Response to Ken Halbert
by Gary D. Bonnell
June 8, 2008

I am responding with deep regret because much of this information was discussed behind closed doors, and I was very hopeful that the information I am about to present remain there. To the contrary, Superintendent Halbert has elected to bring these issues to the public’s eye causing great disruption in our school system.

I am responsible as Board President to be the designated representative of the Board to the Superintendent and Treasurer according to Board Policy. Part of my duties is to guide and direct not only our Board but to inform the Board, Superintendent, and Treasurer of any situation that may cause liability resulting in litigation or adverse public perception knowing that we must depend upon the taxpayers for funding our school system. That being said, I was elected to the Board by the taxpayer, and I will attempt to fulfill my obligation to see that the district budget of $56 million per year is spent wisely and for the purpose it was intended. I would like to make note that I do not and will not take any Board compensation (approximately $3,000 per year) until we are out of Fiscal Emergency.

Unlike comments made by Mr. Walton, I am just one of five votes on the Board. My duties as Board President extend way beyond that realm both legally and financially. I am responsible for all of the committees that have been formed and to see that they function properly. I am also Pro Tem of every committee and have a right to not only sit in on but vote as a member of each committee. Involving any litigation, I am the individual that is named as the primary defendant. Also there are other duties required by law to be reported semi-annually to the Board President by the Superintendent such as bullying. As President, if I do not take action, I will be liable.

Since Mr. Halbert has been here, he has sent a letter to all Board members prior to each January Board meeting requesting that the Members choose a President who can be available and be able to meet and communicate with him on a daily basis. Mr. Halbert not only communicated to me his personal dissatisfaction that the previous Board President was out of state for five weeks, but that the individual did not respond to his phone calls regarding critical issues. I must emphasize that after becoming Board President, I was requested by Superintendent Halbert to discuss school related issues 95% of the time. I in no way met with him without a request from him to do so. I was appointed Chairman of the Bond Liaison Committee (at which time all committees including the Food Service and Athletic had been approved by a 5-0 vote).

Superintendent Halbert requested, because of my experience and background, to represent him on the OSFC Construction Project that pertained to his responsibility. He requested this because he wanted to concentrate his time on improving test scores. I reluctantly and with great debate with him accepted this role and told him that I was concerned that people might think I was micromanaging him and the school district. I would like to emphasize that Superintendent Halbert has publicly stated he wanted me to assume that role and thanked me for accepting it.

What I find very disturbing is that Superintendent Halbert knows the protocol that if, in fact, there is a personnel issue such as the one he made very public this past week, he had the obligation to call a Special Board Meeting and go into Executive Session to discuss any dissatisfactions especially any directed at a Board Member. To date, that has not happened. He also knows that according to Board Policy, before it is finalized and released to the public, the Board agenda must be approved by three individuals, the Superintendent, Treasurer, and the Board President. Superintendent Halbert also knows that no resignation can be placed on the Board agenda without the support of a written letter of resignation of which he has not submitted to date.

It should be recognized that I was the individual primarily responsible for bringing him to our district. I was informed before we interviewed him from individuals who were directly involved in the Wellsville School District that there were two main issues of dissatisfaction.

· He threatened to quit if he didn’t get his own way.

· He was disappearing from the district during school hours.

I questioned Superintendent Halbert prior to his interview with the Board and he debunked these allegations as sour grapes by those individuals at Wellsville because he was considering leaving them. Even after his interview and before he was hired, I discussed some of these issues with our Board and all of the Board except one accepted his explanation.

The following are issues that happened which I feel compelled to inform the public.

· When Superintendent Halbert was hired, he stated he would buy a home in the district and be part of the community and be readily available to participate in school functions. Shortly after he was hired, he moved to his home in Poland, Ohio which is approximately 45 minutes away from our district.

· Mr. Halbert recently demanded a five-year contract after only 1 ½ years into his initial three year contract. Again, Superintendent Halbert stated if he did not receive a five year contract, he would resign July 2008. This was not his first threat to quit.

· With the formation of the Athletic Committee, which was approved with a 5-0 vote of the Board, Superintendent Halbert vehemently opposed this committee because it was micromanaging not only him but the Principal and the Athletic Director. I explained to Superintendent Halbert that not only did I think it was necessary to have this committee, but the entire Board felt the same, after having packed Board rooms and numerous phone calls from dissatisfied parents. I explained to him that part of this was due to our previous President abolishing the Athletic Board, a.k.a. Athletic Committee, which had been in place all of the previous years that could be verified. This is one of the big sticking points that angered Superintendent Halbert - that I would not agree to abolish that committee. Again, Superintendent Halbert threatened to resign.

