-
> -*bd of education meetings were taped in the past, has this practice
> stopped? this started because of franks post about an appointment of
> hopson, i also do not know him, but know frank is sincere , yet he as
> been asked several times who voted for this man, he has posted others
> yet does not answer this important question, why? it is public
> information and will eventually come out, if frank is correct he is
> wrong to put the blame on the vice president, it takes a nomination a
> motion to second it and then a vote of the entire bd.
You are quite right. The BOE records the public portions of the
meeting digitally on CD, which is a matter of public record. I did
respond individually re the vote, but not to the whole group. So I'll
correct that now. Since there were only seven people on the board
rather than a full board of nine, it only took four votes to name
someone to the board. Garrett nominated Mr. Hopson, Mrs. Sanders
seconded it, and the other two votes that seated Mr. Hopson were Mr.
Brewington and the Rev. Smallwood, both (in my opinion) people of good
will and heart. The last person to get to vote because he is the
Board President(thank God)is Robert DiSanto. When the vote got to him
it was, as they say, a fait accompli, so he could either register a
protest vote or affirm the vote. He has to try to work with the
entire board, including Mr. Hopson; Robert's thankless job is akin to
herding cats. Although I certainly cannot speak for him, I can say
that Robert voted yes, which at that point was the diplomatic thing to
do and in keeping with the "team spirit" admonitions in board policy.
The point that is missing here I obviously did not make very
clear in my initial or subsequent postings. So I'll try to make it
less opaque now. After all four candidates were interviewed in public
(that's an interesting CD right there), the board went into closed
session, as is permitted, and did the necessary straw polling to
present what would hopefully be a unified board in public, prevent any
hard feelings on the part of the candidates not chosen, and have an
expeditious process. Those executive sessions are not recorded,
although minutes are kept as the Open Public Meetings Act provides.
Suffice it to say that what then transpired in public session
immediately thereafter was not consistent with what had transpired in
closed session. More than that I cannot say. Thank God, however,
there were over a dozen witnesses present in that executive session.
I would think the word "treachery" is not an unfair characterization
of what took place that night, and it had nothing whatever to do with
race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. I have never said that what
took place was illegal; it most certainly was not. It is a matter of
honor and integrity. It certainly cleared up for me once and for all
who I would and wouldn't want to share a foxhole with.
Frank D'Alessandro
Sorry for being so long-winded. It's that old retired teacher thing.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
