SEPAC Parents Protest Esposito's Termination
“It’s a disaster, what you’ve done today.” -- Special Education Parent Advisory Council member Hedi Kovacs, to the BOE
Photos
When the school board declined on Wednesday night to renew the contract of Frank Esposito, one question hung in the air: Why?
Esposito, the Director of Special Services for the school district, had done an excellent job during his year in his position, according to several parents in the audience at the May 9 BOE meeting.
“Our superintendent, who is in the trenches with Mr. Esposito, and we parents, who are in the trenches with Mr. Esposito, feel he did a good job, yet the board members – including new board members – who have no inkling what he does, voted against him,” stated one clearly frustrated parent, Hedi Kovacs, facing the board. “It’s a disaster, what you’ve done today.”
Kovacs, a member of the Special Education Parent Advisory Council, (SEPAC) said she was speaking on behalf of all the special needs children in the district. She and other SEPAC parents at the meeting had pleaded with the board to renew Esposito’s contract but when it came up for a vote, only three members – Catzel Bumpus, Maribel Perez and Shane Berger – voted in favor. The rest of the board – Paula Zaccone, Emily Smith, Mary Shaughnessy, Ken Weisert and Dan Anderson -- voted against it.
Superintendent Jason Bing stated beforehand that he recommended Esposito’s contract be renewed but the vote overrode his recommendation.
“I’m trying to understand how you came to this decision,” said an angry Lizanne Wilkinson, another SEPAC parent, following an hour’s delay while the board members met in closed session. “Most of you don’t come to our [SEPAC] meetings. It’s disappointing that you haven’t asked any parents. The Director of Special Services has to work equally well with administrators and parents, but you chose only to get the administrators’ point of view.”
She added, “We’re wondering whether have someone in your pocket you’d rather have in that position. It looks a little shady from our viewpoint.”
Board members responded to the parents’ comments by saying they were not at liberty to discuss the reasons behind their decision. Smith said, “There were other factors that went into our decision. [But] I can’t talk about it.” School District Attorney Nicholas Ditoli reiterated her position, saying, “[The reasons behind the decision] should not be part of the public realm.”
What that meant, explained Bing after the meeting, is that the board was unable by law to discuss Esposito’s employment, or the circumstances surrounding his contract termination, because he had not consented to have it discussed in a public forum.
“By law, whenever we discuss employees in public, we have to notify them in writing beforehand,” said Bing, noting that this correspondence, known as a R.I.C.E. letter, would then require him to respond, ‘Please have the board delineate [in public] why I was not hired.’
Bing admitted, “99.9% of the time, people don’t want it discussed [publicly.]”
Beyond disappointment over the Esposito decision, the SEPAC parents expressed anger that the district’s special needs families were being largely overlooked by the administration.
“You do not understand inclusion or what it means to us,” Kovacs protested, while Wilkinson said pointedly, “If you want to learn about it, come to our [SEPAC] events. People who don’t come to the table really don’t have a right to say anything.”
“No one came to see Ari Ne’eman,” concurred Kovacs, referring to Obama's appointee to the National Council on DisAbility who came to speak to the Bloomfield community about inclusion on April 26. “He advises President Obama and Congress on the very things he came to speak to us about. When we have someone like that and no one shows up, it’s very discouraging.”
In fact, by Ne-eman had visited by special invitation of SEPAC member Misa Kastrati. Despite advertising the event and notifying the Board members personally, only about 40 people attended each of the two lectures. Bing and Bumpus did attend the presentations.
“We have to fight for every single support and service we get [in this district],” said Kovacs. “To get anything, we have to go to the courthouse stairs. It’s unconscionable.”
Newly elected Board member Kent Weisert addressed her concerns. “I can assure you this was not done lightly. It involved the weighing of a very large number of considerations,” he said. “We answer to a higher authority. My parents taught me that it was a sin of God to do anything against a disabled person.”
Nicole Williams
8:22 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
And so the real hidden agendas of the BOE begins. i don't want to say I told you so but.... All of the SEPAC members should take note that former BOE member Dianna Fuller took time off from her job to attend the presentation by Ari Ne’eman. I believe she was the only past or present BOE member to attend this presentation.
Catzel Bumpus
10:29 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
I was in attendance as well.
Adam P. Japhet
9:27 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
I am a little pertubed about the response by Kent Weisert. "We answer to a higher authority" is not what I would expect to see as a response from a BoE member. Last I checked, we the people of the township of Bloomfield voted him into office. If he wants to only answer to a higher authority, he should go work in a religious school setting.
