November 13, 2008
Fosters – Second Day of Fired Superintendent’s Hearing Focuses on Issued Stipends
NORTHWOOD — The second night of a public hearing where former SAU 44 School Superintendent Judith McGann is appealing the school board’s Sept. 3 decision to fire her started off with a dispute over a witness her attorney, Andru Volinsky, tried to call to testify.
Volinsky sought to call SAU 44 Joint School Board member Christine Bane of the Strafford School Board as a witness, but Ed Kaplan, attorney for the school board, said it was too short notice to call Bane.
The board broke for a deliberation and the examination of Bane began at 6:50 p.m. after the board agreed to allow her to testify on the condition she could no longer deliberate with the board when it made its decision.
Volinsky asked Bane about the time she spent as SAU 44 treasurer. Bane was responsible for endorsing checks and approached a bookkeeper for backup so she could understand what the checks were for, but was refused access to that information.
She was told McGann had restricted access to that information on grounds it “involved employees.”
When Volinsky asked Bane if she had ever approached McGann about these restrictions, she said she only raised the issue with Bruce Patrick, chair of the SAU 44 joint board, but never spoke to McGann about the issue.
Kaplan had no questions for Bane.
Volinsky’s second witness was Judith Raskin, SAU 44 grant writer from Bedford. Raskin said this is her fifth year serving as grant writer.
Volinsky asked Raskin about her duties as grant writer. She said she looks for potential grants and works on Title I grants as part of the No Child Left Behind Act. When asked how her job has changed since McGann’s firing, Raskin said she has less communication with administrators.
“I have less of a handle now on a day-to-day basis with the principals,” Raskin said.
Raskin confirmed that on an annual basis, the SAU 44 board granted authority to McGann to look for, accept and administer grants. The issue with the grants was how they were used to pay stipends.
Under the regulations of grants, teachers can only be paid stipends for hours worked beyond regular school hours.
Stipends require that teachers are working on something beyond their typical duties. Examples include an afterschool robotics team or mentor coordination.
“There is nothing inappropriate about them being paid stipends with grant money for doing extra work,” Raskin said.
In a counter-examination, Kaplan read a N.H. Department of Education guideline that specifies grant money can only be used to pay money for services beyond hours of regular work schedules. He then pointed to documentation that a teacher filed showing she had applied for stipend pay for work done during school hours.
However, as Volinsky pointed out, it was unclear from the data whether the teacher was being paid for her regular duties on that day. Kaplan also pointed out that while Raskin looks over grants, she is not the one to talk to in regards to reviewing documentation of how teachers spend their time.
One example of a school official applying for a stipend was Northwood Elementary School Principal Esther Asbell, who received $10,000 for working as a mentoring coordinator. Kaplan claims other principals in the district refused a similar stipend because they feared it was “too controversial,” which Raskin confirmed was stated at a meeting.
Volinsky pointed out these fears only arose as a result of McGann’s firing.
“No one wanted to be subjected to the scrutiny of this process,” Volinsky said.
A break in the meeting was taken at 9:15 p.m., after which Volinsky still had witnesses to call, including McGann herself.
Colleen Pingree, chair of Northwood School Board, said it was possible the joint board would reach a decision Wednesday night but added they would not rush the process. Pingree is not part of the board that will decide on the matter because she testified Tuesday night. SAU 44’s Joint School Board — made up of members from Northwood, Nottingham and Strafford school boards — scheduled Tuesday’s public meeting in response to McGann’s right under RSA 91: A to appeal the board’s decision to terminate her in a nonpublic session.
On the first night of the appeal, attorneys Kaplan and Beth Catenza represented the SAU 44 Joint School Board by focusing on various alleged accounting gaffs and questionable financial management while McGann was superintendent as justification for her firing.
The attorneys and joint board focused on what they said was $50,000 worth of unauthorized pay, stipends and bonuses going to department staff without board approval or knowledge.McGann was terminated on Sept. 3 after about 41⁄2 years of service and replaced with interim Superintendent Michael Ludwell. McGann is currently being paid, but is not acting as superintendent in any way, Volinsky said.
The Joint School Board has 30 days to issue a written decision on the appeal.