In A Rudyard Kipling approach to (FOIA) requests – Part Three, we learned that former EMSD#63 retired Superintendent Dr. Kathleen Williams was indeed living a consultants dream; performing consulting services without a proposal, without a written agreement or contract, without a written scope of work, without written expectations, for an unlimited number of days @ $900.00 per day; a pay schedule dwarfing the current superintendent’s salary by hundreds of dollars per day.
After posting Part-Three, I realized that the true working relationship between Dr. Williams and EMSD#63 was anything but clear. Attached to the hundreds of documents returned under the FOIA 100505-001, were dozens of e-mails to EMSD#63’s attorneys, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca for their review and authorization for release. These emails were sent by (consultant?) Kathleen Williams.
Note: I have submitted over 1,050 FOIA requests to EMSD#63 and have never seen this happen before.
So I asked myself; self, what right does this “consultant” have to communicate with EMSD#63’s high priced attorneys, especially regarding the authorization for release of documents relating to her activities? And on my tax dollar to boot?
The following e-mail string between Dr. Scott Clay and myself goes a long way to answer that question.
Dr. Williams continues to be gainfully employed (as a district employee) at EMSD#63, with or without all of the perks!
So, why hadn’t we officially heard of this exciting news before? One would have thought that this School Board, who in the past had proven to be so infatuated with this “award winning” administrator, would have, at their first opportunity, acknowledged her continuing contribution to the educational and financial health of the district.
EMSD#63 School Board had the responsibility to inform us! They actively inform us when it’s in their interest and actively not inform, us when it is not.
Note: I have reviewed all of the pages and documents at the district’s website and all of the Board Meeting Minutes between April 2009 and April 2010 provided to me under FOIA 100401-001, and could not find a reference to Dr. Williams’ continued employment.
Before I end this post, a word of caution.
If you are invited by school officials to meet “personally” and/or “privately,” to discuss “your questions or concerns” about the district or about “education” in general, or any other nonsense, politely tell them no.
Based on my experience with some school districts, if you are seriously searching for the truth, you will not, in my opinion, find it there.
Note: I intend to follow up on the letter with SH&P and if need be, the IL Attorney General’s Office. I have no idea of the specific type of information EMSD#63 withheld.
I have worked with EMSD#63 management on over 1,050 FOIA requests since 2004. At no time that I can recall, has the district resorted to using SH&P to issue its “intent to deny” statement. Very curious indeed!
ENSD#63 delivered over 400 pages of information on May 21st, 2010. Attached was the following cover letter.
Dr. Williams timesheets and payment data were thoughtfully and conveniently placed together. This allowed me to quickly answer the e-mailer’s five questions.
Questions & Answers.
E-Mailer’s Questions In Order
Does Dr. Williams have a contract?
Is she still consulting District 63?
What is she doing?
How many days has she worked?
How much money have we paid for her services?
First question: Does Dr. Williams have a contract?
Ms. Glickman’s cover letter stated: “No proposal, agreement/contract, or written scope of work exists, and therefore no documents to this nature are enclosed.”
A consultants dream.
No proposal.
No written agreement or contract.
No written scope of work.
Unlimited Number of Days.
$900.00 Per Day + Expenses
No expectations!
Second question: Is she still consulting District 63?
Today is May 22nd. Based upon the data presented below, she was still consulting East Maine School District #63 as of May 5th, 2010.
Third question: What is she doing?
Again, based upon the data presented below, Dr. Williams is providing various ancillary management services. There are however, reasonable questions regarding the need of her providing these services, based on additional data received under FOIA # 100505-001. I will elaborate in a future post.
Fourth question: How many days has she worked?
Also, based upon the data presented below, records indicate that as of May 5th, 2010, Dr. Williams had worked a total of 72.50 days.
Fifth question: How much money have we paid for her services?
The records indicate that as of May 5th, 2010, Dr. Williams received $65,250.00 for her time.
Dr. Kathleen Williams time sheets and payment data are presented in two formats below. The first report is a spreadsheet report showing data from each individual record plus totals. The second report, is a PDF copy of all of the time sheet and payment records provided under FOIA # 100505-001.
Putting Dr. Kathleen Williams Consulting Dollars Into Perspective.
I have included for your review, a report based on Administrator Salary Data 2009-2010 supplied by EMSD#63 under the Freedom of Information Act.
