Monday, August 25, 2014

Can it be? . . . .


. . . . . . a new FC?!!!!!!!!

Having spent $12,000 on a contract with the PA School Board Association for help with its superintendent search, FC School Board filled the position internally, appointing Elementary Principal Jill Jacoby Acting Superintendent - someone they, and more importantly the staff and students, know.

The authors of this blog have been critical of Jacoby's past actions when Robert W Dinnen was in charge; however . . .

Jacoby is at the helm now!

It is our hope that she makes the necessary changes to move Fort Cherry in a positive direction.


A good step in achieving that goal – meet with the community:

The following public notice appeared in the Observer-Reporter:



The Fort Cherry School District will hold Town Hall Meetings on the following dates:

·     Hickory Residents: Tuesday, September 9, 2014 from 7-9 [p.m.] at the Hickory Fire Hall
·       McDonald Residents: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 from 7-9 
[p.m.] at the McDonald Library
·       Midway/Robinson Residents: Thursday, September 11, 2014 from 7-9 
[p.m.] at the Midway Community Center

All community members welcome - parents and non-child residents. Come and meet the new Acting Superintendent, Dr. Jill M. Jacoby. Bring your questions, concerns, and comments. Looking forward to seeing a great outpour of community representation

So, FC parents and taxpayers, as requested,

. . . bring it!


Sunday, June 1, 2014

Mission Possible?!!!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idIwBpc98Zg

The intent of the authors of this blog has been, and always will be, to improve the Fort Cherry School District  both academically and financially.  We hope to achieve that goal by informing the public and the board members of those things which, in our opinion, prohibit the district from moving forward in a positive way.

That being said, the last post pointed this out:

Perhaps it would better serve the students for Jack Okorn to do what he was hired to do - maintain the equipment, thus eliminating the need for an IT assistant at all.  Or perhaps to better serve the students and taxpayers, FC should consider replacing the entire FC Technology Department with one qualified Technology Director who possesses a college degree.

A recent twitter post by Jack Okorn seems to support the need for a Technology Department overhaul.











"Calling all hackers we have a mission"? Really? "PM me please for info"- which mean Personal Message or, contact him directly for information.

Now we ask, does the district truly want someone who may be encouraging an illegal activity working with our students and staff?  


Unlawful use of computer and other computer crimes - 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 7611

 Pennsylvania Statutes
                               SUBCHAPTER B
                       HACKING AND SIMILAR OFFENSES

        Cross References.  Subchapter B is referred to in sections
     7605, 7606 of this title.

     Sec.
     7611.  Unlawful use of computer and other computer crimes.
     7612.  Disruption of service.
     7613.  Computer theft.
     7614.  Unlawful duplication.
     7615.  Computer trespass.
     7616.  Distribution of computer virus.
     § 7611.  Unlawful use of computer and other computer crimes.
        (a)  Offense defined.--A person commits the offense of
     unlawful use of a computer if he:
            (1)  accesses or exceeds authorization to access, alters,
        damages or destroys any computer, computer system, computer
        network, computer software, computer program, computer
        database, World Wide Web site or telecommunication device or
        any part thereof with the intent to interrupt the normal
        functioning of a person or to devise or execute any scheme or
        artifice to defraud or deceive or control property or
        services by means of false or fraudulent pretenses,
        representations or promises;
            (2)  intentionally and without authorization accesses or
        exceeds authorization to access, alters, interferes with the
        operation of, damages or destroys any computer, computer
        system, computer network, computer software, computer
        program, computer database, World Wide Web site or
        telecommunication device or any part thereof; or
            (3)  intentionally or knowingly and without authorization
        gives or publishes a password, identifying code, personal
        identification number or other confidential information about
        a computer, computer system, computer network, computer
        database, World Wide Web site or telecommunication device.
        (b)  Grading.--An offense under this section shall constitute
     a felony of the third degree.
        (c)  Prosecution not prohibited.--Prosecution for an offense
     under this section shall not prohibit prosecution under any
     other section of this title.

        Cross References.  Section 7611 is referred to in section
     7603 of this title.

http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/crimes-and-offenses/00.076.011.000.html


Teachers, coaches, students and sponsors have lost their positions or been suspended for less offenses than recruiting hackers for possible illegal activity.
What will the Fort Cherry Board do now?

