To The Editor:
I am concerned. Being new to Chadds Ford I have been researching my new home and community. I was very disturbed to discover a conflict of interest in the upcoming election. Public officials should be held accountable to the highest standards of ethics and should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Therefore, I question why Beverly Brookes could be considered qualified to serve as a School Board Director for Region C of the Unionville Chadds-Ford School District, which encompasses Chadds Ford and Pennsbury Townships.
Ms. Brookes’ daughter is a teacher in Unionville-Chadds Ford School District and a former coach of one of the girls’ athletic teams. If Ms. Brookes were elected, she would be in a position to influence how much her daughter was paid through the collective bargaining agreement with the teachers’ union and hire/fire her daughter’s ultimate supervisor: the Superintendent of the School District. This is clearly inappropriate
In fact, Pennsylvania law squarely addresses such obvious conflicts of interest. The State ethics Commission has interpreted the Ethics Act as precluding school board members from taking part in contract negotiations where members of the immediate family are district employees. See, e.g., Van Rensler, Opinion of Commission No. 90-017, School Law Information Exchange, Vol. 28, No. 5 (1991). The Ethics Commission has also ruled that such a conflict precludes officials to obtain information that could impact collective bargaining negotiations, including salary information. See, e.g., Mattie, Advice of Counsel No. 91-508, School Law Information Exchange, Vol. 29, 28 No. 36 (1991).
You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand the problem with an elected official being able to award her child a raise or other benefits. However, Ms. Brookes, who has secured the Democrat nomination for school board, has not addressed this issue publically. Does she think no one is paying attention? I am paying attention as are many other community members.
Even if Ms. Brookes announces (after this issue was brought to the public’s attention) that she will not participate in negotiating with teachers concerning compensation nor with the hiring/firing of the Superintendent, one must wonder exactly why Region C would want one of its three elected School Board Members precluded from participating in the most important decisions that a School Board Director actually makes: teachers’ contract and the selection of the Superintendent. In other words, if Ms. Brookes wins this election, Region C will lose a vote on the issues that matter the most.
I find it unfortunate the Ms. Brookes has not previously disclosed this conflict to the voters at large. I find the potential loss of our “voice” even more troubling. This issue needs to be addressed. The Chadds Ford Community deserves answers.
Lisa Carman
Chadds Ford
TE Resident,
Bev’s daughter has been an established teacher in the district for over 20 years. How much influence would just 1 board member actually have to effect a teacher with that much experience? I think you give way to much power to 1 individual on the board. That is why there are 9 board members and votes are taken with a need for a majority. Your point is moot.
I look forward to hearing from all 6 of the candidates on Thursday evening at 7 PM at Hillendale Elementary school. Thank you League of Women Voters for sponsoring such a helpful event.
Liz J
East Marlborough
Liz,
I’ve talked about why it’s a conflict of interest. Now I’ll talk about why it’s a confidential information question. It’s too easy for confidential information to be leaked to union members from a Board Member whose daughter is a teacher.
Bev can form an advisory committee on educational policy, while leaving school board members without any conflicts to deal with the unions and other teacher matters. That way, there are no conflicts, but her expertise is always available.
Lastly, it disenfranchises voters for Bev to excuse herself from voting on contract issues because her daughter is a teacher.
Look, I don’t believe Mr. Rock should be on the Board, and he teaches in Bryn Mawr. It is crystal clear his allegiance is to the teachers.
It is evident, that in every district around here, the focus needs to return to students and the tax payers who pay.
I don’t know what they do in the TE school district but here in Unionville we like to support our teachers. Board Members like Rock, Do, and Lindner were critical to balance out members like Jeff and Keith. With Jeff’s clear support of the Republican ticket in region C, it’s even MORE critical to balance our school board and go with the Do, Lindner, Brookes ticket. And please stop the personal attacks on Bev Brookes. You question her integrity (and her daughter’s). Have you met either one of them? You are using this letter as podium to mudsling and attack people willing to volunteer their time to better our school district. As I said, your point is moot. Just ask Vic Dupuis, board president. Enough already! We like our teachers and our balance on the board here in Unionville!
Liz,
I’m not attacking Bev and you’re mischaracterizing my point by saying I’m calling her integrity into question. If Kathleen chose her as a running mate, I know she’s great. And I agree with you about the need to balance out R.’s Jeff and Keith with strong voices to counter their influence. But Jeff and Keith were elected by citizens in their regions to represent them the way they want want to be represented. They were chosen to represent their wards for a reason. The best way to counter Jeff and Keith is to support candidates in their wards whose ideas run counter to theirs who, like Jeff and Keith have no conflict of interest precluding them from serving. Even though I disagree with them, I have no problem telling them I disagree with them and talking to them to persuade them to change their view.
Having a teacher or a teacher family member on the board muddies the waters, to say the least. Citizens will not feel comfortable giving their opinion, especially on issues surrounding contracts and classroom problems.
I have been very clear about my position on teachers. Teachers matter. Teachers are the most important segment when considering what’s best for students.
Liz, do you really believe Rock, Do and Lindner think an Assitant Supt. should be raking in $193,000 per year when teachers make a fraction of that? Why did they vote yes? They knew they had to, to get the little they could for the teachers. Students and tax payers were after thoughts in that whole process. Now, look how you balance your budget. Off the students (large class sizes), and aides and paras, (outsourced) Both of these decisions negatively effect students. Every segment got more, alot more, except the students, the after thoughts that this whole thing is supposed to be about. As far as I know, Carolyn Daniels was the only Director who voted NO. Her vote demonstrates her allegiance is with the tax payers and the students. And IMO, that’s who should be best represented. TAX PAYERS and STUDENTS.
I’ve been watching this thread with some interest and increasing nausea. TE’s insult to youth league volunteers should not and cannot be left unchallenged, nor can her ridiculous assertions on conflict of interest.
While there are a handful of coaches who favor their kids, most do not. Many, in fact, do the opposite and bend over backward to play their kid less, not push them onto the all star team and so on. So, TE owes many in this community an apology. Immediately.
Second, her point about parents in coaching APPLIES to serving on the school board, too. TE speaks of favoritism toward employees, what about favoritism toward students of board directors? By TE’s argument, all directors with children in the district should recuse themselves, or not even be allowed to serve, because of it being a conflict of interest.
And furthermore, as taxpayers, any action a board director takes might save them tax funds, so that’s a clear conflict, too.
Evidently, no one is conflict-free and should be allowed to serve on the school board by TE’s measure.
That makes no sense whatsoever and should be treated as such.
You have an axe to grind. You’re angry about something other than this. please, move on and get over it.
Right….the only one who clearly has an axe to grind is TE. No matter what, the game is fixed, people are awful and evil, and will always do the wrong thing out of self interest. Why don’t you detail your experiences with coaching in the Unionville area? Why don’t you detail your experiences as a Unionville parent and taxpayer? Why don’t you recount your experiences at school board meetings? You spew a lot, but it seems incredibly without basis.
Turk, cool it. Attack the idea, not the person. This thread is getting a bit overdone, folks. I think the points have been made. Move on.
You raise a good point about directors with children in the district. While it would be ridiculous to consider that no parent can serve on the Board, there have been situations when elected Board members have spearheaded causes that directly benefit their child. However, that’s all they can do….introduce the topic and educate the Board. It takes more than one Board member’s vote to pass a motion. In the end, it’s always good to have different viewpoints and opinions, give careful consideration to all, and then vote your conscience and what you believe your constituents want.
Both of you make a great point about parents, like Carolyn Daniels serving on the Board. The mission of a school district is to educate children. Resources should go to them. The system should be “bias” toward students and tax payers who pay for it.
The paradigm has shifted over the years. Parents have become in service to Administrators. Administrators make outlandish salaries, pushing out support staff and increasing their power further. It’s got to stop.
