I heard something that made me think, Is that true? Tell me what your opinion is...
Is there a conflict of interest for a Board member to serve the public who is also a declared member of the Apples? What if said Board member is feeding information to the Apples?
Let me see your bet and raise you one more. Is it possible for that same board member to represent her community when she has such a narrow view of what good education looks like based solely on her own child's particular needs? The answer is obvious.
ReplyDelete!. I am not an "Apple".
ReplyDelete2. I don't particularly like "the Apples".
3. I have no particular affection for ANY of the BOE members, as I think this is the most pathetic and lackluster group of representatives in my memory (approximately 30 years).
That said, I think that your hatred of the Apples has pushed you off the rhetorical deep end.
To say that someone has a "conflict of interest" because that person belongs to a particular organization that has no pecuniary interest in the educational system, and is in fact an advocacy group (no matter how ill-advised or wrong-headed) is to smear that person with an ethics charge that is completely undeserved.
Like the Apples. Hate the Apples. But recognize that Board of Education members are entitled to belong to any advocacy or "special interest" group they want without violating the conflict of interest rules. It is no more impermissible to be "an Apple" than it is to be "a Republican" or "a Democrat".
You are WAY off base here. What is next -- disqualifying BOE members because they are "card carrying members" of:
1. The ACLU?
2. The NRA?
3. The Norwalk Public Library?
I simply asked if a comment I heard had any merit. If anyone has gone too far in accusations, I think it might be you.
ReplyDelete"Simply asking a question" is the oldest rhetorical trick in the book to obliquely cast aspersions on someone one wishes to discredit.
ReplyDelete"Is a certain President in reality a secret Muslim?"
"Is it permissible for a presidential candidate to take his marching orders from the Mormon elders?".
"Is it ok for a BOE member to feed information to the Apples?"
Just askin'.
It happens that the person to whom everyone is referring is a genuine troublemaker. I don't care what the accusation may or may not be, just get her off the Board!
ReplyDeleteThen vote her out in the next election.
ReplyDeleteShe may be a troublemaker.
She may be a genius.
She may be an idiot.
But she does NOT have a conflict of interest based on any affiliation with an advocacy group, no matter how much one disagrees with them.
Wow! You are determined to make your point again and again and again and again........what's YOUR problem? Are you a bully also?
DeleteNo, I just get upset when I see people confuse legitimate political or associational activity with unethical conduct.
DeleteAnd I get particularly upset when I feel compelled to defend people of whom I am not particularly fond in the first place.
Curious - does this woman realize the reputation she has given herself? What is her motivation? Anyone know?
ReplyDeleteIf you have any doubt about Sue Haynie's lousy values, remember this-- she voted against the entire Board of Education when they introduced a policy to allow disabled kids to bring guide dogs to school.
DeleteIf we are reading this blog, chances are we've heard about the harassment that she inflicts on the assistant superintendent.
ReplyDeleteIs it a legal "conflict" to use your office to get inside information for a group you belong to? I don't think so. But, is it sleazy and unethical? Well that's another story.
I don't think it's right when Colarossi gets whacked with broad personal attacks and I don't think it's right when the same thing happens to Haynie.
ReplyDeleteCritique her record (although I find it hard to believe she voted against guide dogs in the schools). Criticize her blind allegiance to Susan Marks. Question if she has the intellectual or emotional ability to contribute to the schools and students. But don't fall into the same trap she does by engaging in cheap personal attacks.
She voted against guide dogs. Check the minutes!
DeleteWhether it's because I'm a defense attorney at heart or because I know all too well the sense of frustration of having contorted conflict of interest allegations waged against me for cheap political purposes, I'd like to weigh in on the side that the actions complained of are not, in the legal sense, a conflict of interest.
ReplyDeleteThe public will certainly decide if the actions of any member (myself included) comport with the standards they believe we should follow. And the public can certainly decide if elected officials should be judged by the company they keep (although I would ask that Artie Kassimis' friendship with me, and his serving as the best man at my wedding, not be held against him!).
