Ceasefire

Yesterday, Cathy Zavorskas resigned her school board seat following revelations at Monday night’s televised BOE meeting that the school district allowed Bruce Quinn to serve as superintendent without proper certification despite notification from the county. At that same meeting, Rappaport’s story continued to unfold – filings to the county listing her as a supervisor pre-date the December, 2003, BOE meeting assigning her that title. Plus, shortly after that same meeting, the school board negotiated with the MRAA to pay a Director of Special Services a higher salary than any other director and then awarded that salary to Ms. Rappaport even though she no longer held the title. The number of laws broken in the district has become too much for me to count.

Though there’s more to this story, and I will certainly continue to investigate, I have no plans to publish any more discoveries. I recognize that many of us wish to see justice done to those who abused our community over the years but that is not the purpose of this blog. My intention has always been to improve our community. I exposed past misdeeds to hold our public servants accountable and ensure history doesn’t repeat itself. Nothing more.

Now is the time to move forward. Per statute, the school board has 65 days to appoint a new member and will likely refrain until after the election. As of today, the two school board incumbents representing Aberdeen have still not retrieved their candidate packets and the deadline for submitting candidate petitions is this Monday. Should they choose to run, Liz Loud-Hayward and I have prepared a massive ground campaign targeting all segments of our community. We will run a vigorous campaign holding board members accountable for their records while promoting our promise to break from the past and build a better future. However, should they choose to resign with dignity, we have no plans to live in the past.

Regardless, I will honor my commitments to engage community leaders, parents, and teachers, to express my vision, hear their concerns, and develop common goals.

As for the township, I still have my concerns. Though I’m heartened by the democratic leadership’s clear intent to begin next year with a clean slate, I am troubled by the seeming attempt to “cash out” while there’s still time. From irregular financial filings to unwanted development to possibly locking the township into multiyear contracts with political contributors, it almost looks like they’re either sabotaging next year’s slate or don’t believe the populace will punish the new candidates for the party’s past sins.

Still, I believe Aberdeen’s future is bright and look forward to a new leadership untainted by corruption. I also appreciate Councilman Tagliarini’s personal notification that he has officially registered as a Democrat. This is a sharp contrast from past years when all things political were considered state secrets.

Soon, this blog will be taking a softer and more constructive tone. Yet, for those who are considering public service, please note – Don’t mistake a soft voice for a soft head. Our community has awakened and we will hold all public officials accountable to uphold and defend the public trust. >>> Read more!

Rumble at the BOE

Last night’s meeting at the BOE was quite a brawl. There were no surprises as I had broadcast my intent earlier in the day and each side was prepared to come out swinging. I stood on one end demanding that board members need to adhere to a code of conduct that avoided even the “appearance of impropriety”. At the other end were BOE Member Zavorskas and Board Attorney Gross who argued that no such “appearance” existed since there was no evidence of wrongdoing. At issue – upon the administration’s recommendation, the board appointed Zavorskas’s daughter to a work-study program (Agenda - Page 7).

Our courts are based upon the adversarial system – each side argues his position and an impartial third party (judge, jury) makes the final determinations. However, since neither of the other parties is willing to defend himself on these pages, I’ll need to refer to the ancient inquisitorial system whereby the officers of the court seek the truth. Welcome to the Court of Public Opinion.

As I’m a party to the case, my version of the event is just that, my version, and I encourage anyone interested to watch the actual board meeting when it is posted at www.marsd.org or broadcast on Huskievision.

To the best of my recollection, here’s the blow-by-blow:

On April 7th, amid allegations of misconduct during the school board elections, the high school posted positions for the work-study program. Zavorskas saw no problem with, and likely encouraged, her daughter to pursue a position at the high school; last year, the board had exempted children from the “No Nepotism” policy and, in the past, board members’ children have taken these positions.

A number of children were interviewed by the administration (primarily secretaries) and Zavorskas’s daughter was selected, presumably, based upon her office skills. Due to budget cuts, several work-study positions were eliminated but not her daughter’s job, which pays $4,290 annually.