Since Ms. Carman is new to the district, she does not have the long time history that many residents have. I have lived in the district for 38 years and taught there for many of those years. Over the years, we have had many School Board members who have been parents of students, grandparents of students, previous UCFSD employees, retired and working members of the community, and yes, parents of district employees. It has never affected the outcome of any contract negotiations. Trust me! Those members have never served on the negotiating teams when there children were employed. Nor will Mrs. Brookes. The contract is settled and thus, for now, a non-issue.
As for some history….UCFSD is a community. We are comprised of several towns and zip codes, and unlike neighboring Kennett School District, we don’t have a town community. We have longevity with our school district community. Once you experience a tragedy in the community, you will understand the close relations that develop throughout our school family. The support and caring are incredible. Many, many residents have been life long members of the community, often choosing to remain in the district to raise their own children. More recently, we have had a large influx of parents who graduated from the UCFSD and have decided to relocate and have their own children attend our schools.
People are connected to the district and want to serve. People like Bev Brookes. Bev brings a wealth of experience as a very active community member and long time resident. She has history, which I feel is an asset, even if it’s just to share information and enhance everyone’s understanding as to why things are as they are. It does not mean she isn’t open to new ideas, but it’s important to understand all facets of any issue….past, present and future implications. While I understand that Ms. Carman may have concerns about the appropriateness of her serving on the Board while here daughter is employed, I have absolutely no reservations. Bev has loyally attended many Board meetings over the years she has lived here….years when she had children in schools and years as a retired and concerned taxpayer. She keeps herself educated about all issues. She reaches out to everyone…residents with children in the district and those without, and I believe that she would be seen as an approachable representative for anyone in Region C who had a concern or question.
I don’t think there is a candidate running who has resided in this community longer than Bev or who has the knowledge about educational issues as she does. I encourage anyone who lives in Region C to feel very comfortable casting a vote for this candidate. She will work tirelessly to ensure that UCFSD continues to be an excellent district.
I just want to thank Sandy Beach for making this comment. Bev is truly an extraordinary, hard-working and passionate advocate for our children, and Gregg Lindner and I are honored to be running with her for the School Board in Region C.
No one likes and respect Sandy and Kathleen more than me. Sandy has shared valuable information and I agree with much of what he/she says. However, the same applies, Since Sandy has taught in the district for many of the 38 years he/she has lived here, her/his opinion should not be considered when talking about a mother of a teacher running for school board.
It’s the same thing as Dad’s coaching their sons in Little League. Who plays pitcher and short stop? What kids make the all star team at the end of the season? Whose kids make the tournament teams in the summer? The coaches’ sons, that’s who. It’s an exclusive club, with few members, who game the system to shut out others so their kids can play and get every opportunity. I know many readers out there know exactly what I am talking about.
As much as it pains me to say it, and as much as I HATE to admit it, Keith was a highly qualified School Board member. I didn’t like his tactics or agree with his relationships with Administrators, but I had the right to say so and I did. I don’t think Keith’s past experiences or family relationships disqualified him from serving. He wasn’t bias, he was just him.
What if a parent has a problem with Bev’s daughter? Do you think they will be comfortable going to the Board? How will Bev not want to retaliate against parents, any parent who disparages teachers It’s human nature and citizens instinctively know that. There is no way for her to be objective. It squelches free speech and shuts down open direct and honest communication.
To be clear, as far as I know, Keith’s children were not administrators when he was on the Board. As a Board member, Keith CHOSE to develop those relationships and if Keith’s children were Administrators and I had known that, it would greatly effect my comments on the subject.
Over the years, I have seen parents coach their own children and teachers teach their own children. Yes, right in our district. What I have seen is that it is probably harder on the child because the adult usually goes out of his/her way to be fair, almost to a fault. Sometimes it’s not a good situation, but I have to believe that most adults have the best intentions at heart and are doing their best. To be honest….we need Board members with whom the staff is comfortable having an honest and respectful conversation. Many employees are tax payers, too, and that gives them the right to express concerns and opinions. That’s not easy when you wear many hats….taxpayer, employee, and parent. I believe that my many years as a taxpayer and employee have allowed me to form many opinions that should be considered.
