|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on May 13, 2006 18:56:37 GMT -5
Thats perfect! I love it!
|
|
|
|
Post by delilah on May 16, 2006 7:02:50 GMT -5
Good Morning Today is the Big Day and I am going to vote early so its off my list. I want to thank the Administrator of this site for founding it. You have done Plainedge a great service. With this site many people feel they can really speak their minds, exchange thoughtful ideas and have a much better understanding of the underlying problems in our district . Thanks again TODAY IS THE BIG DAY SO GET OUT AND CAST YOUR VOTE FOR A BETTER PLAINEDGE!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 16, 2006 21:29:50 GMT -5
Good Morning Today is the Big Day and I am going to vote early so its off my list. I want to thank the Administrator of this site for founding it. You have done Plainedge a great service. With this site many people feel they can really speak their minds, exchange thoughtful ideas and have a much better understanding of the underlying problems in our district . Thanks again TODAY IS THE BIG DAY SO GET OUT AND CAST YOUR VOTE FOR A BETTER PLAINEDGE!! Thank you Delilah. The goal in creating this site was so that members of Plainedge can share the information that they have with others. There is too much information for one person to remember, maintain and distribute. But, through the use this site, we can share the knowledge and become more united towards a common goal. Though at times we may believe in traveling a different road to reach that goal, we all want the same thing....quality, excellence and cost effectiveness. Over the past year, this site has had tremendous growth. It is viewed by more people than there are members - because of all of you and the information that you share! More importantly, key community individuals have not only viewed the site, but have even taken part in dialogue. I think that is a major step and hope that those individuals will continue to post here. I hope that this site has helped many become more aware of the school district, the processes that are involved and more importantly, become more educated! Keep posting and tell more people to join. There is more work to be done. The more, the merrier! |
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 18, 2006 12:09:24 GMT -5
Thurday 1pm - Has anyone been able to get on to the School District Site today?
Since early this morning I've been getting nothing but "server Not Found" error message while trying to do so!
Ed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on May 18, 2006 12:13:48 GMT -5
no problems here - 1:13 pm Maybe you were personally banned from viewing it...lol  |
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 30, 2006 8:19:41 GMT -5
School Website changeLate Monday the school website switched over to Version 2.0 of the Apache Web server software, It's resulted in a change in color and a new title: PHP-NUKE The Apache server is a Linux based software package that is most commonly used by most Internet Servers - nothing radical. Other UpdatesAdditionally, the Plaintalkonline.com site has updated some of its pages to include photos of the recent parade and a narrative about the infamous Plainedge School District e-mail wire-tapping case. It seems that some are quite willing to let the subject drop because the consequences of it can be so drastic. However, no one should walk away from a crime like this simply saying "Jim did it - and he's gone!" It was, and remains, a criminal act. There had to be a valid reason, profit or motive behind "Jim's doing it." It was not a whim of a single person - it's an indication of some very serious warped thinking and actions by others that were involved! A sickness that should be rooted out and exposed! Ed. ;D If you asked for and paid for 10 gallons of gas at the local station - and they only put 7 gallons in your tank, spilling 2 of them on the ground and keeping 1 in the pump - what would you do?
If you put $10 dollars in the Budget for your child's education - and they only spent $7 for education, sending the other $2 to banks and using the other $1 for administration - what are you going to do? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on May 30, 2006 19:58:42 GMT -5
The actions of the BOE Trustee and the administration are unacceptable.
One or two emails being received are excusable but for many messages to be received over an extended period of time are inexcusable.
Who is Jim? Was he an employee or was he a student?
|
|
|
|
Post by rinx on Jun 11, 2006 17:32:52 GMT -5
kcolton wrote:
This content will automatically show up under the correct year in the Board Minutes page and be immediately searchable. I had not noticed that we have not received a Board Minutes email in a while and will inquire about these documents on Monday and if we can obtain them, put them on the website. I apologize for any inconvenience the absence of these documents have caused anyone.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any news on the updating the board minutes front?
Another month has gone by. We're now in June and the last update is from April.
Ken if you're still reading this board, who supplies you the minute info and why haven't you guys received the information in a timely fashion?
|
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Jun 11, 2006 20:09:51 GMT -5
Rinx:
At the next BOE meeting, the BOE will approve May's minutes. Then they can be posted.
We're always one month behind. June's minutes will be posted after the July BOE meeting....and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 11, 2006 20:37:42 GMT -5
Just a reminder
Minutes of a meeting need not await the approval of a Board to be posted!
They should be available to the public within 10 working days (2 weeks) of being taken. They may be marked as "Unapproved Minutes of the Meeting of . . ."
They can be "Approved" or "Approved as Modified" at the next meeting and need not be Motioned, Seconded, Discussed and Voted upon by the Board.
Minutes are not Rejected.
They may also be corrected at a later meeting if warranted.
That's the Professional way they are recommended to be processed - even if this is not the way the present Board of Education does things!
Ed.
|
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 11, 2006 23:43:59 GMT -5
Just Because . . .
There often seems to be many home grown experts on the topic of meetings. So as to set the record straight, end debate, and to back up what I wrote in the last post, I'm Cut & Pasting the following from the Laws and Requirements for Public meetings held with Public funds:
************************************************
OPEN MEETINGS LAW
PUBLIC OFFICERS LAW, ARTICLE 7
OPEN MEETINGS LAW
Section 100. Legislative declaration.
101. Short title.
102. Definitions.
103. Open meetings and executive sessions.
104. Public notice.
105. Conduct of executive sessions.
106. Minutes
107. Enforcement.
108. Exemptions
109. Committee on open government.
110. Construction with other laws.
§106. Minutes.
1. Minutes shall be taken at all open meetings of a public body which shall consist of a record or summary of all motions, proposals, resolutions and any other matter formally voted upon and the vote thereon.
2. Minutes shall be taken at executive sessions of any action that is taken by formal vote which shall consist of a record or summary of the final determination of such action, and the date and vote thereon; provided, however, that such summary need not include any matter which is not required to be made public by the freedom of information law as added by article six of this chapter.
3. Minutes of meetings of all public bodies shall be available to the public in accordance with the provisions of the freedom of information law within two weeks from the date of such meeting except that minutes taken pursuant to subdivision two hereof shall be available to the public within one week from the date of the executive session.
************************************************
As you may have guessed, subdivision two hereof pertains to Executive Session meetings. They can only be called for eight specific reasons. Simply calling an Executive Meeting "To discuss Personnel", as has been often done, is not proper.
So, if anyone questions your need to have minutes, simply cite Section 106 of the Open Meetings Law authorized under Article 7 of the Public Officers Law of New York State.
Ed.
|
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 12, 2006 0:19:27 GMT -5
While on the Topic of Open Meetings Law . . . .
The recent e-mail wire-tapping could have run afoul of the Open Meetings Law with regard to the number of Board Members involved!
Had the total number of Board Members been five, not the seven we now have, there would had been a Quorum (3 members) involved in the e-mail communications! The two members communicating and the third surreptitious member "listening in"! That action would violate the Open Meetings Law!
In recent views of e-mail, or telephone, communications the following considerations have been made:
**********************************************
E-MAIL AND THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW
There is nothing in the Open Meetings Law that would preclude members of a public body, such as a city council or village board of trustees, from conferring individually, by e-mail or telephone.
However, a series of communications between individual members or telephone calls among the members which results in a collective decision, a meeting held by means of a telephone conference, or a vote taken by e-mail would be inconsistent with law.
Voting and action by a public body may only occur at a meeting during which a quorum has physically convened.
The Open Meetings Law is intended to provide the public with the right to observe the performance of public officials in their deliberations. That intent cannot be realized if members of a public body conduct public business as a body or vote by e-mail or phone.
A recent decision indicates that action taken by means of series of telephone calls violated the Open Meetings Law, and the same conclusion would likely be reached with respect to action taken through a series of e-mail communications. In Cheevers v. Town of Union (Supreme Court, Broome County, September 3, 1998), the court stated that:
"There was no physical gathering, but four members of the five-member board discussed the issue in a series of telephone calls. As a result, a quorum of members of the Board were 'present' and determined to [take an action]. The failure to actually meet in person or have a telephone conference in order to avoid a 'meeting' circumvents the intent of the Open Meetings Law (see e.g., 1998 Advisory Opns Committee on Open Government 2877). This court finds that telephonic conferences among the individual members constituted a meeting in violation of the Open Meetings Law..."[/i]
If a majority of the members of a public body engage in "instant e-mail" or communicate in a chat room in which the communications are equivalent to a conversation, it is likely that a court would determine that communications of that nature would run afoul of the Open Meetings Law. In essence, the majority in that case would be conducting a meeting without the public's knowledge and without the ability of the public to "observe the performance of public officials" as required by the Open Meetings Law (see §100).
THINK AND PLAN
E-mail can be a magical tool. An agency's well-designed and managed e-mail system can expedite business communications, reduce paperwork, increase productivity and diminish costs. Nevertheless, there should be an awareness of a variety of legal obligations, particularly those relating to FOIL, records management, and even the Open Meetings Law.
**********************************************
So, even now, if four or more of our present Board Members (and not necessarilly concurrently);
exchange e-mails -
or TELEPHONE CALLS -
about a BOE topic prior to a public meeting -
THIS COULD BE IN VIOLATION of the Open Meetings Law!
Does anyone out there think this has NOT happened in the past?
Ed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Say What Again on Jun 14, 2006 12:54:23 GMT -5
Wow. what a tangent THIS thread has shot off in  |
|
|
|
Post by rinx on Jun 21, 2006 8:21:03 GMT -5
Well....still waiting for those May minutes to be posted.
Maybe Jim was supposed to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 21, 2006 9:07:13 GMT -5
Rinx
Just because the minutes are supposed to be available in two weeks and its now nine weeks later, does not mean that the Administration is slow in doing its duty!
It really means the Administration doesn't give a second thought about doing its duty to the public!
And the Board of Education won't make the Administration fulfill even this little obligation to the public!
Ed.
|
|