There is no evidence that Zavorskas’s daughter received any preferential treatment.

At the board meeting, I strenuously objected to the appointment. I advocated that board members have an affirmative responsibility to avoid the “appearance of impropriety”. Board Attorney Gross responded that there was no impropriety here. By excluding children from the “No Nepotism” policy, he said, the board made clear that board members’ children should be allowed to pursue the same opportunities that other children have.

I argued that Gross was misconstruing the board’s intent. In no way does the exclusion for children nullify a board member’s obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Rather, the exemption was meant to allow their children to receive paid positions when no reasonable person would assume favoritism was shown. For example, if objective criteria was used (i.e. the one with the highest test scores) or if the process wasn’t highly selective (i.e. one that could accommodate most applicants such as a cleaning crew).

In this instance, however, Zavorskas’s daughter was selected by people who knew her mother was an influential board member and who used purely subjective criteria in judging her the best candidate. A reasonable person can certainly be expected to suspect that favoritism was shown. Therefore, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, the board should not be appointing their children to these positions.

Gross responded that there’s no evidence of impropriety. I answered this isn’t a court of law but the court of public opinion. His feeling was that I had the burden to show evidence of favoritism. I insisted it was the board’s responsibility to demonstrate no favoritism had been shown. Following Gross’s logic, there is no “appearance of impropriety” so long as there’s no “evidence of impropriety”. That may be true in a courtroom but not in a boardroom.

The board bylaws specifically prohibit any family member from using a board member’s position to secure financial gain (Conflict of Interest, No. 9270-E). The board can never say this girl didn’t receive preferential treatment. They can only claim there’s no evidence that she did. Of course, there could never be any evidence since “personnel” issues are confidential and beyond public scrutiny. Hence, in the board’s view, no evidence means no problem.

Though Zavorskas didn’t participate in the debate, she later voiced the opinion that she and her daughter were being victimized in a smear campaign. She insisted that neither she nor her daughter had done anything wrong and that her daughter got the job based upon her own merits.

My time was up but the argument continued after the meeting and off camera. Zavorskas insisted this blog regularly attacks her with baseless lies and is now going to use this opportunity to vitiate her daughter as well. I responded that this blog never attacked her prior to the school board elections and hasn’t attacked her since. Furthermore, the discussion isn’t about what her daughter did; it’s about what Zavorskas failed to do, namely avoid the appearance of impropriety.

Gross then raised four points. First, he suggested that my reasoning would preclude board members’ children from participating in any school events because it could always be suggested they were shown favoritism. I responded that I draw the line where there’s financial gain, the same place where the bylaws draw the line.

He then argued that forbidding board members’ children from pursuing these opportunities was not fair to the children themselves. I agreed. This is one of the sacrifices a board member’s family makes in order for that board member to serve. The families of public servants are often asked to make sacrifices to preserve the public trust.

Next, Gross believed that asking board members to make such a sacrifice was unreasonable considering how much they already do, how much they already sacrifice, and how few people are willing to assume the mantle of responsibility. I replied that preventing board members’ children from getting jobs in the school district seemed, to me, not only a very small sacrifice but a very obvious one that board members assume when they accept the position. Nor did I believe that such a rule would have prevented a single sitting board member from running for office.

Lastly, Gross asked why I would publish anything that could possibly cast Zavorskas’s daughter in a bad light when there’s nothing I could do to alter the board’s decision. I told him, the next time a board member considers allowing his child to take a district job, I hope this article gives him the impetus to reconsider.

Unlike the board members, I do not represent the public. These views are my own. I submit this case to the Court of Public Opinion and make one request – let your voices be heard. The school board works for us and they should never forget it. >>> Read more!