· With the formation of the Food Service Committee, which again was abolished by the previous President, Mr. Halbert vehemently opposed this committee because it would burden him with additional work. Again, the Food Service was part of our committee structure for all the previous years that could be verified. I stated to him that over 70% of our students receive either free or reduced lunches and in many cases this was the only quality meal that they receive each day. Our food quality and the lack of being able to account for $7,000 of missing money were reasons enough for me and the Board, who voted 5-0, to reinstate this committee. I would like to note that Superintendent Hiscox brought Nutrition Inc. to East Liverpool Schools illegally by violating the sealed bid procedure. Superintendent Halbert again threatened to resign because he felt we were micromanaging his authority to choose what method of food service we were to use.

· Several months ago, Superintendent Halbert presented five administrative contracts totaling three years each to the Board. After I researched the evaluation process, I discovered in a school law book, and then by verification of our attorney, that these three year contracts were in direct violation of the law. When I brought this to his attention, he was angered and I explained and supplied to him the correct process according to law (Ohio Revised Code) that these individuals could only receive a two year contract because they were not properly evaluated. He blamed Interim Superintendent Rick Wolfe for not evaluating administrators the nine months he was in our district; but the fact is, Mr. Halbert did not perform one evaluation the first year he was here. When I confronted him with that fact, he stated that he could not properly evaluate them, because he did not observe their performance. I explained to him that our attorney stated these evaluations must take place according to schedule even if it was somewhat a generic evaluation. These evaluations could not be missed and properly administer individuals a new contract. Our attorney stated that these administrators could only be issued, according to law, a two year contract and if we did otherwise, there could be expensive legal implications. Also, there was an issue with a Principal refusing to carry a cell phone. I explained to Superintendent Halbert that this was unacceptable in view of power outages in our area as well as shootings and conduct/safety issues that have occurred in other districts throughout the US. I questioned Superintendent Halbert,
after reviewing administrative evaluations contained in the Board packet (which is given out to Board Members before meetings) about the glowing evaluations of some individuals who were removed from their positions because of poor job performance. They were reassigned to another job and were assisted by a consultant. I reviewed these evaluations with Superintendent Halbert and stated I thought he should be more conservative because if any administrator did not perform properly after these glowing evaluations, it would jeopardize our Board legally. I shared with our attorneys and they concurred that I was correct. Glowing evaluations was a pattern among most administrators. He again accused me and the Board of
micromanaging and threatened to quit.

· I repeatedly requested from Mr. Halbert, because of low test scores, the evaluation of our teachers. He repeatedly stonewalled me and finally admitted that most of our teachers had not been evaluated for 23 years. I asked him if he instructed the Principals during his first year here to evaluate teachers and he said he had not. Again, Superintendent Halbert said I was micromanaging and threatened to resign.

· Superintendent Halbert sent a very critical letter to our construction managers, R. P. Carbone. I questioned the information supplied to him by some of our administrators as to its validity and requested that he make a phone call to verify that information. Instead, Superintendent Halbert sent the letter anyway…a letter that contained inaccuracies and untruths. This obviously angered R. P. Carbone construction managers and they responded in kind criticizing his accusations. After working almost on a daily basis with R. P. Carbone, I felt that it was not conducive to a good working relationship and that situation should never happen again. After conveying my feelings to Superintendent Halbert, he again threatened to resign.

· I questioned Superintendent Halbert on numerous occasions about the implementation of the Virtual Academy from Jefferson County that both he and the Board thought was a good idea to compete heads up with the Buckeye Online School for Success and either save or recoup the 185 students we have lost to BOSS. Superintendent Halbert commented that he didn’t have the time or the manpower to implement it. I told him I thought that was unacceptable in view of the loss of enrollment to our district and the loss of over $1.3 million. Mr. Halbert, again, accused me of micromanaging and threatened to resign.

· I am not the only Board Member or Administrator that Superintendent Halbert has been dissatisfied with. He has been critical of Board Members Scott Dieringer and Bob Estell for their activity on the Athletic Committee and also made accusations that it was a conflict of interest to have a former Food Service Director on the Food Service Committee. That accusation is false. Mr. Estell’s brother’s wife is the daughter of theformer Food Service Director and furthermore, the former Food Service Director is going to assist us free of charge.

· Superintendent Halbert wrote a very damaging letter attacking Treasurer Dan Telzrow and offered his resignation because he could not professionally get along with him. This letter was on the heels of Mr. Halbert repeatedly requesting and suggesting to me and other Board Members that his friend and former Wellsville Treasurer replace Mr. Telzrow.

· Over dinner, I discussed with Vice-President and Chairman of the Personnel Committee, Janice Martin, some comments conveyed to me by people in the community about the Superintendent. I stated to her two issues. 1) The perception was that he was coming in late and leaving early and was seen going up Route 11 at 2-3:00 in the afternoon. 2) There was a concern by the public that he was not attending very many of the student events in our district. She stated that he lives in Poland and it may be difficult. I stated to her that it was not our district’s problem because he said he would purchase a house in our district and become part of our community. I reiterated to Janice that this was one of the reasons I had the language changed in his five-year contract which she had resisted. It stipulated that he was to maintain normal business hours. I asked Janice Martin what approach she thought we ought to take and requested that she accompany me while I spoke with him. She declined to accompany me and then asked me how I was going to approach him. I conveyed to her what I was going to say and how I was going to say it. As soon as she left dinner, she contacted Superintendent Halbert at home conveying to him that I was dissatisfied with his performance. The following day, I met with Mr. Halbert at lunch noting that I was not accusatory, critical, or reprimanding him in any way. He stated that Janice had called him the evening before and said I was dissatisfied with his job performance. I would like to make clear that is not what I had said. I asked him to review the perception that had been conveyed to me by members of the community and consider changing his pattern especially in view that he was one of if not the highest paid superintendent in the county. Superintendent Halbert reacted with great anger and again threatened to resign.

In conclusion, Janice Martin has publicly stated that Superintendent Halbert is responsible for bringing this district out of Fiscal Emergency of almost a $2 million deficit. The fact is the person primarily responsible for this is William

Wenger, Chairman of the Financial Planning and Supervision Commission. Mr. Wenger has corrected, through his position as Chair, the majority of the financial conditions that existed. Also, I have brought to this district’s attention many corrupt acts, including but not limited to the State Auditor’s Finding for Recovery of illegal stipends paid to employees. (It should be noted that Mr. Walton voted for these illegal stipends along with former Board Members Denise Taylor and Steve Beadnell, costing our district over $70,000). It has been confirmed in public by R. P. Carbone Co. and by the Ohio School Facilities Commission that, in fact, the fraudulent enrollment figure of over 1,000 students would have resulted in a loss of over $20 million to our district and given our competitor, BOSS, brand new buildings for pennies on the dollar.

Mr. Walton has made some very strong accusations about my character and integrity. It should be known that Mr. Walton was assured that Beadnell and Taylor would be elected and he would hold the spot as President for the next two years. The taxpayers were smart enough to see that those two individuals did not get elected. Mr. Walton is very upset that he is not President and that four Board Members did not grant his recommendation to have his 24 year old relative as Commencement speaker. I think it is very relevant that Mr. Walton who votes on a $56 million budget should be questioned why he has not paid $97,200.26 in state sales tax that he collected from customers but did not pay the State of Ohio. According to two publications in the newspaper, he has not paid his property taxes either.

Miss Martin who is Vice-President and Chairman of the Personnel Committee, was employed as a cashier at Mountaineer Park. After her appointment, she became one of the active union leaders and was one of the individuals who brought Mountaineer Park on strike. During this same time frame, as Chairman of the Personnel Committee, she did not attend any personnel meetings regarding the hiring of a secretary for Treasurer Dan Telzrow. She was on the picket line. Mr. Estell, who was on the committee with her, took the lead in the interview process and selected jointly with the Treasurer several candidates and what their potential pay should be. During the Special Board meeting to vote on this issue, Janice Martin voted "No" because of the salary structure. How can you criticize when you do not attend any committee meetings? I would like also to note that she attended only one of the numerous Food Service Committee meetings. In my opinion, Janice Martin should resign her position as a member of the Personnel Committee. It seems to me it would be very difficult to be a union organizer bringing Mountaineer Park out on strike and then switch hats and represent the Board of Education regarding sensitive union issues.

I have recently discovered that Superintendent Halbert interviewed for our Superintendent’s position at East Liverpool several years ago. It is also my understanding that the interview lasted only a minute or so with the conclusion of the Board that it was his way or no way. To my understanding, he then wrote a letter chastising them for not hiring him.

It is also my understanding that there was collusion among Janice Martin, Larry Walton, and Superintendent Halbert to make this public in an attempt to force my resignation as Board President and as a Board Member. Unlike Superintendent Halbert, I do not threaten to quit nor am I a quitter. It will be a cold day before I resign. I find it interesting that Board Members Scott Dieringer and Bob Estell have not attacked me or my job performance as President of the Board, and they are not involved in this regrettable situation.

I have not received any negative phone calls from or conversations with the public. As a matter of fact, I have been inundated with supportive phone calls.

Gary D. Bonnell

President

East Liverpool Board of Education