The authors of this blog have been patiently waiting for the "new" board members to bring about the change they promised when they won their seats. Unfortunately, things have gone from bad to worse.
When we last posted, Chris Lauff had brought to the public's attention that the business manager was unable to produce consistent versions of administrative compensation. At last count, there were at least 5 different salaries reported for the same time frame.
To our knowledge this issue has not been resolved. Some board members demanded answers, but it appears that the administration simply ignored the board members and the issue was dropped.
It was the hope of the authors of this blog that the board members would use the documented information we have posted to bring about a stop to the horrendous waste of our tax dollars.
To our surprise, the administration and several board members bullied Chris Lauff, Tina Cottrill, Jodi McKay, Melinda Errett and Leann Darnley into passing a "Cyberbulling Resolution".
Jamie White encouraged the Cyberbullying Resolution, claiming the need to protect FC administration from what he and former board member, Cindy Gaskill publicly called "ATTACKS" by this blog.
From that moment on, anything posted on this blog, no matter how factually based, could not be addressed by any board member, lest they be accused of "cyberbullying".
Well, we tried, and it seems no one on the board had the courage to do the right thing, until . . .
December 4, 2012 . . .
Board member Leann Darnley had the courage to stand up to the administrators and the board members who want to continue with the status quo. She read a board report detailing an investigation held by FC administration regarding the unauthorized, personal use of a District credit card by an administrator. It is important to note that the investigation of the administrator was conducted by the very administration under investigation.
Here is an excerpt from Ms. Darnley's board report:
"4. During the October 10 special meeting, several individual board members asked to see official documents utilized in the administrators’ investigation. The administration stated that those documents were unavailable at that time. The meeting was closed with the understanding of several board members that these documents would be provided at a later date. They have not been provided. When I asked for them in a November 9 email, my request was refused again, with the administration saying that the matter was closed. As of today, the documents have not been provided."
(entire Board Report at the end of this post)
Although Ms. Darnley requested publicly that her report be included in the official minutes of the board in its entirety, Board Secretary Paul Sroka reduced her statement to this:
Ms. Darnley reported to the Board on the following:
1. Bullying Committee meeting.
2. Discussion of October 10, 2012 Executive Session relative
to use of a District credit card. She feels the situation wasn’t
handled properly and feels that the Board violated the Sunshine
Act. Ms. Darnley requested the agenda be amended to make a
motion to include action on the initiation of an outside
investigation of the Fort Cherry credit card use to include
personal employee and Administrators reimbursements
involving credit cards for the past 3 ½ years from 2008-2009
thru 2012-2013 with the option of expanding the investigation
if necessary and approved in advance by the Board. Mrs.
McKay seconded the motion. Motion fails 5-4 with Mr. Lauff,
Mr. Heirendt, Mr. Cecchetti, Mr. Miller, and Mr. White voting
no; and Mrs. McKay, Ms. Darnley, Mrs. Errett and Mrs.
Cottrill voting yes. December 3, 2012: http://www.fortcherry.org/site/Default.aspx?PageID=13
By twisting Ms. Darnley's words, Sroka moved the focus of Ms. Darnley's statement from the unauthorized, personal use of a district credit card to a possible Sunshine Act violation.
Ms. Darnley attempted to have the board approve an outside investigation of the unauthorized credit card use. As you can see from the minutes, it failed.
After asking the administration twice over two months to get promised documents to the board, Darnley submitted a Right to Know request. FC's RTK Officer and Business Manager, Paul Sroka, denied a portion of her request on the grounds that the requested documents were part of a non-criminal investigation.
Here is part of Sroka's denial:
(Entire document at the end of blog)
Here is part of Sroka's denial:
Isn’t credit card theft a crime? Who deemed it non-criminal, and why?
Ms. Darnley was forced to appeal to the PA Office of Open Records for public documents that should have been given to all board members the moment they were requested.
The district incurred $1600 in legal fees in Sroka's attempt to keep the public documents from exposure. Ms. Darnley won her appeal; the state agreed that FC financial documents are public.
The district incurred $1600 in legal fees in Sroka's attempt to keep the public documents from exposure. Ms. Darnley won her appeal; the state agreed that FC financial documents are public.
Sroka then had to prepare and distribute Ms. Darnley’s RTK request. However, several months, including copies of the Sept. and Oct. statements are still missing. The 'September Transaction Details' document provided by Sroka, shown below, was retrieved online. It is not part of the official Sept. statement, the rest of which was excluded by Sroka.
 |
| NOTICE BELOW THE PURCHASE OF ADMISSIONS TO ISLANDS OF ADVENTURE IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA, A CAR RENTAL FOR THREE DAYS, GAS, AND ALL THAT FOOD! |
 |
Why didn’t the Board protect the school’s credit by investigating the credit card misuse?