  • Will they act as they have done in the past and quickly open the IT position?
  • Will the IT position be added to the agenda so the board can promptly eliminate Mr. Okorn as they did for the Majorette's sponsor, who was fired over a petty issue despite objections from a majority of the squad and their parents? 
  • Will they properly look into this incident and act accordingly, or will they allow this to go unpunished as they did for Sroka, who used the district's AMEX card for personal purchases among other things?


FC administrators have smart phones and computers in their possession, paid for by taxpayers. They are to be used properly and for school purposes. If Okorn's tweet was sent using any of these devices, he may also be in violation of school policy 815.

http://www.fortcherry.org/cms/lib03/PA01000874/Centricity/Shared/District_Policies/800_Operations/815-Acceptable_Use_of_Computer_NetworksInternet_Agreement.1.pdf


FCSB, you now have a mission....No! You have a duty.  Do the right thing by the public and our students. Your duty is to take appropriate action based on facts and figures, not emotions, personal agendas, or vendettas!

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Paul R. Sroka . . . a Pain in the Neck?? .. .


A Burt Hill (Stantec) architect presented plans for the proposed track at the May 19, 2014 Fort Cherry School Board Committee Meeting.  The proposed plan eliminated space for the portable restroom facilities that Ranger fans are all too familiar with.  This is not the first time that the Stantec architect seemed unaware of the district's current site plan and facilities.

Perhaps Burt Hill (Stantec) was not the best choice for FC?  Could it be that Fort Cherry's business manager, Paul Sroka, put his personal agenda (the pursuit of Burt Hill's Ms. Montgomery) before the needs of the district?

It may be telling that Butler County Community College has not been able to come to an “amicable agreement” on issues concerning a contract with Stantec.  According to the Trib, BCCC could not reach an amicable agreement with Stantec, and so contracted with another firm.
http://triblive.com/news/butler/6155135-74/board-stantec-firm#axzz32fwldBCW

Perhaps BCCC didn't reach an agreement due to its failure to extend personal invitations to dinner and a Pirates game to a Stantec employee?  (See last post.)  Perhaps the judgment of the BCCC business manager was not clouded by the pursuit of a Stantec employee, but was properly focused on the students and taxpayers?  Perhaps the BCCC business manager was not using the school's email to make a date, as was Fort Cherry's business manager, Paul R. Sroka (a violation of FC District Policy 815)?

The use of the telecommunications network for illegal, inappropriate or unethical purposes by students or employees is prohibited. For example, but not as a limitation, the following uses are prohibited:

1. Use of the network to facilitate illegal activity.

2. Use of the network for commercial or for profit purposes.

3. Use of the network for non-work or non-school-related work.
FC District Policy 815
Acceptable Use of Computer Networks/ Internet Agreement



The board is in the process of approving a budget put together by the current administration, an administration that seems to put their own needs before that of our children's education.

As for Paul Sroka, it seems he feels put upon by the budgeting process . . .



No idea whom he feels "screams" at him during budget time - Dinnen??? - it certainly is not the board.

That being said, here's one example of the FC administration putting their own needs before that of the students.  The district is in dire need of a music teacher in the elementary.  There is also a need for a third grade teacher.  The high school librarian and Drivers’ Ed program that were eliminated as part of the 2010 budget cuts have never been replaced. . . .

 . . . all would benefit our students . . .

Yet administration is asking for a full-time IT assistant for Jack Okorn (FC currently employs a part-time IT assistant).  For those of you who are unaware, Jack Okorn is the "Technology Coordinator" at FC.  He is self-taught.  Mr. Okorn and his fellow administrators feel it is a district priority to employ a full-time assistant for Mr. Okorn, the argument being that Mr. Okorn cannot keep up with the technology demands of the district.  Funny thing, up until the time a resident alerted board members, Mr. Okorn had plenty of time during FC school hours - on the taxpayers’ dime - to maintain the multiple "technology" blogs he established (a violation of District Policy 815).

·        http://www.jackokorn.com/
·        http://www.jtclearning.com/

Perhaps it would better serve the students for Jack Okorn to do what he was hired to do - maintain the equipment, thus eliminating the need for an IT assistant at all?  Or perhaps to better serve the students and taxpayers, FC should consider replacing the entire FC Technology Department with one qualified Technology Director who possesses a college degree in IT?

And as a final note to Paul Sroka . . . really, Paul? Discussing doctor's appointments?  Setting up a date? 
And, the Big Ten????!


Monday, March 3, 2014

Paul R. Sroka's "dinner date" . . . continued . . .