However, claiming that any elected official has committed a "conflict of interest" where none exists is unfair as that language carries such a strong legal and ethical opprobrium.
Dude- what are you doing?
DeleteShe's been a disgrace- trying to knock you down whenever she can, cheering for the Quitter, and boring people to tears with her speeches.
It's ok to admit you made a mistake helping her get elected. Admitting your mistake is the first step to recovery.
First, my appologies. Obviously Sue Haynie has not committed a conflict of interest. What has surfaced here is the (alleged) harassment of the assistant superintendent. What I heard initially referred to that claim. It was my understanding that, through the Apples, information was requested by Sue.. Hence my question that led to this post.
ReplyDeleteWe know the superintendent is too weak to take a stand, can the Chairman of the Board put an end to the harassment? Let the man do his job! Stop Haynie from harassing him!
ReplyDeleteI'm not defending Haynie, however, "let the man do his job"? Do you honestly think he has not been a bully and instigator at CO?
ReplyDeleteI think the person who needs to do his job is CHAIRMAN CHIARAMONTE.
DeleteToo bad for Jack that the Mayor protects Haynie. She's one of his attack dogs. Jack takes his marching orders from Dickie Moccia.
I honestly defend him. He has been the only person to hold the central office secretaries accountable. He had their computers monitored and found out that some of them were spending hours a day shopping, on Facebook, planning trips.....He confronted them. Everyone asks for accountability, and when a central office administrator goes after people, they call him a bully! I'm tired of listening to the nastiness about the Assistent Superintendent. Do you want accountability or not?
ReplyDeleteIf it's true that Haynie is feeding information she gets to the REdApples, then "Houston, we have a problem". Board of Ed members receive lots of confidential information. They are supposed to keep it confidential.
ReplyDeleteI have heard that some REdApples are trying to scare up a campaign against the Asst. Supt. From what I've heard, they (the Apples) are using info from Haynie to make their case. That's wrong.
That is exactly what I heard! I suspect it is all true. Unfortunately nothing can be done about it because Haynie is protected. Remember Haynie was a staunch supporter of the Nathan Hale principal, so she happily goes after The Assistant Superintendent. He was the one who held The principal there accountable for the minority class that was out of compliance with state regulations. She was dubious with Daddona. She appears to be out to get him. Ironically, she is after the only person in the system who holds staff accountable!
Delete(not dubious, furious! Automatic spell corrector at work....)
DeleteYou have your facts all wrong on Nathan Hale. Dadonna held no one accountable. He was out to run McCain out of town - and he sent Mosby to do the job.
DeleteOh please, that's the story Haynie wants you to believe. The students placed in that class were not supposed to be there. Daddona warned the principal in private and McCain refused to change the class. It was the principal's fault tha it became a public issue. Even Susan Marks had to get involved. Next you'll be telling me that Susan Marks wanted to run him out of town. It's called ACCOUNTABILITY.....a word most people in Norwalk never heard before.
DeleteThere's a lot more to the Nathan Hale story-- McCain was a good company boy and didn't throw anyone under the bus. But Dadonna dropped the ball too-- kids had schedules turned butt-over-tea kettle to satisfy the Mosbys of Norwalk.
DeleteLong way of saying that Dadonna is no angel, but he does not deserve what Sue Haynie and the Apples are trying to do to him. The Apples are sending out emails to Nathan Hale families encouraging them to protest Dadonna becoming the interim superintendent. Sad- the man should be judged on his merits, not on how much Sue Haynie hates him.
Sounds like a very dangerous, loose cannon for an elected official! Any legal advice out there to stop Haynie? It is no surprise that Haynie has taken on Daddona from the get go. She backed McCain for Asst. Superintendent and made trouble for Daddona way back then. She is a Board member with a very focused mission. This is soooooo wrong!
ReplyDeleteCould someone please post a copy of the letter that the Apples sent out to the Nathan Hale families that asks them to protest Tony Daddona's possible appointment as Interim Superintendent. I think we would all be interested in reading it. Thank you.
ReplyDelete