As you can see, Dr. Williams consulting fees, in terms of both daily, full-year and equivalent salary rates, outpace all full-time EMSD#63 Administrators by a large margin. At her current daily-rate, Dr. Williams would make $60,000 more than Superintendant Clay.
In Rudyard Kipling approach to (FOIA) requests – Part Four, we will continue to present the data, discuss findings to date, develop new questions, and create, if necessary, additional FOIA requests.
You now know everything you need to know to write your own FOIA request.
I hope this series has been helpful.
Your comments and questions, as always, are most welcome.
I have often stated that teaching is: “the effective transfer of knowledge and skills from one generation to the next.” Normally, this transference flows from the old to the young.
Sometimes, the young; in this case, two 16 year olds from California and one 16 year old from Australia respectively, show what ambitious, focused, creative, determined and courageous young people are capable of.
I’ve been “abusing” school districts and teachers quite a lot over the last couple of months, at least, that’s what I’ve been told.
So, I thought, maybe, the focusing of a bit of “light” into all that darkness might be in order. That said, I will attempt, starting tomorrow, to lighten things up a bit and discuss some of the more positive aspects of education, whenever I can.
In 1979 Russia invaded Afghanistan. In a response designed to show America’s displeasure, then President Jimmy Carter, chose not to allow our athletes to participate in the 1980 Summer Olympic Games in Moscow, depriving many of these competitors, their one time, hard won, opportunity to compete in the “Games.”. To be fair, 64 other countries also boycotted the Moscow Olympics.
The boycott was a political act.
Highland Park’s School Board decision to deprive the girls basketball team of their opportunity to compete in Arizona, was also a political act, and a stupid one at that. If the decision had been about safety, as District officials alleged, the District would have pulled out of the tournament prior to the states passage of Arizona’s new immigration law.
The citizens of Arizona will willingly tell you about their “safety problem.” That’s why they created the law!
I recognize that school districts are political animals. They get their operating monies from the taxpayers, and Board Members are voted into or out of office.
Let School District 113’s experience be a lesson to other School Boards. The children you claim to “do it for” are not pawns to be used to serve your political agenda’s.
I really did try to find a Non-Fox-News Youtube video.
One would think that this School Board and Board of Education would have enough on their plate in trying to improve their district’s academic achievements scores and bringing their teacher and administrator payroll costs under control.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Another School system displays a lack of common sense this week.
The reason for this insanity is “zero tolerance.” Zero tolerance is the policy of “applying laws or penalties to even minor infringements of a code in order to reinforce its overall importance.” Why zero tolerance? Zero tolerance frees school systems from decision-making responsibilities and, they believe, shields them from public criticism.
Zero Tolerance = No Responsibility!
I think the guys in Georgia should lighten up.
WARNING: This video is: A little adult. A little offensive. I hope it helps!
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Five working days later, I received the following e-mail.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
I would like to thank Mr. Eric Poder at the Voice of Morton Grove website for delivering to me this morning, video recordings of EMSD#63’s School Board Meetings from January, 2009 through May, 2010.
The reason for my wishing these videos, is that I had not had the opportunity to personally attend these important meetings.
Mr. Poder indicated that 40 “enlightening” hours would be required to review everything.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
You see, FOIA’s do get their attention. Now we must wait to see if they actually do what they say.
Now that you have had a chance to review the “FOIA” legislation, let’s see if we can make the law more understandable and user friendly. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s office has been very helpful in this regard. Her office has provided us two web pages: "General Public Training" and “Frequently Asked Questions By the Public”. The training takes a few minutes and the FAQ provides good additional information.
A few points to keep in mind on your way to becoming a FOIA maven.
Most School Districts receive one or two FOIA requests in any given month. I have authored over 1,050 FOIA requests; the majority of them penned between 2005 and 2007. Do I know everything about FOIA’s? No. But I have had some success with them.
A couple of the things I learned during those years was that: all is not always as it seems, and the incident that prompts your question, is often times, a symptom of a much larger problem.
So, follow me and get ready to write your first FOIA but don’t forget to keep looking at the big picture.
Assuming you’ve done your homework and somewhat understand FOIA concepts, we’ll move on to Butterly’s five steps for FOIA requests.
Butterly's five steps for FOIA requests.
1. Pick your target 2. Determine who to send the FOIA to 3. Perfect your question 4. Send via e-mail 5. Await your answer.
