A Red Herring?

The odd part of the whole thing is that he has used the school district’s attorneys (disguised as the “U-B Corporation” in Cleveland) as the agent for the foundation.  We’re not sure what the Superintendent and the law firm of Ulmer and Berne are up to but we will be watching.  Why must everything in this district be done under the table?

 It begs a lot of questions, Why a 501(c)(4) whose contributions are not tax deductible?  If it is really for the citizens of stow then why not a 501(c)(3) whose contributions are deductible, like B.E.S.T., the committee formed to put artificial turf on the football field, or the Band Boosters or the PTA?   Who paid the filing fees and attorney fees (Ulmer Berne)? Who is going to appoint the Board for this foundation, the School? It also seems strange because Russ Jones is not a Stow citizen and this is the type of organization that a citizen would start. Something does not smell very good here in suburbia.

Click here to see the forms filed with the Secretary of State                 Click here to see an IRS definition

At a meeting with the PTA Council on 2/16/10 the Superintendent made several statements that may be (in his words) false and misleading.

At the meeting with the Stow-Munroe Falls Parent Teacher Association, the Superintendent stated, “put a gun to my head….(there is) no levy committee….. the levy committee treasurer files a report”.

Mr. Superintendent: If there is no levy committee, who is the group that filed allegations with the Ohio Election Commission against the Stow Citizens for Responsible Government?

Why did the non-existent levy committee sponsor (under cover of the PTA Council) a fundraiser golf outing?

Why did the PTA council issue a check for a donation of $8,072.67 to a non-existent levy committee?

Why does the non-existent levy committee have a treasurer and co-chairpersons?

Your statement at the meeting that they “..(did) not (do) something sneaky”, surely explains why the levy committee’s golf fundraiser was disguised as a function of the PTA Council. Are the businesses and individuals who purchased tickets and sponsored holes aware they were being snookered?

Would you have known that the contribution amount sent to the levy committee by the PTA Council was illegal (according to their by-laws) if the SCRG had not intervened?

The PTA Council representative at the meeting stated, (there has been) “a lot of communication with the state (Ohio PTA). Everything has been done legally and above board.”

It’s amazing what a little public exposure can do.

We really don’t care if the PTA Council sent funds to the levy committee.  We support the levy committee in their arduous duties.  We know that without levies school systems could not function.  We only care that the district be run corrrectly and legally.

No indication was given as to what the money would be used for. The PTA is an honored organization and well known for their service to the schools and the students. A golf outing to be sponsored by the PTA was announced a little later. Only problem was, nobody informed the membership of the PTA. Very few members of the PTA Council were informed. Indeed, it would seem that nobody in the PTA was aware that they were sponsoring a golf outing in June to “support the Stow-Munroe Falls Schools”. There was no mention of the event or the sponsorship in the PTA’s minutes. No mention was made indicating what the money would be used for. After the June date was rained out, the outing was re-scheduled for August 14th. Click here to see the poster.

The PTA Council’s Treasurer’s Report for September 15, 2009 indicates that the Council took in $9,894.67 from the generous golfers. In the same report, the money, on September 4th was listed as an “expense” and sent somewhere. Some of the money was used to pay the bills for the golf outing at Fox Den golf course. A total of $8,072.67 was sent to oblivion. Then the heat got turned up.

The money was sent to the Stow-Munroe Falls Levy Committee! The PTA Council, in violation of their own by-laws, had just made a major donation to a Political Action Committee (PAC). The membership did not vote to hold a golf outing. The membership did not vote to disperse the money from the golf outing. And the membership certainly did not vote to put their organization in jeopardy with the Internal Revenue Service and possibly damage their tax-exempt status. Certainly, if anything was being done against the by-laws or the law, the membership of the council would have known (or should have known) to put a stop to it.

In their required 2009 financial report to the Summit County Board of Elections, the levy committee reported the amount of $8,072.67 was donated by the Stow Council PTA.

A complaint was filed with the PTA District 13 Advisor by the Stow Citizens for Responsible Government on December 3, 2009. Click here to listen to the resulting meeting.

In January, when the report to the Board of Elections became public record, an addendum had been added stipulating that the levy committee was returning the money to the PTA Council because the amount exceeded their permitted 5% of their budget.

We have questions. Questions for which we will probably never get an answer.

Why would the Superintendent ask the PTA Council to violate their own rules?

Why would the levy committee treasurer, a Certified Public Accountant, not question a large donation from a small group that normally funds only student related programs?