No doubt, FC administrators and members of the board will try to downplay the email exchange between Paul R. Sroka and Jennifer Montgomery of Burt-Hill by claiming the “dinner date” was business related.

Here are a few more of the emails.

Business or pleasure?

The emails speak for themselves . . . 






Monday, February 24, 2014

Is FC Business Manager Paul R. Sroka making sound business recommendations or making a date?



"Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto announced his choice for budget director, [Edward S. Kiely] who owes the Internal Revenue Service more than $83,000 in back taxes, . . "

Gerald Shuster, a University of Pittsburgh political communications professor, said Kiely’s potential job relates to the issues about his debt.

“He’s the one who’s supposed to be the financial guru making recommendations for Peduto and the entire city,” Shuster said. “If he hasn’t made those kinds of wise decisions himself, how can he do it for the city?”


Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
February 7, 2014

We agree with Professor Shuster.  The same thing applies to FC and business manager Paul R. Sroka.

Why would FC hire someone to make wise decisions for the district that hasn’t made wise decisions himself?  Why was Paul R. Sroka, a man with a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, hired in the first place to manage the district's money?

The business manager is involved in all things financially related to the school district.  The board of directors relies on the business manager’s input when voting on items that directly affect the staff, students, and taxpayers of the district.  Sroka’s bankruptcy was on his record long before he applied at Fort Cherry.

On January 17, 1996, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court finalized Paul Robert Sroka’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy.  Sroka’s bankruptcy carries a 20-year disposition.





For obvious reasons, the resume Sroka submitted to Fort Cherry does not mention the bankruptcy.  Nothing on the resume would make Sroka stand out from other candidates who may have applied for the position.




However, Sroka sent a letter expressing interest in the FC Business Manager position to the school auditor Cypher & Cypher, possibly giving his resume a level of legitimacy that the other applicants lacked. 


Did Cypher meet with Sroka as he requested in the letter?  Did Cypher feel comfortable forwarding Sroka’s name on to Fort Cherry without checking into his financial background?

Once Dinnen received the letter from Cypher, he should have conducted a financial background check on Sroka and any other applicants who may have applied.  As Professor Shuster said about Kiely, “(the) potential job relates to the issues about his debt.”   Dinnen, in his capacity as superintendent, should have done his due diligence to protect the financial integrity of the district. 

Or . . . here’s something to consider . . .

Is it possible Dinnen was aware of Sroka’s bankruptcy and recommended him to the board anyway?

Is it possible that Dinnen was looking for a candidate with something to hide, just as Dinnen hid  his annulled Letter of Eligibility from the board in 1998?

WHY DOES THIS MATTER?

A Chapter 7 bankruptcy would make an individual very expensive to bond.  Bonding is not a requirement of business managers in Pennsylvania, but PA School Code mandates that board secretaries must be bonded.  The business manager at FC also acts as board secretary.  FC taxpayers foot the bill for Sroka’s bond, not Sroka. 

In addition, experience has shown that Paul R. Sroka, who is dealing with his own financial difficulties, is not able to act wisely with FC finances.

This blog has shown the public many of the financial gaffes this district has endured under Paul R. Sroka including:



·       Habitual miscoding of expenses

·       Bouncing checks in the scholarship accounts and subsequently telling an outright lie to the board to hide his incompetence

·       Issuing reimbursements to fellow administrators despite the lack of proper receipts

·       Not sending items out for bid

·       Commandeering the district’s AmEx for personal unauthorized expenses

That’s just a few.

Most recently, the board relied on Sroka’s recommendation in choosing bond counsel and habitually relies on his recommendations regarding upcoming renovations.

It’s interesting that, back in March of 2010, the district fired Foreman Architects and entered a contract with a new architectural firm, Burt-Hill, for the planned renovations.  At that time, the administration was reaching for the stars and had a $58 million renovation in mind.  Consequently, Burt-Hill was handed a contract potentially worth more than $2.8 million.




The official school board minutes do not reflect any discussion about replacing the architect.  By law, such discussion is not permitted in executive session, and therefore should have been recorded in the minutes if it had occurred.

As stated above, the business manager is involved in all things financially related to the school district, and as such, is the contact person for the architectural firm.  It stands to reason that the board would rely on Sroka’s recommendation when choosing an architect.

So why was Foreman Architects suddenly replaced by Burt-Hill?

An email exchange between Paul Sroka and an employee of Burt Hill recently fell into the hands of a local taxpayer and subsequently given to the authors of this blog.   A post-it note attached to the emails posed the question:




From the email exchange, it appears Paul Sroka may have been trying to initiate a relationship with an employee of Burt Hill.  At this point, we don’t feel it’s necessary to publish all of the emails in our possession, but this exchange in particular is telling . . .





Was Paul Sroka using his influence over the board’s decision to award a multi-million dollar contract to impress a girl?????



Tsk, tsk, Paul Sroka, tsk, tsk . . .


Note the date and time of the email exchange:  March 22, 2010 at 11:19 and 11:21 a.m.  That very evening the board voted to hire Burt-Hill.  The official board minutes of March 22, 2010, reflect:

"Mr. Cechetti made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Duran, that the Board approve Burt-Hill as the Architectural Firm of record. Motion passed unanimously."

Also, think about the subject line of the emails:  “Thank You”

Why “Thank You”?

Is it possible Paul R. Sroka informed Ms. Montgomery that her firm would be awarded the contract before the board actually took the vote that evening on March 22, 2010?

Is it possible Paul R. Sroka further guaranteed Ms. Montgomery’s firm would be awarded the contract by releasing the financial details of bids supplied by other interested architectural firms to Ms. Montgomery in prior emails?

Hmmmm? . . . . 


Friday, February 7, 2014

Is FC on its way back to “Truth, Honor, and Integrity”?


The authors of this blog would like to thank the FC board for taking care of three agenda items at the January 27th meeting that will greatly impact the future direction of Fort Cherry.

Foremost was the board’s formal acceptance of Superintendent Robert W. Dinnen’s retirement.


Subsequently, and wisely, the board invoked Section 1073(b) of PA School Code which states:


By formally accepting the resignation and invoking Section 1073(b), the board fulfilled the terms of Dinnen’s contract.  Formal acceptance also ensures that the board secretary include the vote in the official minutes of the board.

Additionally the board did not renew the contract of the school auditor, Cypher and Cypher.

The motion to renew failed to get enough votes, thus opening the door for a new set of eyes to be used on Fort Cherry’s finances.

Those voting to keep the status quo and Cypher were Cindy Gaskill, Larry Heinrendt, and Jamie White.

Those voting for change by seeking proposals for a new auditor were Tina Cottril, Melinda Errett, Chris Lauff, Jodi McKay, Jeanine Miles, and JoAnne Wagner.

Although no one from the Observer-Reporter attended the meeting, it appears O-R staff writer Emily Petsko called FC’s Administrative Office after the meeting to learn some details.

The O-R quotes Dinnen as saying:

“We’ve advanced the academic achievement of our students, instituted numerous professional development activities for our staff, created a collaborative process with parents and moved technology to state of the art … and went from $20 million in debt to debt-free.”


Let’s think about that statement.


Dinnen:  “advanced the academic achievement of our students”

That’s an easy claim to make, but do the test scores back up the claim?

Joanne Wagner created a blog while running a successful campaign for school board. 

In Ms. Wagner’s April 30, 2013, post, she pointed out in 2013 that FC is not “advancing the academic achievement of our students” as Dinnen claims.  She references the Pittsburgh Business Times 2013 School Guide which shows FC’s statewide rank dropped:





Dinnen:  “created a collaborative process with parents

Typically, Dinnen spins things to make himself sound and look good.  A man who has no trouble claiming another's career and achievements as his own (as he did with Lt. Col. Yelk and Mattoon JROTC**), most likely would have no qualms using another's ideas and claiming them as his own.

Interestingly, Ms. Wagner also states in her 4/30/13 post, , “. . . we need to acknowledge our problems in order to start a dialogue in the community about how to fix them. . . . This is a shared responsibility between the community and the school.  We can solve these types of problems by developing collaborative relationships and working together, not ignoring them or fighting about them.”


Dinnen:  “instituted numerous professional development activities for our staff”

“Professional development” for the administrators at FC seems to have taken a front seat, in front of our children’s education.  As documented in this blog, “professional development” has consisted of lavish meals, travel, and entertainment for administrators.

Under Dinnen’s tenure, the Administrative Compensation Plan (Act 93) has been modified to include a $5000 yearly bonus for a doctorate degree – a degree obtained with 100% tuition reimbursement thanks to FC taxpayers.  In addition, the Act 93 gives administrators who sign off on a grant a 5% cut, even if a teacher or parent has put the work into applying for it.  The administrator simply signs off on the application, and 5% goes to the administrator.


