Pontiac Board of Education must vote again before negotiating consent agreement with state
MORE PHOTOS
Click thumbnails to enlarge
Who or what entity will be in charge of Pontiac school operations is still up in the air as Pontiac Board of Education and the state Treasury and Education departments prepare to begin negotiations on a consent agreement that will guide the district through its efforts to open its doors.
However, even before the state and Pontiac school officials can begin the negotiation process, trustees will have to vote again on their Friday decision to enter a consent agreement with the state because their vote was taken too early, said Sara Wurfel, spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Snyder’s office.
The Pontiac board voted to enter such an agreement after Snyder determined Aug. 6 that the district was in financial emergency and must select one for four options to deal with crisis: consent agreement, emergency manager, mediation with vendors or Chapter 9 Bankruptcy.
Trustees also agreed unanimously not to appeal Snyder’s determination.
But in its efforts to make a decision early to ensure doors will open in the fall, the Pontiac board’s vote was taken prematurely, before the deadlines outlined in the Local Government Stability and Choice Act of 2012.
Under the act, the governor must confirm his Aug. 6 determination first and that can’t be before Aug. 16, a full 10 days after his original declaration, Wurfel said.
Despite the fact the vote was premature, Wurfel said, in reaction to the board’s decision to enter a consent agreement with the state, “That is positive news because everyone is focusing on the kids.
“We look forward to working cooperatively,” with Pontiac school officials, Wurfel said on the governor’s behalf.
Interim Superintendent Kelley Williams said, “We are working with the state through the process.”
To questions about how much assistance the state can provide Pontiac schools if they enter the consent agenda, Terry Stanton, spokesman for the Treasury, said, “It would not be prudent to speculate on what may or may not be included in a consent agreement, as the Governor has neither confirmed nor revoked his determination at this point.
However, even before the state and Pontiac school officials can begin the negotiation process, trustees will have to vote again on their Friday decision to enter a consent agreement with the state because their vote was taken too early, said Sara Wurfel, spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Snyder’s office.
The Pontiac board voted to enter such an agreement after Snyder determined Aug. 6 that the district was in financial emergency and must select one for four options to deal with crisis: consent agreement, emergency manager, mediation with vendors or Chapter 9 Bankruptcy.
Trustees also agreed unanimously not to appeal Snyder’s determination.
But in its efforts to make a decision early to ensure doors will open in the fall, the Pontiac board’s vote was taken prematurely, before the deadlines outlined in the Local Government Stability and Choice Act of 2012.
Under the act, the governor must confirm his Aug. 6 determination first and that can’t be before Aug. 16, a full 10 days after his original declaration, Wurfel said.
Despite the fact the vote was premature, Wurfel said, in reaction to the board’s decision to enter a consent agreement with the state, “That is positive news because everyone is focusing on the kids.
“We look forward to working cooperatively,” with Pontiac school officials, Wurfel said on the governor’s behalf.
Interim Superintendent Kelley Williams said, “We are working with the state through the process.”
To questions about how much assistance the state can provide Pontiac schools if they enter the consent agenda, Terry Stanton, spokesman for the Treasury, said, “It would not be prudent to speculate on what may or may not be included in a consent agreement, as the Governor has neither confirmed nor revoked his determination at this point.
Pontiac school officials said at a recent meeting that under a consent agenda the state will help support the district’s recovery with financial and technical help.
Trustee Mattie Hatchett made successful motions to win a vote against an appeal and to select the consent agreement option, which officials said would provide assistance from the state to get doors open and operate the school year..
“I believe we have a financial emergency,” Hatchett said. “I wouldn’t take the case to appeal this to the governor. What facts would I present?”
“We are like guinea pigs. We will be the first school district to be in the position of choosing from four options. This leaves the door open for the board to still maintain some authority and input into decision making,” she said.
“We are really going to be making the mold for the future,” Hatchett said; noting “The state people want us to open our doors. Entering the consent agenda and one option is giving us a chance.
“I wouldn’t have a problem if someone is operating the district as long as it is not an emergency manager,” she said.
Pontiac Trustee Brenda Carter argued that Detroit had entered into a consent agreement and the outcome was punitive.
School district attorney Darryl Segars disagreed. Both, it turns our were correct.
According to Stanton in the state Treasury, “If the situation ended with a consent agreement ... Pontiac Schools would be the first school district to do so under the 2012 Act”
However, a Dec. 8 letter from state Superintendent Michael Flanagan to the president of the Detroit school board indicated a consent agreement with Detroit schools was in effect as of Dec. 1, 2008.
Trustee Mattie Hatchett made successful motions to win a vote against an appeal and to select the consent agreement option, which officials said would provide assistance from the state to get doors open and operate the school year..
“I believe we have a financial emergency,” Hatchett said. “I wouldn’t take the case to appeal this to the governor. What facts would I present?”
“We are like guinea pigs. We will be the first school district to be in the position of choosing from four options. This leaves the door open for the board to still maintain some authority and input into decision making,” she said.
“We are really going to be making the mold for the future,” Hatchett said; noting “The state people want us to open our doors. Entering the consent agenda and one option is giving us a chance.
“I wouldn’t have a problem if someone is operating the district as long as it is not an emergency manager,” she said.
Pontiac Trustee Brenda Carter argued that Detroit had entered into a consent agreement and the outcome was punitive.
School district attorney Darryl Segars disagreed. Both, it turns our were correct.
According to Stanton in the state Treasury, “If the situation ended with a consent agreement ... Pontiac Schools would be the first school district to do so under the 2012 Act”
However, a Dec. 8 letter from state Superintendent Michael Flanagan to the president of the Detroit school board indicated a consent agreement with Detroit schools was in effect as of Dec. 1, 2008.
“However, not one week passed before district officials failed to abide by the terms of this agreement,” said Flanagan, who shortly thereafter recommended three candidates for emergency manager for Detroit schools.
If the board again votes for a consent agreement and it isn’t reached within the time lines of the act, the state Treasury can require the district to operate under one of the other options.
Once a consent agenda is in effect, “Nothing in the consent agreement shall limit the ability of the state treasurer in his or her sole discretion to declare a material breach,” which could result in the governor placing the local government in receivership or in the neutral evaluation process.
If the board again votes for a consent agreement and it isn’t reached within the time lines of the act, the state Treasury can require the district to operate under one of the other options.
Once a consent agenda is in effect, “Nothing in the consent agreement shall limit the ability of the state treasurer in his or her sole discretion to declare a material breach,” which could result in the governor placing the local government in receivership or in the neutral evaluation process.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.