Barbato-Zavorskas Regain Control

Yesterday’s Matawan-Aberdeen school board election was a blowout by any measure. Despite complaints of ethical misconduct, Jan Rubino garnered 1105 votes, possibly a new record in local school board elections. Her running mate, Martin Ruprecht, won 986 votes to Ken Aitken’s 759. It may also have been the most divisive with a record 758 undervotes and write-ins. The proposed budget was defeated for the 7th consecutive year .Yet, the people breathing the biggest sigh of relief were never on the ballot.

Yesterday’s election only saw a 17% voter turnout, in line with historical norms. While Aitken ran a campaign of ideas, his opponents worked to get out the vote. (Although Aitken’s numbers were lower than his prior election bid, this was likely due to his name being last on the ballot, the loser’s slot.) In an election where organization matters more than ideas or principles, the “powers-that-be” have every advantage.

The Barbato-Zavorskas (Barza) wing has the organization. They have aligned themselves with the local teachers union, members of the town council, and activists in the PTO. Barbato and Zavorskas also have deep ties within the community. Zavorskas has been living in the same house nearly her entire life. Barbato has been on the school board for almost a generation.

The Barza wing thrives on voter apathy. As long as most of the township remains convinced that no school board will ever improve education or reduce taxes, they will not take the time to vote. Unfortunately, the voters have squandered a real opportunity for change. Dr. O’Malley’s appointment, opposed by the Barza wing, could have been a watershed moment. He may now be driven out like the former superintendent, Bruce Quinn.

Meanwhile, Aberdeen’s town council members are relieved that grassroot efforts are so easily defeated. Despite every attempt by the current school board leadership to increase citizen participation through public and televised meetings, they could not raise voter turnout.

Yet, I remain optimistic. Ken Aitken lost this election, not the ideals of creating a low-tax, high-performing school district. There were nearly 1000 undervotes and write-ins for the Matawan and Aberdeen candidates but only 102 undervotes on the question of the budget. The budget was soundly defeated 54.76% to 45.24%.

Additionally, I credit this blog with the record number of undervotes in Aberdeen. Hundreds of people chose to not vote for a second candidate rather than push a button for someone without honor.

The Barza Wing and Sobel Gang may be celebrating now but even they must realize that change is afoot. And when it comes, it won’t be a tinkle but a torrent.

For over seven years, the people of Aberdeen have been begging for a candidate who will reduce the tax burden and expunge the corruption. For over seven years, we have been seeking a candidate who will prepare our children for a competitive, complex, and uncertain future. For over seven years, Aberdeen has been searching for a candidate who actually fights for the people. And next year we shall have it.

Mark your calendars. Plans are underway. 2009 will be the year we take back our town and take back our schools. >>> Read more!

The Battle for School Board Control

On April 15th, the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District is having its annual school board elections. Council members John Barbato and Catherine Zavorskas are waging a relentless campaign through their Mini-Me’s, Jan Rubino and Marty Ruprecht. They’ve abandoned all pretense of fighting “for the people” in their mad quest for power. The only thing standing in their way is the truth.

The stakes are high. For the first time in years, we have a school board trying to restrain spending and raise standards. They’ve won concessions on employee contributions to healthcare, halted all new construction, hired a demanding superintendent with a proven track record, and taken the prior administration to task for not raising test scores. Baby steps, for sure, but at least they’re steps in the right direction.

Opposed to the board majority is the Barbato-Zavorskas wing. For years, they’ve turned the school district into their personal fiefdom, doling out jobs and special favors for the privileged few. They supported every one of former Superintendent Quinn’s empire building schemes and have fought every effort to impose standards, including the appointment of Superintendent O’Malley.

Representing the board majority, Ken Aitken has tried to wage a campaign of ideas. He appeared at the BOE Meet the Candidates Night and created a website stating his record and platform.

In contrast, Rubino and Ruprecht have used every unscrupulous tactic Barbato and Zavorskas could imagine.

Meet the Candidates –
As detailed in my prior posting, they engineered a no-show to prevent any press coverage and then disseminated false stories to justify their actions.