I have also seen parents coach their own children and teachers teach their own children. You can believe what you want. The intentions the parents have is to get their own children opportunity. And they’re not shy about it either and I agree that in each and every one of these cases, their children suffered. The children who were shut out at an early age and gave up because they did not have a parent fighting for them suffered too.
Look, it’s a fact, the best baseball players are truck drivers and the best Q.B.’s are grocery store clerks, whose Dad’s weren’t coaches and whose parents weren’t teachers.
Your opinion should not be considered when you benefit financially from the opinion, or vote. Who would not vote for themselves or their children hefty pay increases?
Response to UT letter about Bev Brookes
Since Ms. Carman is new to the district perhaps she is not aware of all of the facts. Two clarifications:
First, Bev has never hidden the fact that her daughter is a teacher in the district. I met her earlier in the year, and it is one of the first things she told me. She explains this to voters all of the time, and has always said that she will recuse herself from any vote that directly impacts her daughter, and would not participate in contract negotiations. (The board’s contract negotiation committee only includes three out of the nine board members and the board will not need to negotiate another teacher contract for four years!)
Bev’s daughter openly tells everyone that she is exceedingly proud of her Mom for stepping up to run for the School Board. Certainly, the press is aware that Bev’s daughter is a Patton teacher, and I am sure Mike McGann can attest to that fact.
Second, Ms. Carman is probably not aware that when our Board President, Vic Dupuis, was first elected in 2011, his daughter was also a teacher in the school district, and he has always been considered to be an extremely effective school board member.
Bev is running on a Bi-Partisan ticket with Kathy Do and Gregg Lindner. I really hope that Ms. Carman’s letter was just a statement from a misinformed resident and not the beginning of a partisan attack against a very honorable woman.
Amy Baram, Pocopson Township
Every vote a school Board Member takes will effect her daughter. Just like every vote a school board member in UCF takes, effects TESD which effects RadnorSD which effects Lower MerionSD. The decisions Directors make reach far, effecting jobs,resources and the education of children.
Directors should be as impartial as possible.
I don’t view this as “a partisan attack against a very honorable woman.” I view this as a good point expressed by a tax paying citizen who is concerned that tax payers’ best interests are going to be compromised with a sitting School Board Director whose daughter will be effected by every vote her mother casts.
It’s great that Bev and her daughter openly tell citizens that her daughter is a teacher. The more people know, the better.
Because Vic Dupuis’s daughter was a teacher when he was elected Director does not make this right. He should not have been elected either. Is she drawing a pension now? Even stronger reason for him not to have a seat on this Board. I understand that he is running unopposed. That is sad. And not everyone believes he is an extremely effective school board director. I’m not even a tax paying resident and look back at the way he has addressed me.
Bev is no different from the rest of us. She wants what will be best for her child. There is no way to reconcile that as a school board director. That’s why Carolyn Daniels is the best choice, Her children are students in the district. (the segment Directors are supposed to represent) She has been in the system long enough to know how it works She has demonstrated her loyalty to students (and teachers) by voting NO to the outlandish $15,000 per year raise, bringing an assistant supt.’s salary up to $193,000 per year on a 5 year contract. He will make more in his retirement than he will make in his working career. That could not have been easy. Think about that. She cast that NO vote right in Keith’s face. Could not have been easy and demonstrates her allegiance to tax payers and students. I know Kathleen tried to get her and I think that was a great move but since she declined, it would have been best to get someone on like Carolyn.
When Vic Dupuis ran for school board the first time, his daughter was a teacher in the district as well. It’s not the first time this has happened. It has never been an issue before. Why now? Whether a teacher is a part of the collective bargaining unit or not, the salary and benefits are still the same.
Too bad Brookes isn’t in region A. We’d gladly have her represent us! We need more people like her willing to step up and serve.
Liz J
East Marlborough
If this is true, Ms. Carman has a point.