Pete Mock
10:55 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
I agree, Mr Weisert's comments concern me. I'm not comfortable with the invocation of "a higher authority" in school board decisions, nor do think it's appropriate to use the term "disabled" to refer to all the kids who participate in Special Services.
John Wilkinson
1:33 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
Agreed! If his comments are, in fact, a summation of the BoE's thought process on, (what should be) "secular" decision-making, than any hope for an education that embraces merit, equality, and a level playing field, is already 'lost.'
The writing is on the wall, Bloomfield. Attending a presentation, and being "proactive" about the content of the meeting, are two different things. The vote last night was all about politics, and that's always been the problem with this town.
Enjoy your "Crusade" Kent Weisert.
Frank Esposito
10:32 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
I would like to submit a clarification to the article above. Maribel Perez voted "yes" to Mr. Bing's recommendation to renew Frank Esposito's employment. Further, there was a board member absent from the proceedings last night. He too, by means of written vote was agreeable to the decision to renew as well. Please confirm this information with the administration.
Linda Federico-O'Murchu
12:07 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
To those of you who pointed out that Ms. Perez voted to renew Mr. Esposito's contract, you're correct. The article has been updated. Thank you.
Linda Federico-O'Murchu
12:18 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
As an added clarification, though there were statements during the public portion of the meeting that no BOE members had attended the Ari Ne'eman presentations, in fact Superintendent Bing and BOE member Catzel Bumpus did attend.
Dr. Laurie Roemmele
2:11 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
I have been involved with Bloomfield's Special Services Department since 2001. Having two children who are classified in the District has been long and arduous. For me, it is not the specific person per se who is the "director" fired, resigning...it has been the BIG turnover that now leads me to have lost track of how many Directors there have been in this position. If it is about money, the District's request to seek funding for admin and programs to our children was rejected by the Township. The potential of a grant writer to access the many resources available to supplement services (as in SPECIAL SERVICES) is VITAL to all school districts, who will not be able to survive efficiently and innovatively without such an investment. Residents do NOT realize that the district cannot do it all with just the passing of a budget in my humble opinion. I agree with Mr. Wilkinson and admire the advocacy or Ms. Wilkinson and Ms. Kovacs and all of the SEPAC advocates and parents. Since this will be a significant part of my life with "still" young sons receiving services, it concerns me when we will be at a place where people really comprehend what is at stake for the future of Bloomfield's young citizens in need. I am a single parent working fulltime but will do my best to NEVER stop my support of the needs of our children...I will support (if mostly from afar right now) the great work of the teachers and SEPAC and other parents and advocates!!!
G. Lombardi
5:10 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
Ms. Kovacs point about the new BOE members voting to take away a man's job without any insight into his performance nor the effect upon the Special Ed Dept. is well taken. The Board Members that had experience of Mr. Esposito's work were split on the voting. That, combined with Mr. Bing's endorsement of Mr. Esposito, should have led the uninformed members to abstain from voting before they took away the man's living. I hope they are shown more mercy in their own lives. Ms. Roemmele's point about the lack of continuity for this position impacting negatively upon the education of our children is quite true and of paramount importance; though apparently not for the Board members that failed to renew Mr. Esposito's contract in favor of a mystery replacement with totally unknown abilities. Mr. Esposito worked hard to reach out to the students and parents in Bloomfield and he worked magic trying to juggle the financial constraints imposed upon us by the budget; the repeated and criminal underfunding of Bloomfield Schools by the State and giving the kids the best possible education he could; given the circumstances. His ill advised removal despite the fervent approvals of those that dealt with him was obviously not based upon his fine performance. Many thanks to BOE Members C. Bumpus, M. Perez and S. Berger for trying to ensure a better education for our kids. Mr. Esposito will be sadly missed. As for those that voted against Mr. Esposito, they will also NOT be forgotten.
Deborah Hall-App
12:25 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
Very well stated, G. Lombardi. I wonder if after the outpouring of public support for Mr. Esposito the BOE could or would reconsider its vote. Such a reconsideration was afforded the public on the Foley Field measure when it was in the best interests of the students and community to move ahead with the project. In a situation like this, is another vote after further debate or reconsideration possible?
vivienne wilkinson
9:43 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
It is difficult enough to be the parent of a special needs student much less to be faced with a school board that knows nothing about the issues. With one fateful vote, a board can ruin what promised to be a brighter future for so many. I cannot imagine any" higher power" approving of such thoughtless disregard for the most vulnerable.
DC
10:50 am on Tuesday, July 17, 2012
I'm not a fan of how the Bloomfield's Special Services Department was run and a change of leadership is welcome. They need to stop playing games and provide the services needed for our children.