Would the PTA Council have been in violation of their tax exempt status if the SCRG had not intervened?

Why was the PTA Council reluctant to discuss this? Could it be that they had no information available to them?

Why was it necessary to involve the school district’s attorneys to rectify this situation?

Why did so few people in the PTA Council know of this whole event?

What will the PTA Council do with all this money?

Why did a School Board member lend his endorsement to a possibly shady deal?

Why was it necessary this year (2009) to disguise the golf outing as a PTA Council event , “for the schools”, instead of a levy committee function with virtually all the same contact people as was done in 2008 and before?

BUT MOST OF ALL, WE’D LIKE TO KNOW,

Who’s paying the legal fees for the PTA Council and the levy committee? The taxpayers?

Warner Mendenhall, Attorney at Law

190 North Union Street, Suite 201,  Akron, Ohio 44304 330.535.9160

December 8, 2009                                                                                   Dr.RussJones,  Superintendent                                                                     Stow-Munroe Falls Schools                                                          4350 Allen Road                                                                               Stow, OH 44224

Dear Superintendent Jones,

My client Donald Bettio has determined that the Stow Munroe Falls School District has paid twice for the same legal services. Additionally, the School Board apparently paid for legal representation before the Ohio Elections Commission when it had no business before the Ohio Elections Commission.  My client suspects that Attorneys Adam Miller and Donald McTigue were paid by the school district for work they performed for the Stow Munroe Falls School District Levy Committee. These payments are contained within Ulmer and Berne Invoice #1959251.

I have attached the relevant records of the double payment and payments related to work before the Ohio Elections Commission.

My client is of the opinion that there may have been an improper use of taxpayer funds and has requested that I begin the process of instituting a taxpayer lawsuit.

Before doing so, I want to give you a chance to address these issues. Please respond in writing.

Sincerely, Warner Mendenhall

See the various copies of each transaction as a PDF here.   You will need a PDF reader such as Adobe Reader or Foxit Reader.

Maybe this will help:

The Board has outlined its first five “consequences” if the levy fails:

1.  Reduce busing to the state minimum level

2.  Reduce the school lunch program in the cafeteria (a federal program)

3.  Close one school building

4.  Reduce the teacher/student ratio (larger classes)

5.  “Pay-to-play” for sports, clubs, etc.

“No decisions on cuts were discussed as the the Board meeting focused on consequences the Board said may encourage voters to pass a school levy next May.”  Local Media

…”until the community feels the pain they have no intention of voting yes.“  Superintendet Russ Jones, Update to BOE

 ”Why not put those things out there that are seriously going to impact the community?”  Denny Mariola, President, BOE

 ”I need something that will say, ‘This is going to impact me’ (the voter), I think larger class sizes will affect more people than busing.”  Karen Wright, BOE member

“Again, it’s to incentivize (a corporate-jargon non-word meaning “motivate”) the voter.”    Catherine Bulgrin, District Treasurer

 ”Maybe closing a building would drive people…to the polls,”  Pat Mathews, BOE Member

“It’s just a matter of rearranging your work schedule to accomodate transportation cuts.”  Dick Spangler, BOE Member

Deb,  Can we count on you to have a large number of your rank and file present at the Stow Idiocracy (sic) meeting, Oct. 23rd, at 7:00PM at the Stow City Hall in the Safety Center.  This is where the council meetings are held.  This group is gaining steam and seems their direction is against teachers, classified, administration and of course school board.  We had great representation at their last meeting as you were an attendee and noticeably had put them aback by our presence, questions and comments.  I would really appreciate that as many teachers as possible attend this meeting as to show this group and community we are united in the progress this district is making primarily because of the dedication of all the employees that are connected to our school system.

 It appears that this Board does not represent the best interests of our community, but instead, has decided to represent the unions.   Below is an e-mail sent to the teachers and others in the school system:

The next meeting of the “Stow Citizens for Responsible Government” is this Thursday, Oct. 23rd at 7:00 in the conference room of the Stow Safety Building.  Please try to attend.  This organization has a website which outlines their point of view and the issues they have with our school district.  It is full of misinformation…if you could, plese take some time to review it so that if a community member asks you about it you will be able to let them know about the inaccuracies.

