Letter: Board of Ed Lacks Ethics

Patch reader Bob Urbancik says the board violates ethics policies that have been in place since 1999.

*Local and frequent speaker at Board of Education meetings Bob Urbancik emailed this letter to Patch criticizing the Board of Education's lack of ethics.

Since Feb. 9, 1999 the members of the Smithtown Board of Ed were required to sign and follow Policy 2160-E. Sadly the present Board is operating without signing this required policy. The policy is an "Ethics Exhibit." I find this to be a very serious situation; especially when viewed with some recent acts of some Board Members.

The current Vice President of the Board, Mrs. Knox‘s actions stand out. Her husband is an accountant whose boss conducted an annual audit of the district for the last several years. After the most recent audit a member of the board claimed that the audit committee (which Mrs. Knox’s husband's boss was on) exceeded its authority. Mrs. Knox denied that. But, after several months it was found that the committee did exceeded its authority. But, Mrs. Knox still disputes that. The audit is done as an unpaid service to the district. I strongly believe that the district should accept the services of a new auditor (Mrs. Knox’s husband’s boss has been doing it for several years); if it was a paid position Mrs. Knox husband’s boss would not be allowed as the potential for a conflict of interest. I believe that the potential for a conflict is real even for this unpaid position. And with the district’s finding the committee exceeded its authority along with Mrs. Knox denial of this a solution is needed.

Clearly Mrs. Knox husband’s boss should not be auditing the district while Mrs. Knox serves on the Board. And to be clear Mrs. Knox husband is a member of a large firm and his boss is on the audit committee and this firm should not be allowed to audit the District.

Going over the district budgets for the last several years we learned that the District sometimes had reserves over $12,000,000 and raised our taxes while holding on to the reserves. Perhaps an audit by an impartial community member would point out how to use these reserves more wisely. At minimum it would eliminate a husband auditing work done by his wife.

The current President of the Board is a very honest, hardworking and fair person. And along with Mrs. Knox the Vice President she is a long serving board member. I have gone to many meetings and I strongly believe that Mrs. Waldron always followed the items of the ethics exhibit. But I believe Mrs. Knox clearly violated the ethics exhibit; which in part states “ avoid being placed in a position of conflict of interest."

Mrs. Knox’s belief that her husband’s boss’s committee did not exceeded its’ authority continues after the District found that it did.

As a community we are entitled to fair and ethical treatment. The current situation needs to be repaired now. How can Mrs. Knox believe that her husband's boss can audit the district without the appearance of a conflict of interest? And how can her denials about the district’s finding not be a conflict of interest? And why did she not sign the required Ethics Exhibit? And since Mrs. Knox is a long standing board member how could she not know about the Ethics Exhibit. I found it ; it’s on the District’s website. I am not sure but I think Mrs. Knox was a Board member when the policy was adopted.

Another troubling matter is the lack of transparency concerning our school district. We are not getting the full information about important matters and the information we do get is delayed. With the loss of the $3.1 million dollars the district and the Board of Ed refused to give us all the details. This makes the need for an independent auditor a real priority for the community.

And recently several members of the community asked the Board of Ed to supply more copies of the expanded agendas for the public Board of Ed meetings. Our Board of Ed responded to eliminate ALL agendas. The district cited a new law that allows them to do so. But this law does not require the district to eliminate the agendas. Now if someone goes to a Board meeting for the first time there is no way to follow along. The expanded agendas provided useful information about what was happening in the district. I guess the Board of Ed doesn’t want us to have that information.

– Bob Urbancik

scsddad February 26, 2012 at 03:01 AM
In my opinion she is still to close to the STA and I think they are her main concern that's my opinion. I know your opinion is different let's hope for the best
Bill February 26, 2012 at 03:05 AM
well we shall see. It's March and still no settled contracts. Let's hope everyone can sit down in a room and get these contracts settled before the budget vote.
One Opinion February 26, 2012 at 03:26 AM
I can only speak to my own opinion. I find it questionable that Ms McEnroy chose this past election to run for a seat on BOE. She was on the executive board of the STA when the union declared impasse with the district. I cannot believe a person coming from this background will be asking the tough questions or make the make the difficult votes that will be necessary to get the district finances in order. Why did the STA work so hard, even resorting to inappropiate campaigning to get both Ms McEnroy and Ms Plourde elected? Because they want Mr Carlin and Mr Rossi out. Does anyone remember Mr Rossi's statement at his last BOE meeting? That was a statement from a man who had nothing to loose but to tell the truth about what was happening with the STA issues. Mr Carlin spoke repeatly, educating the public on what was actually happening. These are the type of people I want representing the students and taxpayers of Smithtown. I do not doubt that Ms McEnroy has an education background that is an asset but her ties to the STA negate that fact. I hope that I will see all the BOE members, not just Mr Saggese, speak out and aggresively question the status quo. So far the only votes I have seen from the freshmen members have been to restrict public speaking time. Not very progressive and open if you ask me.
One Opinion February 26, 2012 at 03:36 AM
I would be shocked if they settled the contract before the budget vote. The union has no incentive to negotiate. I think the administration understands that the public is fully aware of the implications of a contract that is not signifigantly scaled back from the one that expired in 2010. The unions can go for years and years collecting their 5% increases. Hopefully with the Gov Cuomos mandate regarding APPR the district must have an agreement in place by Jan 2013 in order to qualify for additional state aid. That might get things moving. However, I fear that the taxpayers are not going to be happy when this contract is settled. Let's see how that plays out.
scsddad March 01, 2012 at 05:38 PM
Smithtown Mom of 3 Maybe this is Ms Plourde real character


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »