Posted 5/12/12
Rich has attempted to reach Dian McCarthy, the Vice Chair of the Goffstown School Board to address these issues. Should she reply, we will post it here under this post. And, of course, we’ll be discussing this on Monday’s show.
Subject: RE: MVMS consultant search
From:
Date: Sat, May 12, 2012 10:54 am
To: “Dian McCarthy”
Hi, Dian.
I regret that I am feel it necessary to document, via email, my attempts to reach you to further discuss the information mentioned below.
From your email, I gather that, while you’ve stated you will recuse yourself from any vote on awarding a contract in this matter, it appears you have been and will continue to involve yourself in the discussions over whether or not the district should pursue this course of action. This begs the question of why the district is in possession of bids, including one from your company, if the decision to pursue this course of action has yet to be made.
Further, it would appear that your participation in this conversation is, in and of itself, a violation of the the school board’s ethics policy, as published on the district’s Web site: http://goffstown.k12.nh.us/common/policies/BCB%20-%20Board%20Member%20Conflict%20of%20Interest.pdf
To be sure, I’m looking for a response from you that will rectify what appears to be a clear violation of your district’s conflict of interest policy. I will also renew my invitation to you to be a guest on my show to explain this in your own words and to discuss, in general, the upheaval that seems evident at MVMS.
Be advised, that in addition to posting this material on facebook and my blog at www.girardatlarge.com, this will be a news item on Monday’s show, so we hope to have you and or your comments.
Best Regards,
Rich Girard
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: RE: MVMS consultant search
From:
Date: Wed, May 16, 2012 1:18 pm
To: “Dian McCarthy”
Hi, Dian;
It appears from the attached documents that the discussions you’ve been involved with regarding a consultant for Mountain View Middle School have been more than about “the merits of the proposal and whether or not we think such a study would be of benefit to the school, the district and the community.”
Further, it also appears as if the district is, in fact, at a point of considering the awarding of a contract, contrary to your statement below.
Because of this and because I’ve yet to receive a reply to my last email or to several phone calls, I believe I have no other choice than to request that you provide any and all communications you’ve had with any school district personnel or fellow board members regarding the solicitation of bids for an RFP that doesn’t appear to have been proposed by the administration, approved by the board, or posted to the public.
This request is made under New Hampshire RSA 91-A, the Right to Know Law.
Also, my prior inquiry regarding how the administration can be evaluating proposals when the school board hasn’t decided to secure these services, awaits your reply.
Dian, my intent here is not to cast aspersions. It is to gain clarity on what’s happening. I’d rather we talked about this to facilitate my understanding of what’s happening and your role in it. Since you appear unwilling to engage that discussion, I have no choice, in pursuit of the truth, but to proceed from the premise that there’s something to find and go looking for it.
Best regards,
RH Girard
Host
NOTE: These are links to the attachments downloaded and sent to Dian.
See Superintendent’s Report on page 3 here: http://goffstown.k12.nh.us/SB/attachments/014_Approved%2004-02-12%20GSB%20Minutes.pdf
see MVMS item on page 4 here: http://goffstown.k12.nh.us/SB/attachments/014_Approved%2004-16-12%20GSB%20Minutes.pdf
See pages 6 & 7, MVMS study committee here: http://goffstown.k12.nh.us/SB/attachments/014_DRAFT%2005-07-12%20GSB%20Minutes.pdf
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: MVMS consultant search
From: Dian McCarthy
Date: Fri, May 18, 2012 6:44 am
To:
Cc: Stacy Buckley
Rich,
I’ve forward your email to Superintendent Stacy Buckley as she is responsible for handling 91-A requests on behalf of the Board. She will be in touch with you as outlined in the statute.
Best regards,
Dian McCarthy
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: RE: MVMS consultant search
From:
Date: Fri, May 18, 2012 7:07 am
To: “Dian McCarthy”
Cc: “Stacy Buckley”
Hi, Dian;
I appreciate your forwarding this to the Superintendent as it contains the 91-A reference, however, there is information that, I believe only you can provide, such as any and all communications you’ve had with board members, district personnel, or “bidding” vendors regarding the MVMS consultant. Also, an explanation of your participation in this matter is expected per the request below. Your statement that the board is only discussing the merit of having a consultant doesn’t seem to square with the negotiations the Superintendent is having with potential vendors. I have copies of emails that you’ve been copied on regarding this matter indicating that you are more involved in this process than your original email has led me to believe. Therefore, a detailed account of your participation in this matter is required to determine whether or not you are in compliance with the board’s Conflict of Interest policy.
Again, I expect the Superintendent will provide the district information, but not your personal communications or explanations.
Regards,
RH Girard