Suddenly, Dist. 300 Comp Issue Disappears
</element><element id="paragraph-1" type="body"><![CDATA[A statement read Thursday night by District 300 board president Larry Valier is critical of the Du Quoin Evening Call's story of a vote two weeks ago on compensating Supt. Gary Kelly, business manager Cory Robbins and DHS maintenance employee Dane Porter for work on the new high school over and above their customary paychecks.
The statement provides a measure of damage control for the action which at least four board members (two against the issue and two of the five voting for the issue) say was designed to provide the three with $130,000 in added compensation over three years for their hard work and oversight of the project.
The newspaper threw a penalty flag on the action--woefully lacking in transparency--after discussions left the privacy of the executive session and became public.
Board president Larry Valier Thursday night was angered by the fact that the substance of the discussions escaped the executive session. As the need arose for an executive session Thursday night to decide on routine aide appointments Valier's attitude was "what's the point?," yet the customary closed session did follow.
After the session the board voted to hire Michelle Bradley as a DMS in-school suspension supervisor and Jessica Craig as an elementary instructional aide.
Valier called the story "negative" and was frustrated by the public's lackluster support of the new high school, a very positive project for the community.
He echoed odds and ends of public criticism including public comments that the red on the new VanMetre Field was "too red" and that the field lacks the "Crazy Indian" mascot.
Always the voice of reason, Valier said the entire community should be proud of the project, "something for the kids." And, it should.
Criticism of the newspaper's support on any level is bogus. The Du Quoin Evening Call has championed the project and the work of the board at every level, authoring countless stories on the industrial education building--since completed--groundbreakings and ribbon-cuttings, features on VanMetre Field, the renovated R.P. Hibbs Auditorium, the gym and band room and in recent days a story on the seamless move to new lunchroom quarters.
None of these success stories has anything to do with the board's controversial 5-2 vote--apparently inspired by architect Paul Lunsford--to apply for capital development funding as reimbursement for further compensation to the three mentioned and/or others in the district.
At the outset, even Supt. Kelly said his added time "has value."
Valier said Thursday the Capital Development Board met last week and voted against the application for supplemental funding because the reimbursements are not allowed under their guidelines.
Yet, Capital Development Board spokesman David Blanchett--who was contacted by the Du Quoin Evening Call--said he can't find where the CDB voted on anything, nor that application for the $130,000 was even submitted. "The last thing in our files is from last November." Maybe it was a telephone inquiry.
Others at CDB tell the newspaper there is no such thing as a 72-hour turnaround on an application like this. It can typically take 30-60 days to get an answer.
The district has provided neither the original Lunsford letter nor the labor budget which is said to have replaced it.
Apparently, the controversial issue just evaporated or self-destructed.
Thursday's statement read: "First and foremost there will not be any type of "stipend" or "bonus" for any individuals as the article reported. For a number of years if additional work that was approved by the administration that was incurred beyond a regular work time, compensation was granted in accordance with the DEA certified or non-certified contracts. Both contracts stipulate how additional work beyond the normal work day would be compensated.
"Our most common processes and procedures have been to compensate those individuals who perform additional work by documenting their time on a weekly time card for non-certified staff, from a listing of time for certified staff via a memorandum from the administration submitted to the superintendent for approval and subsequent processing by the district payroll official via internal substitute reports of through board action.
"The board did review a letter during the August 18, 2011 regular board meeting that was developed by the district architect which was used an example in a similar district for this type of compensation under the CDB guidelines for school construction grant reimbursement. The majority of the board did not want to utilize that type of example since it deterred from our current practices. In summary, the majority of the board authorized the district architect to develop a budget to submit to CDB for any construction-related personnel expense that could be included as part of our school construction grant costs."
That would include overages of time for the maintenance supervisor, custodial and kitchen personnel and moving costs.