PDA

View Full Version : Dec. 5, 2007: Hughes set to take control of Board of Ed



Record-Journal
12-05-2007, 12:04 AM
MERIDEN — Frank J. Kogut may be out as Board of Education president after 16 years at the helm.

Democratic board member Mark Hughes has lined up the five votes he needs to take over, Hughes said Tuesday — and he did it by offering the vice presidency to Republican Leonard Suzio.

Michael P. Cardona is running for secretary and Thomas Bruenn is seeking the position of treasurer on a slate that also has the support of John Lineen, securing the five votes needed for a majority on the nine-member board.
“This is where the votes lie,” said Hughes, who is starting his second term on the board.

Hughes, Cardona, Bruenn, Lineen and Suzio met with the Record-Journal on Tuesday to announce the slate. To avoid a quorum, which would have made it an official board meeting, they met in two smaller groups to make the announcement.

They cited broad dissatisfaction with Kogut’s leadership, including his lack of attendance at expulsion hearings, and a general need for a change.

The school board is scheduled to vote on leadership positions tonight.

Kogut said Tuesday that if he is not re-elected as board president, he intends to complete the last two years of his term. But he said he plans to “keep my options open,” which could mean seeking another elected office.

Originally, the Democrats were united in support of Kogut as president, but that fell through when he backed Robert E. Kosienski Jr., a Republican, for vice president, said Hughes, who initially sought the vice president’s seat.

Barbara Sokol, a Democrat who serves as the board’s treasurer, also supported Kosienski.

But several Democrats, including Town Chairwoman Mildred Torres-Ferguson, wanted to see a Democrat as vice president.

“Frank put his own position on the line to support Rob,” Hughes said.

Hughes decided to challenge Kogut for board president but needed another vote. That’s when he called Suzio, a 13-year veteran of the board.

“I really thought they’d get their act together,” Suzio said of the Democrats, adding that he took time to consider Hughes’ offer.

Suzio, who said he does not intend to seek re-election in 2009, said he is concerned that many will think that being offered the vice presidency will influence how he will vote tonight, but he said that isn’t true.

He was going to be offered a leadership position regardless, he said.

Kogut was prepared to offer him the position of secretary, Torres-Ferguson said.

“It was the most love I’ve felt in my 13 years on the board,” Suzio said.

Kosienski said Tuesday that he is willing to work with the board’s new leaders.

“It’s a shame politics had to come into play, but it’s certainly not the end of the Board of Education,” Kosienski said, adding that he is focused on doing what is best for Meriden’s students.

Hughes and the members of his leadership slate said they respect the opinions of Kogut, Sokol and Kosienski, and that their decisions were not political.

“It’s about the direction of leadership for the Board of Education,” Hughes said.

But Kogut disagreed.

“That’s a lie,” he said. “They have absolutely no respect for me, Barbara and Robby. It’s all politics.”

Kogut said he was not surprised by his colleagues’ actions.
“I’ve been around too long,” he said. “I’ve seen too many things.”

Also likely to be stripped of a leadership title is Sokol, who left a Democratic caucus last week in disgust.

“Truthfully, it doesn’t bother me,” she said. “If you have to win a seat the way this was won, shame on the whole thing. I don’t regret anything.”

Torres-Ferguson said no one should be surprised by the board’s choice of leaders.

“No one wants to think about the Board of Education as political, but this one piece of it is,” she said.

While Torres-Ferguson said the new leadership team was not her first choice — she preferred to see a Democrat serve as vice president to learn from Kogut — she supports what the board’s majority wants.

“We always wanted a change in leadership,” Cardona said.
Cardona wants the board to be more active when tackling issues, he said. He also wants the board and its leaders to talk more and communicate better with the public.

Leadership needs to be shared, Bruenn said.

“I don’t see the president’s position as a position of power,” Hughes said. “I see it as a position of direction and a position of unity. If the position is used properly, that’s how it will be.”

Unity may be the goal, but Bruenn said there may be some tension for a while.

“I doubt by the end of (tonight’s) meeting that we will be singing ‘Kumbaya,’” he said.

eds
12-05-2007, 07:45 AM
The people asked for change...and they got it. Though I don't think people like it. I support change too.

But I support the Libertarian platform for education in America as quoted below:


Poor children suffer the most under the current education system. Wealthy parents can afford to send their children to better or safer schools. Poor parents have no choice. Their children generally end up in the schools with the worst problems. These children end up at a public school, which is obligated to accept every local student, even those who are not interested in learning or who have a reputation for being disruptive or dangerous. The current system traps poor children in poor schools.
Source: The Libertarian Party’s Legislative Program Nov 7, 2000

We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended. We call for the repeal of the guarantees of tax-funded, government-provided education, which are found in most state constitutions.
Source: National Platform of the Libertarian Party Jul 2, 2000

We condemn compulsory education laws, which spawn prison-like schools with many of the problems associated with prisons, and we call for an immediate repeal of such laws.