The last meeting was attended by several administrators, teachers and support staff.  Thanks to those that could be there!  One of the issues that SCRG has is that they don’t feel the Board of Education is “transparent ” enough with the voters.  Yet when asked who make up their committee, or who their board members were, the audience was told that they weren’t willing to share that information.  This answer is an example of the type of group that is working against the good we are trying to do, and most importantly, they are hurting the kids of our communities.  If you have any questions, contact Deb Pauley or Deb Husted.

 THE UNIONS ARE TELLING ITS MEMBERSHIP AND ANYONE ELSE WHO WILL LISTEN THAT THE INFORMATION ON THIS WEBSITE IS “FULL OF MISINFORMATION”, THEN CONTINUES TO ASK THAT THE MEMBERS FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH THE SITE TO “LET THE COMMUNITY KNOW (IF ASKED) ABOUT THE INACCURACIES”.

What Mr. Mariola, the School Board, Superintendent, Treasurer, Business Manager and the two unions do not say is that NOT ONE of these people has challenged in any way the information provided by the SCRG website.   Why haven’t they?  The answer is quite simple.  The information on this website has been provided to you through the Ohio Open Records Act.  These records come directly from the Treasurer and should be considered indisputable.  The facts are just that.  Anyone is entitled to request information from the Treasurer’s office and we encourage those of you who want factual information to make this contact yourself.

How unfortunate it is that the Stow Citizens for Responsible Government website is under attack only because an effort is being made to empower community members by offering the truth and allowing people to make responsible decisions for themselves.

The prevailing attitude throughout the district continues to be, if you aren’t with “them” you are against children.  NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!

According to records forwarded to us by the Treasurer of the School District, the May 8th forecast for the fiscal year 2008 was off by $900,000.  It is also hard to believe that fiscal year 2012 has gone from a negative $24.7 million dollars in the May forecast to a negative $12.0 million dollars in the October forecast.  This makes us question if we need a levy.  The Board of Education still has no action plan except to ditch the Finance Committee (an extremely valuable check-and-balance tool) and determine how to better sell a levy to the community.  They are quite worried about getting rid of  the Business Manager and screwing up that position rather than paying attention to what really needs their attention.

The school board recently gave the district treasurer a very favorable evaluation. In considering some of the public concerns expressed regarding her performance, we would have asked the treasurer…

- Why are board agendas and meeting minutes consistently posted late?

- Why are meeting minutes inconsistent and not adequate to convey the board’s rationale for voting, as the law requires?

- Why is the five-year forecast not prepared in a timely manner, with only brief opportunity for public (not to mention board) comment or questions? – Why are you consistently late posting meeting information?

- Why is the public unable to reach you directly?

- Why do you have so much trouble complying with public records requests, often consulting lawyers at district expense? Are you not conversant with school law regarding such requests?

- Why are you consistently “unavailable” to the press for comment on district finances?

- Why, when asked any of the above questions, do you always find someone else or some situation to fault? As CFO aren’t you ultimately accountable for the accuracy, legality and transparency of your office and employees?

In considering any additional raises, perks, incentives, etc. as a result of her recent evaluation, perhaps the board should also contemplate a few of the awards the previous treasurer earned for the district. They truly exhibit fiscal efficiency, accountability and accuracy in reporting:

- 2005 Making Your Dollars Count Award (for demonstrating commitment to careful spending, accurate fiscal recording and efficiency) – State Auditor – 2006-07 Meritorious Budget Award (for excellence in the preparation and issuance of its school system budget) – Association of School Business Officials International – Fiscal Year ending 6/2006 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting (for achieving the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting) – Government Finance Officers Assoc.

MAYBE SOME ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS ARE CONTAINED IN THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT RECEIVED THROUGH THE OHIO OPEN RECORDS ACT:

AGREEMENT CLARIFYING TERMS OF SEPARATION FOR TREASURER CATHERINE M. BULGRIN

WHEREAS there is currently in existence a contract between the South-Western City School District Board of Education (hereinafter “the Board”) and Catherine M. Bulgrin (hereinafter “Ms. Bulgrin”) for the employment of Ms. Bulgrin as Treasurer through December 31, 2007; and

WHEREAS certain issues have arisen which the parties wish to resolve with a minimum of cost, delay, and disruption; and

WHEREAS the parties are desirous of facilitating a smooth transition in the position of Treasurer for the benefit of the District and its students;

IT iS HEREBY AGREED by the Board and Ms. Bulgrin as follows:

1. The Board will continue to pay Ms. Bulgrin at her currently contracted salary rate for the balance of her contract, and will continue to provide insurance coverage and other fringe benefits without change for the balance of her current contract, except as set forth in this Agreement.

2. Ms. Bulgrin will submit her irrevocable resignation from employment in the District effective as of December 31, 2007. Such resignation shall be submitted for the Board’s acceptance at the same time this Agreement is submitted for the Board’s approval, it being understood and agreed that such resignation shall be conditioned upon the Board’s approval of this Agreement..

3. Beginning with the effective date of this Agreement, Ms. Bulgrin will utilize her unused vacation leave until such leave is exhausted. Notwithstanding anything in Ms. Bulgrin’s individual contract or Board policy, no further vacation leave shall be accrued during Ms. Bulgrin’s employment in the District.

4. Upon the exhaustion of her vacation leave, Ms. Bulgrin will utilize sick leave through June 30, 2007. The Board will not make any objection or require any type of verification for the utilization of sick leave during this period.

5 Effective July 1, 2007, or at such earlier time as the District may identify and hire another individual to serve as Treasurer, Ms. Bulgrin will be placed on special assignment to perform such projects as the Board may determine for the balance of her contract term. During this period, Ms. Bulgrin will not report to work in the District offices but will perform her assigned duties from home or another office location of her choosing. It is also agreed that during this period, Ms. Bulgrin will assume the title of Special Assistant to the Treasurer; provided, however, that such change in title will not affect the salary or fringe benefits paid to Ms. Bulgrin.

6. If, at any time following the Board’s approval of this Agreement, Ms. Buigrin should accept. a position with another SERS, STRS, or PERS public employer, the Board’s obligations under its contract with Ms. Bulgrin shall end as of the effective date of such alternate employment; provided, however, that if the base salary earned under such alternate employment through December 31, 2007 is less that the base salary paid in her current position, the Board shall pay the difference to Ms. Buigrin in a lump sum. The projected difference will be paid to Ms. Buigrin in a lump sum within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of such alternate employment. Any required adjustment to the difference, based upon the actual difference as of December 31, 2007, will be paid by one party to the other, as appropriate, by January 31, 2008.

7. Ms. Buigrin may continue to use her District e-mail account as long as she remains an employee of the District, subject to any applicable policies relating to employee usage of school computers and networks.

8. The Board agrees that nothing herein shall be construed as an admission of fault or wrongdoing on the part of the Ms. Bulgrin, and M.s. Bulgrin likewise agrees that nothing herein shall be construed as an admission of fault or wrongdoing on the part of the Board. Both parties will exercise all efforts in good faith to refrain from public comment on either the terms of this Agreement or the circumstances giving rise to this Agreement, and will likewise exercise their good-faith efforts to ensure that the underlying purpose of this Agreement is achieved, namely, a smooth transition in the position of Treasurer for the benefit of all concerned.

9. The Board and Ms. Bulgrin hereby release any and all claims they may now have or could have asserted against the other, or the officers, employees, or agents of the other, past or present, arising from or connected with the employment of Ms. Bulgrin in the South-Western City School District. The Board will not exercise its legal option to nonrenew the contract of Ms. Bulgrin.

WHEREFORE the parties, by their own hand or through their designated representatives, have indicated their acceptance of the foregoing terms by affixing their signatures below:

SOUTH-WESTERN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION

Here is an example of a teacher’s compensation.  This teacher has 11 years with the school district and a bachelor’s degree:

Contract Salary: $51,364.00

Amount of increase negotiated for ‘07-’08: $1,426.50

Longevity increase for ‘07-’08: $1,581.50

Total increase: $3,008.00

Total % increase for ‘07-’08: 6.22%

Extended time (0 days): -0-

Supplemental Contract: -0-

TOTAL SALARY: $51,364.00

BENEFIT INFORMATION

STRS (State Teacher’s Retirement System) (14% of salary): $7,190.96

Medicare Tax (1.45% of salary): $744.78

Worker’s Comp/Unemployment Insurance: $1,027.28

Life Insurance ($50,000.00 policy): $117.00

Medical/Rx Insurance (family coverage) Board paid: $11,496.24

(Teacher’s ANNUAL premium for Medical/Rx Insurance: $605.16)

Dental Insurance (family coverage) Board paid: $1,482.12

(Teachers ANNUAL premium for dental insurance (family coverage): $1,482.12)

TOTAL BOARD PAID BENEFITS: $22,058.38

TOTAL COMPENSATION PACKAGE: $73,422.38