Dinnen:  “moved technology to state of the art”

Sure, FC has state of the art technology, but is it curriculum-driven?  Former board member Leann Darnley asked that very question last May when the board was considering technology purchases.  Administrators did not respond.  Has FC been purchasing state of the art technology for the sake of bragging rights, or has an educational need truly been established?


Dinnen:  “$20 million in debt to debt-free”

FC would have paid off the $20 million debt last year, with or without Dinnen at the helm.  The district took out a bond to renovate years ago and was required to make a $1.6 million yearly payment.   Furthermore, FC is not debt-free.  The district took out a $4.5 million dollar bond almost immediately after paying off the old debt and the board is discussing the possibility of increasing that bond to $31 million


Also of interest in the O-R, was this quote from business manager Paul Sroka:

“Dr. Dinnen has been very helpful to me in my professional development and mentored me in understanding school finance.”


Sroka:  “mentored me in understanding school finance”

One would think that an understanding of school finance would be a prerequisite for employment as a school business manager, not something you learn on the job.  Did Dinnen’s mentoring include lessons on dubious coding of inappropriate expenditures and commandeering the district’s corporate AmEx card?


--------

With the board’s decisions to hire a new superintendent and retain a new auditor, we are cautiously optimistic that FC is on its way back to “Truth, Honor, and Integrity”.

This board faces many challenges.  Proposals from auditing firms need to be considered.  Decisions over the renovations are looming, along with a decision to increase the bond to as much as $31 million.  Hopefully prudence and good judgment will prevail.

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Will Fort Cherry do what is recommended by the PDE?


Cypher& Cypher’s contract is up this year.  The Board must decide whether to keep Cypher, the auditor for the past 20 years, or obtain a new auditor to set a fresh set of eyes on FC’s finances.

Board member Jodi McKay voiced that it would be a good idea to look for new auditors.  Board member JoAnne Wagner agreed.

Lo and behold, the PDE agrees:  

School Finance 101
PA Department of Education


But board members Jamie White and Cindy Gaskill did not agree.

White and Gaskill are happy to keep the status quo.  Both praised Cypher’s work at FC.


Let’s review a few things that have occurred under Cypher’s watch:
  • FC business manager Paul Sroka commandeered the school’s corporate credit card, making unauthorized personal purchases.  To date, the board has not had it confirmed that public funds were not used to pay for Sroka’s purchases.
  • In 2010, FC administrators violated school code when they transferred over $700,000 out of the 1432 Capital Reserve account.  Instead of instructing the administrators and the board to adhere to school code, Cypher stated publicly that “it didn’t hurt anyone”, made excuses for the administrators, and misidentified the fund in the yearly audit so as to not call attention to the violation.
  • Cypher has ignored years of inappropriate coding by Sroka, enabling the administration to misuse public tax dollars for administrative perks.


For that they deserve praise???

Jamie White not only praised Cypher, he went on to state that Cecil Township, pleased with Cypher’s work in the investigation of former police chief John Pushak, renewed Cypher’s contract.

Really, Jamie??? . . .



Here are the facts:

On January 6, Cecil supervisors approved a new township auditor.  That information appeared January 7, 2014, in the Observer:
“During the reorganization meeting, the board approved Hosack, Specht, Muetzel & Wood LLP in Pittsburgh as the new township auditor, replacing Cypher & Cypher Certified Public Accountants in Canonsburg.”

Cypher did not discover the discrepancy in the Cecil Police Department’s finances.  According to the December 30, 2013, Observer:
The investigation began in mid-January when a Cecil Township resident, who asked to remain anonymous, contacted authorities about money potentially missing from the police department’s evidence room.”

As reported in the January 7 Observer:
 “Our residents do not trust our local government,” said (Cecil) resident Shirley O’Donnell. “It is vital to restore trust and relieve the concern of our citizens through a forensic audit.”


The same thing applies to FC’s administrators and those who are compensated with our tax dollars to watch over them, like the auditor.  This blog has shown time and again that the superintendent and business manager have not been honest with the board.  They are not to be trusted.  And Cypher, by ignoring the indiscretions of the administration, appears to have lost its independence when dealing with Fort Cherry.

Cypher has been the school auditor for over 20 years, well over the PDE’s recommendation of 5 to 6 years.

It’s time for a new set of eyes on Fort Cherry’s books.