By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 11:43 PM
The Transitional School Board will meet for the first time Friday morning in the May Hall of the St. Louis Science Center, 5050 Oakland Avenue, at 9:00 a.m. Labels: Schools
Already on the agenda is the approval of a motion to retain an interim litigation attorney.
The full agenda is as follows:
Special Board Meeting Agenda
It is not clear what firm Sullivan has retained or how much it will cost taxpayers. What is certain is that this contract, if approved tomorrow, was not publicly bidded.
14 Comments:
Yes no bid contract they learned this from Bourisaw. Like we expected the trouble has started. what until Sullivanfinds out what Bourisaw hasin store for him. The staff is waiting on pins and needles to tell him how awful she is.
6/15/2007 1:12 AM
French works for Lewis Reed and Lewis has just appointed someone to the new board and French is working against the new board. Lewis is not gaining much political stock.
6/15/2007 1:15 AM
I can see where they must, immediately, hire an attorney so I as a taxpayer am fine with this no-bid contract. Unlike the Lizz Brown no-bid contract for unspecifed work, this makes sense.
6/15/2007 4:58 AM
"Yes no bid contract they learned this from Bourisaw." Gee, somebody was asleep at the wheel when the mayor's slate ran the board and fine tuned the no-bid contract avalanche!
"The staff is waiting on pins and needles to tell him how awful she is." Interesting! I have heard only good and positive reports from a wide range of staff -- something that was not true of Williams or Crues.
Wait till Sullivan learns what Veronica wanted to hire neophyte Anthony Bonner in at!
6/15/2007 6:40 AM
From the Post-Dispatch: "During her tenure, Bourisaw has weathered personal attacks from one board member. In the past month, she has also withstood personal agendas imposed on her by others on the board."
"I'd like to see how she'll function without standing in the middle of the coliseum," Sullivan said.
He praised Bourisaw as an "expert educator and a wise person who is very, very dedicated to the kids."
6/15/2007 7:12 AM
“Yes no bid contract they learned this from Bourisaw.”
Point of order: School Boards approve contracts not the Superintendent. Roberti/Schoemehl were the ones who got their friends non-working contracts. You know those contracts where they pay the company and no work gets done.
I have been against this state takeover since Slay took office. How ever since the Roberti/Schoemehl terror the school board has had at least one nut case now we have three (I know some would say more). Considering the actions of the school board in recent history answers several questions as to why the students act the way they do in the classroom. No wonder educators outside the district think all we do is baby sit or only try to teach socially acceptable behavior. Purdy complains the state is taking away their rights. What rights? The right to have fights – including both parents and students. The right to abuse teachers. The right to misappropriate funds. The right to buy school property for personal use. The right to blame the teachers because the parents do not want to be accountable for their children. Just maybe this new school board can start bringing a little sanity to the district. But again time will tell. The new board has one year to turn thirty years of problems around. Then a new board will be put in place and everything will go back to the way it is now.
6/15/2007 7:14 AM
This is so much imflammatory horse hockey. What is Sullivan supposed to do? Allow the current law firm, who is fighting to overturn the new Board's power, to continue representing them? This is a contract of necessity, and, note well, it is for a 120 day limit. Give them 4 months to see if they can get it bid properly. If not, then bitch away.
6/15/2007 9:04 AM
Gotta say Elf is right. But it is ironic (funny...sad?)
6/15/2007 9:37 AM
When are you all going to stop talking about people. This is why you all have lost the battle. This is about children not individuals. It is said that this is all this district has done is make it about people. As for that O'Brien lady I hope she does have security since it is clear there are a lot of crazy people out to get her for being able to help the establishment step in and help.
O'Brien is apparently respected by a lot of people in the city and county. What are you all doing to help the children?
6/15/2007 10:46 AM
How about defend their future right to vote?
6/15/2007 11:18 AM
Anon.
You keep insisting she is respected by a lot of people...can you name any besides herself (yourself)?
6/15/2007 11:22 AM
No bid contracts-is anyone really surprised? Yes, I know French works for Reed, and I have nothing but respect for French, but appointing Gaines shows me only that Reed's office hasn't figured out a decent vetting process yet or doesn't care about what they learn from that process. With the transitional board as it now stands, it is not difficult to imagine them awarding a no bid contract to Eddie Hasan et al. to consult with them on minority contractor issues. Who knows, if the transitional board gets protested on racial issues, that no bid contract may happen sooner rather than later. I wonder who will organize those protests. Yes, it is a bunch of horse hockey, and everyone in the mix from beginning to end is guilty of malfeasance and self-interest. So much baggage, so little leadership in this here city of ours. More of the same. And yet, all the while, it's at the expense of our kids. I wonder how many bloggers on this website or how many of our political leaders are trying to figure out where to send their kids to school in the city of St. Louis that isn't parochial or private school. Not many? Yeah, that's what I thought.
6/15/2007 11:28 AM
UPDATE: Richard Gaines voted against the no-bid contract today. It passed 2-1, with Gaines respectfully disagreeing with Sullivan on the need to hire a firm without any kind of a bid — even a 7-day, or even a 3-day bidding.
Gaines also noted a possible conflict of interest with the firm selected by Sullivan also representing the State Board of Education in the suit with the elected board.
6/15/2007 3:35 PM
I kind of like the respectful disagreement as opposed to the disrespectful disagreement.
If they hired someone who also represented the 7 member board---that would be a conflict of interest.
But hiring someone who represented the board full of bozos and voucher advocates placed there by Blunt---others would characterize thme more respectfully---that just seems to be lining up with the side that got you there in the first place. So I do not see the conflict. kind of like phillip morris hiring the same lawyers who defended liggett and Myers.
6/15/2007 6:11 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home