East Maine School District #63 (EMSD#63) recently cried “poor” again, and held a public meeting in January 2010 to discuss the additional sale of millions of dollars in Bonds to help cover expenses. As you might recall, EMSD#63 passed a major tax increase referendum only a few years earlier.
EMSD#63’s Agenda/Minutes supporting this statement:
“Public Hearing on intent of the District to Sell Bonds and Regular Business Meeting / Jan 6 '10
1.03 Public Hearing Concerning the intent of the District to sell bonds in the amount of $3,500,000 for the purpose of paying claims against the District and in the amount of $5,000,000 for the purpose of increasing the working cash fund for the District”
Opinion & Musings
In light of this, or maybe even in spite of this, EMSD#63’s School Board, knowingly and without shame, continues to spend $900+ taxpayer dollars per day on, in my opinion, the questionable services currently being provided by former Superintendent Dr. Kathleen Williams.
Pick your target.
In this case, the target organization is East Maine School District #63 School Board.
Determine who to send the FOIA to.
One can not just send in a FOIA request that starts with the words: “to whom it may concern.” The law requires the public body you have chosen to FOIA, to assign a specific person to manage FOIA requests. We must (should) e-mail the district, in this case EMSD#63, to determine who that person is. I have already done so. The resulting e-mail series illustrate this process.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Let's look at each question and see if any or all of them can be perfected. At the same time, let’s look at the information already available to the general public.
What do we know?
All we know for sure that the Journal-Topics on August 19, 2009, believed Dr. Williams was under a consulting contract or agreement.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Assuming the Journal-Topics information is correct, we will first need to confirm the information presented in the article. Remember your seven good friends;who, what , when, where,how,why and how much? It’s time call them for duty. We will use them to guide us and to help us define as many of the remaining questions as we can.
Time to lay out your questions and thoughts.
This structured approach has worked well for me in the past.
Who: EMSD#63 School Board and Kathleen Williams, Retired Superintendant of Schools, East Maine School District #63.
What: Has Dr. Williams performed consulting services on behalf of herself or others at EMSD#63?
Subordinate Question(s)
What does the scope of work look like?
What does the contract say?
Who does Dr. Williams report to?
What do the progress reports say?
When will the contract end?
How much money can we expect to spend under this agreement/contract?
When: Were these services performed between July 1, 2009 and the date of this posting?
Subordinate Question(s)
What dates were these services performed?
Where: East Maine School District #63.
How: Why was the contract/(agreement) needed?
Subordinate Question(s)
Who was responsible for initiating the agreement?
Who was responsible for writing the agreement?
Who was responsible for voting for the agreement?
Note:The Journal-Topics said: “The Dist. 63 school board approved hiring Williams in June before her retirement.”
A review of the June, 2009 Board Minutes does not show such an agreement. Further, multiple viewings of the full June 3, 2009 EMSD#63 School Board Meeting video taken by Mr. Eric Poder of the Morton Grove Voice, fails to show any direct reference to the hiring of Dr. Williams.
A copy of those minutes are presented below for your review. A copy of the two part video can be obtained by contacting Mr. Poder at the Morton Grove Voice.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Also, Dr. Clay reportedly also told the Journal-Topics: “Williams has no contract but will serve on an ‘as needed’ basis to assist district administrators.”
As one who is somewhat familiar with the goings on at EMSD#63, I can only ask: This Board? This District? No contract?
Why: Why is Dr. Williams' expertise required?
Opinion & Musings
The School Board had already hired Dr. Clay; “an intelligent, articulate, highly qualified and experienced Assistant Superintendant and former Principal,” to perform the duties of Superintendant.
Did the Board not think Dr. Clay capable of performing his duties when they hired him?
Were there no other currently employed EMSD#63 administrators available, who could lead, manage and advise the Board “on a large construction project involving four schools?”
Were there no other currently employed EMSD#63 administrators available who could lead, manage and advise the Board regarding “H1N1 flu contingencies?”
Did Dr. Williams fail to prepare her administrators while Superintendent, such that they would need mentoring by her or someone else when she left?
Journal-Topics went on to say: “Clay said Williams started the project last year and is being brought in to see it through to completion.”
Opinion & Musings
With all due respect to Dr. Williams, I didn’t see anything on her résumé that displays specific, or even general, construction management expertise. Besides, Dan Barrie, Director of Operations & Maintenance is already employed by the district to perform that task. The EMSD#63 website states: “The Building & Grounds Department is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of District 63 facilities.” Also, in my opinion, Dr. Williams, her prior administration and School Board did not have a stellar reputation when it came to building maintenance. One only need recall the District/MTSEP 1131 Dee Road property fiasco.
Further, as one can easily see, Dr. Williams résumé showed no prior experience in epidemiology or other related medical or scientific fields, that would have made her judgments, input or management skills, more valuable than any currently employed EMSD#63 Administrator.
Quite frankly, based on experience, skills, administrative position and the close availability of the District’s school nurse, I would have expected Mrs. Lynn Glickman, Executive Director of Personnel and Pupil Services, to be the lead person on that project.
I have provided a copy of Dr. Kathleen Williams résumé below.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Opinion & Musings
Dr. Williams departure had been known for over a year. The construction project was initiated by Dr. Williams, based on her own résumé. The H1N1 flu virus issues were also known prior to her departure.
Dr. Williams was responsible to prepare the way for her staff and replacement, Dr. Clay. This, I believe, she did not adequately do. Had she had done so, her consulting, advising and mentoring services would not have been needed. Ergo, no $900 per day consulting gig.
The responsibility for this “situation” clearly rests with the School Board and with it’s President.
All this begs the questions: Did the School Board believe Dr. Clay incapable of performing all of the duties of Superintendant?
Was the School Board unwilling to risk failure of these important projects under former Superintendant Dr. Williams replacement?
Who’s idea was it to forgo other possibly more experienced candidates for Dr. Clay?
How Much: The Journal-Topics stated: “The district is paying Williams $900 per day.”
Subordinate Question(s)
Is that true?
How many “as needed” days has Dr. Williams worked in her capacity as consultant, advisor and mentor?
Also, what additional money has the District spent in support of this agreement?
Finally, when does the School Board expect this agreement to terminate?
Research! Research! More Research!
Part of the research is now complete. We’ve already found out who to send the FOIA request to. We’ve read the Board Minutes associated with Dr. Clays reported claims. We’ve reviewed Dr. Williams résumé to see if she had expertise in construction management, epidemiology or science. Now it’s time to review the remaining publically available data before composing the FOIA request.
Let’s start with EMSD#63’s Monthly Accounts Payable Reports. These reports, in PDF format, can be found as an attachment at the bottom of each Board Agenda.
After reviewing all of the Board Agendas posted between May, 2009 and April, 2010, I could not find any mention of a Board vote on an agreement with Dr. Williams.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
After reviewing the report, we can see that Dr. Williams was paid three times over non-consecutive months for ancillary items associated with consulting services. The check information can be found on pages 12, 17 and 20. Further, no other checks for consulting services were paid to Dr. Kathleen Williams, in her name!
The fact that there was check information printed on the Accounts Payable Report, proves that Dr. Williams was, and/or is consulting.
Subordinate Question(s)
How is she currently being paid?
Is it possible that Dr. Williams intends to perform all her work, invoice the district at the end of the project, and collect her money.
Is it possible that Dr. Williams is not operating under her own name?
Could she be operating as a partnership, corporation, LLC, etc.
Could Dr. Williams be working for another organization that already had or currently has, a contract with the District?
Could EMSD#63 be purchasing a tax deferred annuity or some other tax deferred investment instrument on her behalf, that would not necessarily show up under her name at this time?
As you can see, there are lots of questions to be answered.
Strategy.
Should we submit the initial FOIA requests one-question-at-a-time, or should we cast a larger net?
In this case, I’m choosing to throw the net. I can then submit additional single FOIA requests based on initial request responses, or as newly developed questions dictate.
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
Send via e-mail.
FOIA Date: Tuesday, May 05, 2010 Number: 100505-001
Now, we must await our answer!
See, it wasn’t so hard. Was it? When EMSD#63’s answers come back, and when I’ve had time to review the response, I’ll write “Part –Three.”
It seems rather odd to me that District #63 requires the taxpayer to request separate Board Meeting minutes in order to supplement the meager information presented on theDistrict #63 website.
Prior to this recent change, it was possible for the non-attending stakeholder to quickly and efficiently read what transpired at District #63’s Board Meetings. This is no longer the case.
The new system does not facilitate transparency, just the opposite.