Soliciting Contributions from District Employees –
The school board bylaws specifically forbid any board member from soliciting any employee or vendor for campaign contributions (No. 9270, Sec. H, I). Board members are further prohibited from accepting any campaign contributions from these same people (No. 9270, Sec. N). Even if a family member had received a substantial gift ($100 value) from a district employee or vendor, that board member must recuse himself from all discussions regarding that employee or vendor (No. 9270, Sec. O).

In complete disregard of the school board’s bylaws or any sense of propriety, Rubino and Ruprecht sent school employees, including a non-tenured principal, an email soliciting campaign contributions.

Enlisting Support from the Teachers Union -
While individual teachers are free to support whomever they like, the teachers union normally remains steadfast neutral. Not in this case. Not only did the local teachers union endorse the solicitation of school employees, they actually encouraged it. Rubino and Ruprecht were provided a mailing list of all teachers residing in the district, regardless of where the teachers actually work. A number of teachers who live locally but work elsewhere reported receiving this postcard from Rubino and Ruprecht.

Campaign Finance Shenanigans –
The postcards say they were paid for by “Educators for a Quality Education”. If any such organization actually exists, it is not listed anywhere in New Jersey State records or on Google.

Meanwhile, according to state election filings, Rubino and Ruprecht have only donated a measly $25 each to their own campaign. What greater proof exists that these two stooges are only stand-ins for Barbato and Zavorskas than they’re too cheap to even fund their own campaigns.

The question remains, however, who is funding their campaign?

(The filing was a bewildering display of incompetence - legally unnecessary (only contributions over $300 need be reported), highly damaging, full of errors, and submitted by Rubino. Here’s a fun game – I found seven errors in the one-page filing (counting liberally). How many can you find?)

Using the PTO for Political Purposes
In 2006, Barbato was re-elected by only 23 votes. He would have lost but for an absentee ballot campaign engineered by Krista Ruprecht, Marty Ruprecht’s wife. Under the guise of a “Kidz Count” campaign, Krista used PTO resources to recruit college students to submit absentee ballots for Barbato. Krista is a current PTO president. Rubino is a past president. We should expect more of the same.

Slanted Press Coverage
It’s no coincidence that the Asbury Park Press has been running a series of Letters to the Editor (plus one nonsensical editorial) critical of the current board leadership but not one letter in support. Nor is it a coincidence that these pieces began after Rubino and Ruprecht announced their candidacies.

Rubino and Ruprecht are running an unconscionable campaign to represent us in the education of our children. How sickening. A vote for either one of them is a vote against Aitken.

Vote for Ken Aitken. Leave the others blank. >>> Read more!

Meet the BOE Candidates

Last night, the community had an opportunity to meet the Board of Education candidates for the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District. The planned debate was moderated by the League of Women Voters and provided local residents a format to question the candidates. Unfortunately, there was no debate. Only two candidates actually came - Charles Kenny, who’s running unopposed in Matawan, and Ken Aitken of Aberdeen. In a remarkable display of hubris and disdain for the citizenry, two candidates, Jan Rubino and Marty Ruprecht, both of Aberdeen, ignored the event. Yet, I still consider the event a success for we got to see who the candidates truly are.

Aside from Rubino, every member of the Board of Education was present except for John Barbato and Catherine Zavorskas. Their staged absences were broadcast in advance to the local newspapers so that not a single reporter covered the event. Rubino is now trying to cover her tracks by circulating a letter that she opposed the forum and, the last time they held this type of forum, the police had to be called to control the crowd. Lies and more lies. Rubino was the board member who seconded the motion to adopt the new forum to use the League of Women Voters and the police were never called.

Rubino and Ruprecht are firmly ensconced in the Barbato –Zavorskas camp. Just as this left-wing cabal has chosen to not defend themselves in public, neither will I grant them any benefit of the doubt.

This election has become a referendum on the new direction the board has taken. Will Dr. O’Malley’s demanding standards be supported or undermined? Will the school district be judged upon services provided or actual academic achievement? Will parents and students be lulled into believing they are getting a good education or will the district publicize the stark results of standardized testing?

We should not understate the damage Barbato and Zavorskas have done to this district or their insane grab for power at the expense of the people they’ve sworn to serve. The stories of them using the school district to provide patronage jobs are true. Providing teachers lifetime tenure after 3-years of service, probably the largest impediment to educational reform, was only enacted to protect teachers from the likes of Barbato and Zavorskas.

I can appreciate the tactics used for political gain, such as feeding stories and Letters to the Editor of local papers, or recruiting college students to submit absentee ballots, but Barbato and Zavorskas have crossed a line with their latest fundraising attempt.

Below is an un-edited email (in its original red) that was sent to several school district employees, including one non-tenured principal and a staff member whose obligations include working closely with the board.

Dear friends,
As we begin our campaign we find ourselves in need of many things. We are hoping you, our valued supporters, can help us once again.
The days of simply placing signs on lawns, shaking hands and hoping that it will be enough to win an election are gone. Yes, our signs are a great help but we have found, after many campaigns that flyers, signs, magnetic reminder cards and postcards (along with postage) are all essential when trying to get the word out.
We are at a critical crossroad in this district, needing to make some critical changes. With your continued help we can accomplish so much. As board members we will show support of our new Superintendent and help to ease his transition. We will move forward and do what's best for our children and not get caught up in the day-to-day micromanagement of the district. We will work to educate every child at every level so all of our children can reach their highest potential. We will show our community, and its organizations, that we respect and value their input and opinions and support their efforts on behalf of our children.
Simply stated, we need your support of time, effort and money to run an efficient, effective and successful campaign. Only with your support can we win the election and dedicate our efforts to making the Matawan Aberdeen School District an environment where all of our children will thrive.
We are currently soliciting monetary contributions to get this campaign moving in the right direction. We can no longer afford to do it alone and need your help to raise the money that will allow us to run this campaign the best way possible.
Thank you in advance for whatever you can give. We promise to work hard to win this election for all of you.
BE PART OF THE SOLUTION!
Jan Rubino and Marty Ruprecht


P.S. of course, any contribution will be greatly appreciated but…
A donation of $25.00 will pay for 6 signs. (we need 200)
A donation of $50.00 will pay for 200 postcard stamps (we need 3000)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please make checks out to: J.R. and M.R. for Board of Education Election.
We have opened an account at Commerce, by law, for any and all donations and expenditures.

Jan Rubino 824 Arbordale Drive Cliffwood Beach, NJ 07735 566-9008

Marty Ruprecht 8 Ambler Court Aberdeen, NJ 07747 583-1352

The Board of Education is constantly reviewing personnel matters including decisions regarding tenure and disciplinary actions. Does anyone believe Rubino or Ruprecht would recuse themselves from any review involving a recipient of this email? Does anyone believe a school district employee receiving this email wouldn’t feel pressure to contribute or fear retaliation if they didn’t? Does anyone believe this email was issued without the foreknowledge and consent of Barbato and Zavorskas?

I have been very reluctant to enter the political fray within the school board and I’ve been a fierce critic of all the board members but these machinations must come to an end and it’s time to choose sides.

Ken Aitken has been a strong proponent of fiscal reform – that all new budget items be directly attributable to academics. He opposed the lease-purchasing scheme to bypass the voters and fund a $1.45 million dollar football field that continues to be a drain on the educational budget. He blockaded Quinn’s massive construction plans. Ken supports hiring a grants writer to obtain additional outside funding.

Ken is also the reason so much school information is now becoming publicly available, such as the public broadcasting of all board meetings and podcasting from the school website. He supports Dr. Gambino’s efforts to introduce more tools for measuring student performance in a timely fashion. And he believes that a program’s continued failure is a reason to cut, not increase, funding. You can learn more about Ken at his website, www.KenAitken.com.

I fully endorse Ken Aitken. As for Rubino and Ruprecht, I’ll be leaving that space blank. It’s time to send a message. >>> Read more!