

Do you ever shop around for insurance for your home or car just to be sure you are getting the best rate? After doing so, do you typically decide to go with the highest bidder? I doubt it, but that is just what the Worthington school district decided to do at (the Sept. 24) school board meeting.

It's not that they didn't take the time to get comparable quotes for the employee health insurance plan. In fact, they have an insurance committee of district employees who worked for months to gather the information, before advising the board to approve the highest bidder for health insurance.

Who in the world picks the highest bid out there for similar coverage? Only someone who is not spending his own money. Such is the case here, where neither the insurance committee, nor the school board, are spending their own money.

Surprisingly, it appears that only one board member, Marc Schare, even raised any questions about the committee's unusual advice to spend an extra $450,000 this year by selecting the highest bidder. And while he suggested further study by the board, he had to accept that the timing of the committee's recommendation allowed no opportunity to delay the vote.

Thus, the board has granted the request of the district employees - who fill every seat on the insurance committee - while ignoring the interests of the students and taxpayers, who have no seats on the insurance committee.

And while this questionable decision is now history, keep this example in mind as you vote on two new school board members in November. Watch and listen closely to what they say and do.

Will Worthington elect board members who will aggressively represent the interests of our students and residents, or candidates who will favor individuals who are already very well represented by their union?

It does matter, because the best interests of the students and the residents of Worthington deserve to be represented, don't they?

Jill Alfred

Worthington

Micromanaging is a problem

Even excellent school districts like Worthington can improve, and if there is one thing I would like to change is the board's habit of micromanaging the administrative team. I attended the Sept. 10 board meeting, and even though it was a light agenda and there were no comments from the public, the meeting lasted nearly 3 hours and went well past 10 p.m. The meeting was dominated by board members questioning administrators about the decisions made in the course and scope of their regularly assigned duties.

Board meetings of this nature and that last late into the night are not welcoming to the public and are a powerful deterrent to public participation. Although long meetings are sometimes necessary, I believe a board member must be respectful of the public's limited time. The district is stronger when the public attends board meetings because they are more engaged and knowledgeable of the issues. The public will attend if the Board focuses on the "big picture" policy issues and not on administrative minutia. Certainly, administrative matters must be addressed, but the board meeting is not a forum where board members should compete over who has the best grasp over daily administrative details.

We have a talented and experienced team of professional administrators who are ably supervised by our superintendent. If a board member believes an administrator could have made a better decision, he should not circumvent the chain of command by cross-examining the administrator at a public meeting, but instead discuss his concerns with their supervisor, the superintendent. The unending series of questions for administrators undercuts the superintendent's authority and makes for long, unproductive meetings. Most importantly, it distracts the Board from fulfilling its proper function; that of setting high-level, educational policy for the school district.

The board appeared to acknowledge its tendency to micromanage at the Sept. 24 meeting, which resulted in a more productive meeting.

Geoffrey P. Scott

Worthington school

board candidate