The fair and just treatment of Staples High School athletic coaches, the role of parental involvement in Board of Education decisions, and the impartiality of an outside arbiter were among the topics discussed at this morning’s BOE Policy Committee meeting.
More than a dozen residents attended the session, in a small Town Hall meeting room.
The turnout — perhaps the largest ever for the Policy Committeee — was driven by recent decisions to not renew contracts for several Staples coaches.
Currently the Board of Ed, or a sub-committee of members, hears appeals by coaches if their contracts are not renewed.
From left: Board of Education member and Policy Committee chair Kevin Christie; assistant superintendent of human resources John Bayers; Board of Ed chair Lee Goldstein, and BOE member Dorie Hordon, at today’s meeting in Town Hall. (Photo/Dan Woog)
A change, added to the Policy Commitee’s agenda earlier this week, would add an option for the BOE to appoint an “impartial hearing board” of 1 or more people.
Policy Committee chair Kevin Christie explained that this change would bring the appeals process in line with other appeals to the board, over issues like expulsion or residency.
During public comment, residents noted that those appeals involve individual students, while decisions on coaches affect teams with dozens of athletes.
A broader question was raised, regarding the role of Board of Education members in personnel issues. Policy Committee members and residents debated whether the BOE, as elected officials, should listen to public input about coaches, then render an impartial verdict, or if someone impartial could do a fairer job.
That raised the question of the impartiality of an outside individual. Superintendent of Schools Thomas Scarice said that person would be selected from a group of attorneys who regularly do such work.
Committee member Dorie Hordon wondered how impartial those outside arbiters might be. They are hired by the superintendent and paid by the school district, she noted. How often do they not affirm his or her decision?
That led to a discussion of how much information board members and the public know about any particular non-renewal decision, then back to a debate about whether the Board of Education should weigh the views of parents and athletes in coaches’ non-renewal decisions.
Policy Committee member and BOE chair Lee Goldstein said that although the public should have input in how the athletic director runs his department, it should not have a say in hiring and firing.
“It is dangerous,” she noted, for either the public or administrators to try to pressure the board, one way or the other.
Hordon injected the idea of treating coaches “justly and fairly” into the discussion.
“I understand the reasoning, but I’m not sure about changing the policy,” she said.
“If we are elected by the community, the community has trusted us to make decisions.”
Resident Joan Gillman urged the Board of Education to focus on “how we can best set up our employees for success.” That includes written reviews about ways to improve, and “a chance for a clear change of direction” before non-renewal.
No decision was reached. Christie and his colleagues said they need time to reflect on the change.
Any policy change would need at least one more discussion in committee, then at least two public discussions by the full Board of Education.
I would suggest that they review these coaches’ contracts BEFORE they are executed, NOT when they come up for renewal. That is why everybody hates us attorneys.
We’re talking about a part time high school tennis coach not Bill Belicheck fachrissake. Leave the guy alone. He’s an eight time state champ in a sport that no one cares about unless it’s your kid on the team.
I know the gentleman as he coached my neighbor to State Champ. My point, Buck, which seemingly has surpassed your mindset is the coach would not be in this position if a renewal option clause was placed in his initial contract. Now he is in a position of having to Go Fund attorney fees to retain his position. And for the BOF to start reviewing expiring contracts is rather moronic. Leave the guy alone? I am trying to help him and other part time coaches. Perhaps you should check your blood sugar?
Scooter, as you should know my point surpassed my mindset 54 years ago when I graduated. I just love the way a longtime win-win situation that needs no fixing is being over complicated over the cliff. Don’t worry UR DA MAN!!!
Buck: Staples has now 40 sports with a vast variety of coaches. Why has not a specific standard contract been initiated to protect the coach as well as outlining reasons for non-renewal? Instead, we have this poor dude standing out in the rain with no recourse but to sue. And why is the BOF involved? We can build a 100 million$ elementary school but not pay a renowned tennis coach? And why all the secrecy regarding this great guy’s non-renewal? Red flags all over the place.
Scooter,
“No recourse but to sue.”(???) No self-respecting Westport tort lawyer would take this case. THE DUDE HAS NO MONEY. There is no need for convoluted contracts. This is a small town that has simply gotten too big fer it’s britches Bubba. I think Dan should expand the blog and let the fired coaches cover the sports beat. That will enable Dan to take some well-earned time off.
Scooter & Eric
Help me on this one.
A well liked competent coach isn’t renewed and he’s suing saying Westport has to renew him? or can’t not renew him?
They can fire him with no explanation. The non renewal is looking more like a good decision every day.
I can not answer that Sir Thomas for I don’t know if he had a contract or verbal promises of renewal. But Eric is wrong, a tort lawyer could finance his Nassau condo with a case like this if the coach’s reputation is tarnished. I have met the guy, super nice and helped a ton of kids get scholarships to college. But often times the cover up is worse than the infringement. And nobody is talking?
I have the same question as Tom.
How’s his reputation tarnished when no public statements were made? The only reason I know anything is (potentially) amiss is because of the publicity for the former coach’s GoFundMe.
(This has echoes of the school (I’ll clumsily say) racism craze of a couple of years ago. Of course the BOE wasn’t going to make disciplinary action public (just as they aren’t going to make details of employment matters public). It’s like the strategy is to goad the BOE into making a statement so one can sue over the statement.)
If other people make the issues public, that’s on them, right?
As an aside, Mr. Costello’s comment below is 100% on-point. There are processes for a reason – and if they aren’t in place here, they should be. Parental grievance should be dealt with at the BOE level, not with the parents badgering teachers, coaches, or administrators into submission.
I don’t know the particular issues driving this issue are, obviously they center on the tennis coach. I have, however, been around and integrally involved in High School sports for over 40 years! I feel parents should be kept as far away from the hiring (and renewal) process as possible!
The hiring of a coach should be left to the Athletic director who is trained in the process answerable to the principle and the board of education! All parental concerns can be addressed through those to entities. The Athletic director can present his concerns and desires to the principal, who can take them to the Board of Ed. (ELECTED officials)and make his recommendations for hiring or renewal.
The absolute worst thing you can do is allow the parents to be involved in the hiring / renewal process. The parents voice is the Board of Ed., all elected officials! They can take their concerns there as I am sure they do regularly any way.
If you take this to an inevitable conclusion parents may decide not to rehire because of a “tough loss” or failure to defeat a heated rival and of course for not starting their “little Johnnie” or “little Janie”
This is a terrible idea!
Hey, I have an idea! Let’s have the coaches and AD come in and deliver the parents annual “performance review at their place of work!
Absolutely wrong on every level.
The love for these and of these coaches goes beyond politics. Nobody is advocating for some loser here.
Clearly that is the issue.
Politics of school and administration.
I wish this coach luck with his law suit.
If he takes it I have no doubt he will prevail.
FURTHER INFORMATION HAS LED ME TO BELIEVE MY ABOVE COMMENTS MAY VERY WELL BE IRRELEVANT AND PERHAPS MISLEADING. MY APOLOGIES.