At the March Fort Cherry Board Meeting, members approved over $200 in filing fees incurred by the business office to file charges with the local magistrate. Those charges were against 3 FC residents for nonpayment of cafeteria funds.
But back in December when an administrator was found to have used a district American Express card to make over $2,000 in unauthorized personal purchases, all board members but Leann Darnley did nothing.
But back in December when an administrator was found to have used a district American Express card to make over $2,000 in unauthorized personal purchases, all board members but Leann Darnley did nothing.
Some board members will argue that the situation was handled properly by having the administration investigate the administrator who brazenly used a district card.
Why rely only on the administration’s investigation, which appears to simply protect the guilty administrator?
Why rely on the integrity of the investigating administrator who provided the Office of Open Records with a signed affidavit which contains the following blatant lie?
If any board members are exercising their constitutional right to read this post, it may be the first time they have ever seen these credit card documents. To our knowledge, no board members have taken Ms. Darnley up on her offer to see the public documents she obtained in her request.
Why rely on the integrity of the investigating administrator who provided the Office of Open Records with a signed affidavit which contains the following blatant lie?
“Those documents viewed by the Fort Cherry Board of School Directors are the same documents sought by Ms. Darnley pursuant to her December 3, 2012 Right to Know request.” (see item #1)
However, the documents viewed by the board at the October 10 Special Meeting, according to Ms. Darnley's board report, were not the same ones that she had to make a Right to Know request for.
The board was told they would receive them but never did.
Monthly credit card statements should be given to board members in their board packets to review. Why aren't they?
Why did a board member have to make a RTK request to see our school's financial public documents? The board is responsible for the proper use of district funds. They should see verification before approving payments. Why is the administration withholding these statements from our board?
Why did the board accept the administration’s investigation and not contact the authorities?
Some board members will argue that consulting the school auditor and school solicitor was sufficient.
Proper authorities do not include the solicitor nor the auditor.
Those are paid employees of the district! They are not investigators. They see ONLY what is provided to them.
Several board members have stated that no district funds have been spent to cover the inappropriate personal purchases.
Where did they get this information from? Did it come from the investigating administrator? Sroka did not provide any proof of this claim to Ms. Darnley in her RTK request. The balance due may have been paid, but whose checking account was used - the offender's or the taxpayer's?
So what now?
Fort Cherry still needs to pursue this credit card issue. The board ordered the administration to discontinue use of all district cards back in December. Yet board members have questioned charges for a Wex Bank credit card at least twice in the past few meetings. So are credit cards still being used? Is the administration not following the Board’s direction?
Fort Cherry still needs to pursue this credit card issue. The board ordered the administration to discontinue use of all district cards back in December. Yet board members have questioned charges for a Wex Bank credit card at least twice in the past few meetings. So are credit cards still being used? Is the administration not following the Board’s direction?
To this date Fort Cherry does not have a credit card policy.
Why not? Why didn't the administration propose a new stand alone credit card policy to the board as recommended by the auditor?
Why not? Why didn't the administration propose a new stand alone credit card policy to the board as recommended by the auditor?
Ms. Darnley attempted to persuade the board to follow the auditor's recommendation, but the rest of the board did not agree. Instead, they accepted the administration’s proposal to add one sentence to the end of an existing unrelated policy, Policy 616 Payment of Claims.
Remember the questions surrounding the multiple versions of the administrative compensations? They went unanswered and are now forgotten. Similarly, the unauthorized credit card misuse raised questions that have gone unanswered and are now forgotten.
It is as if this whole incident never happened.
The board’s actions effectively hid the credit card issue from the public in the following ways:
The majority of the board approved the December minutes that manipulated Ms. Darnley’s words.
The majority of the board approved the audit which was void of any mention of the credit card misuse.
The majority of the board approved removing the RTK log from Fort Cherry’s website, removing proof that a board member has in her possession public documents showing the credit card misuse.
There is no further discussion of the credit card issue.
There is no explanation of what the board has done to resolve it and keep it from ever happening again.
There is no explanation of what the board has done to resolve it and keep it from ever happening again.
Why is this?
Now it appears to the public that the board, with the exception of Ms. Darnley, is part of a cover up.
As of this date, the board still has not taken any official action on the matter, no authorities were called and the board has not even reprimanded the employee. The administration has been in complete control of this.
The board has not been accountable to its constituents and responsible with the credit card, which is the property of Fort Cherry School District.
The board has not been accountable to its constituents and responsible with the credit card, which is the property of Fort Cherry School District.
And now, the administration wants the board to approve a budget increasing the millage from 118.5 to 121 mills.
Millage increases are necessary to provide adequate funding to educate our children and maintain facilities. However, we question the validity of a budget prepared by an administration that:
FC taxpayers should choose the next board members carefully.
Past and present board members have allowed FC administration and spending to go unchecked and out of control. This does not benefit our children!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leann Darnley's
December Board Report
Millage increases are necessary to provide adequate funding to educate our children and maintain facilities. However, we question the validity of a budget prepared by an administration that:
- Has permitted the improper coding of expenditures and has refused to provide detailed budget control reports to the board, making it impossible to get a true and accurate picture of how our tax dollars are spent.
- Cannot or will not inform the board (and the public) of actual administrative salaries.
- Has boldly used the district's credit for unauthorized personal purchases.
FC taxpayers should choose the next board members carefully.
Past and present board members have allowed FC administration and spending to go unchecked and out of control. This does not benefit our children!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leann Darnley's
December Board Report
On October 10, 2012, an executive session meeting was held to discuss personnel matters. While I agree to keep that portion of our meeting confidential, according to the PA Freedom of Information Coalition we have violated the Sunshine Act by not publicly disclosing the other details that were discussed during that meeting as well as situations that have arisen since then.
Here are the facts:
1. An investigation was held by our administration regarding the unauthorized, personal use of a District credit card by an administrator. Our solicitor and auditor were paid to participate in the investigation to some capacity.
2. We were informed that the administrations’ investigation was initiated because all District credit cards (with the exception of one) were ordered to be cancelled in the Spring of 2012. It was then discovered that one of these credit cards had not been cancelled. However, we have NOT been informed about the incident that prompted the cancellation of the credit cards in the first place. As board members, I would think that this information would have been voluntarily provided to us. It has not.
3. The auditor sent a letter to the board which we viewed during the October 10special meeting. We were forbidden by an administrator to have a copy of the letter. This administrator mistakenly believed that the board agreed that the matter was closed.
4. During the October 10 special meeting, several individual board members asked to see official documents utilized in the administrators’ investigation. The administration stated that those documents were unavailable at that time. The meeting was closed with the understanding of several board members that these documents would be provided at a later date. They have not been provided. When I asked for them in aNovember 9 email, my request was refused again, with the administration saying that the matter was closed. As of today, the documents have not been provided.
5. The documents in question are public, financial documents that the administration utilized in an investigation.
6. It was the auditor’s recommendation that a board policy be created addressing the use of District credit cards. The details regarding these recommendations are stated in a letter written to the board, of which our administration has not provided us a copy.
7. In a separate letter from our auditor dated November 17, 2011, it states that “a District employee was reimbursed for one day of hotel stay that was personal in nature. The employee voluntarily agreed to reimburse the charge without hesitation.” This incident is relevant because we now show a history of inappropriate financial management that allows little accountability.
According to PSBA, our “central responsibility” as board members,”...both in theory and in law, is to be the policy-forming body. Policy means actions of the board that set written goals and objectives for the school and parameters for actions.” In order to adequately perform our duty as elected school directors, we need to have access to all available resources. These are being purposely kept from us. This is a problem, as we, the school board, are unable to do our due diligence without the proper documentation. Unfortunately, to remediate the problem, I have been forced to submit a RTK request for all documents and letters used in or as a result of our administrations’ investigation.
This behavior by our administration is unacceptable. At this point, none of us can be sure that this situation was handled appropriately or thoroughly since all documentary evidence is being kept from us. I am suggesting to you at this time that the administration’s investigation may have fallen short. Additionally, I am concerned with the administration’s breach of duty when the board was not informed immediately upon knowledge of the details of improper credit card usage; instead, we were told on September 30, 2012 that there was an issue being investigated that would result in a “recommendation to the board as to any further action.” Three days later in an October 3, 2012 email, we were informed of the investigation findings and disciplinary actions taken. We were never given any recommendations to consider.
Because we did not insist that the investigation include the board, we have been derelict in our duties as elected public officials in charge of public funds. We allowed the very administration who was being investigated to handle the investigation. We have a fiduciary responsibility to assure that issues such as this have not happened in the past as well as to ensure that nothing like this happens in the future.
I would like to take this opportunity to right our wrong:
I’d like to amend the agenda to include an action item as follows:
I make a motion to amend the agenda to include action on initiation of an outside investigation of Fort Cherry School District's credit card use to include personal employee and administrator reimbursements involving credit cards for the past 3-1/2 years starting at the beginning of financial year 2008-09 to present with the option of expanding the investigation if necessary and approved in advance by board vote.