Until government involvement in education is ended, we support elimination, within the governmental school system, of forced busing and corporal punishment. We further support immediate reduction of tax support for schools, and removal of the burden of school taxes from those not responsible for the education of children.
Source: National Platform of the Libertarian Party Jul 2, 2000

* The most important step in the crisis in education is to end government control of education. We must move toward a system where parents have good, safe, affordable choices for educating their children. To transfer control of education from bureaucrats to parents and teachers and encourage alternatives to the public school monopoly, the Libertarian Party would:Support a true market in education -- one in which parents and students would not be stuck with a bad local school, because they could choose another.
* Implement measures such as tax credits so that parents will have the financial ability to choose among schools.
* Provide financial incentives for businesses to help fund schools and for individuals to support students other than their own children.
* Eliminate the U.S. Department of Education, which spends billions on education and educates no one. The growth of this agency and its numerous regulations is a major reason for runaway costs in American schools.

Source: The Libertarian Party’s Legislative Program Nov 7, 2000

We advocate the complete separation of education and State. We oppose denial of tax-exempt status to schools because of those schools’ private policies. We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether for profit or non-profit. We condemn compulsory education laws. We further support immediate reduction of tax support for schools, and removal of the burden of school taxes from those not responsible for the education of children.
Source: National Platform of the Libertarian Party Jul 2, 2000

As an interim measure to encourage the growth of private schools and variety in education, including home schooling, we support tax credits for tuition and other expenditures related to an individual’s education. We likewise favor tax credits for child care and oppose nationalization of the child-care industry. We oppose denial of tax-exempt status to schools because of those schools’ private policies on hiring, admissions, and student deportment.
Source: National Platform of the Libertarian Party Jul 2, 2000

David
12-05-2007, 10:16 AM
12-5-07
Eds,
Thank you for sharing the Libertarian information. However, please state the source for the same. If it's under copyright, it will be removed from this site.
For future reference, please do not copy/paste text from other sites due to copyright considerations. Simply refer readers here to the site to share info.
Your co-operation is appreciated.

stepup
12-05-2007, 11:20 AM
Change in leadership is long overdue at the Board level, this group has proven to be the most dysfunctional bunch in the city.

I have an new idea!!!
Maybe they can focus on issues like

1. Tumbling CMT scores over the last consecutive 10 years

2. Crumbling high school structures!


we shall we how this plays out.

Mr. Hughes should keep his arrogance in check and refrain from outbursts which just confirm his inability to lead any group.

collie
12-05-2007, 11:59 AM
I'm surprised at some of the venomous comments I've read lately about Mark Hughes. I've never thought he was arrogant and I don't recall any outbursts on his part either. When this story originally broke, I wrote of hoping Hughes would challenge Kogut for the presidency. It seemed a winable fight, that there could quite possibly be a Republican who was also dissatisfied with Kogut's leadership. I suppose it will be Len Suzio being accused of "treachery" and "betrayal," or words to that effect, now. A Democrat was going to win the presidency by simple mathematics. Suzio had the right to pick which Democrat he wanted. I hope those who supported Kogut and Sokol's right to back Rob Kosienski will also support Suzio's right to cast his own vote.

eds
12-05-2007, 01:57 PM
If you looked at the original post you would see the source listed.

I copied this from

National Platform of the Libertarian Party as adopted in convention.

The Libertarian Party’s Legislative Program

They are not copyrighted. I typed this myself. I did not cut and paste.

You'll find these same words on other sites, because other like minded folks like myself are promoting the same ideas. They are often quoted in relation to discussions regarding governmental abuse of the educational system as was shown very clearly at the recent local BOE meetings.

Is it the length of the post or the copyright you are worried about?

Perhaps I might remind the administrator that in the context of the fair-use statue of the federal copyright law, section 107, exempts copyright restrictions for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research provided that four criteria are met.

The first of which is profit or non-profit use. This clearly is a non-profit use as I made no money from its use here on the forums.

The second of which is the nature of the work. The work quoted from is a political party platform and positioning paper which outlines and promotes its own end. I am keeping with that end. This is not a work for sale, fictional, or otherwise.

The third of which is the amount of the copyrighted work also comes into question. Since I did not copy the entire work in question, and only used excerpts, this criteria is also met.

Finally the last criteria is the effect of the market of the copyrighted work. I highly doubt my use here will affect the marketability of the work I copied since I am promoting the position of a political party and not stealing the latest novel from a famous author.

I would say in the context of my use, which is editorial and educational, that it constitutes a fair-use of the alleged copyrighted materials, despite the fact they are not copyrighted "Works".

Even under the Berne Convention where copyright is automatic even if unregistered, it only protects literary and artistic works, visual arts and the like. This is hardly the case. A lack of copyright registration would not deter a claim however the lack of registration with the Library of Congress would limit the amount of damages collected to that which was monetarily lost. That total in this case is zero. I highly doubt the libertarian party would sue for promotion of its values.

But if it makes you feel better I will paraphrase instead.

You really should update the forum rules to include this request.

Thanks!