Without actually ever using the work “plagiarism” today’s Newton TAB editorial criticizes Newton Superintendent of Schools David Fleishman for never actually saying he was sorry for having “lifted phrases” (The TAB’s word choice) without attribution from Gov. Deval Patrick.
But the editorial comes down even harder on School Committee Chairman Hills and for the way he has overseen the controversy.
When a teacher came to Hills in late June with the allegation School Superintendent David Fleishman had lifted phrases from a speech given by Gov. Deval Patrick at Boston University without citing his source, the school committee acted like the worst of corporate boards – hiding what they knew while they met secretly three times, apparently to discuss damage control.
There is no evidence the board encouraged Fleishman to come forward, or that he considered doing so. Instead, the school committee apparently circled the wagons to protect their “CEO.”
This is by far the harshest criticism of an elected official we’ve seen in the TAB since Emily Costello became editor in 2012. After you’ve read it. come back here and discuss.
What an outstanding editorial! 100% right on. Here’s to hoping that this signals a renewed involvement in local issues on the part of the Tab editor. No matter what you thought of the positions Gail took in her days as editor, her passion for Newton civic life is sorely missed in the weekly paper.
Has anyone heard talk that some aldermen might docket a non-binding resolution seeking an apology from the superintendent and a fuller accounting from the School Committee? I for one would love to know whether any School Committee member(s) might have voiced more concern, or advocated stronger action, than was expressed in the SC statement. Otherwise we’re left to think that they all fell in line like lemmings following their leader(s?) over the cliff.
This was one well written editorial, and I support it!!!! No appology and not a real penalty, for someone with that much earning capacity! The editorial doesn’t put Mr. Hills in the best light, but everyone has to deal with the consequences of their actions (or lack of actions). I think the school committee and the superintedent just wants it to go away . . . . but it isn’t going away yet.
I do wish government officials would stop claiming they are going to run government like a business or a corporation. Officials that say this really don’t understand or appreciate the obligations that government has to address the need of constituencies that the private sector cannot or will not serve. Government is not a business and anyone in a government policy making area that thinks it is will suffer failure sooner or later. The best business leaders who have entered government understand this fully.
Shadows in the dark are never good; our Mayor should do a press conference, including any press that might be interested.
One new shadow is if journalist students found out something and asked for a statement from the Super, why didn’t the Super tell the SC that this occurred? Instead, a dept head, has to come forward? Did the Super think the dept head might be intimidated by that and not do it so why come forward?
The quoted “minutes” are entirely inappropriate given that this is now a public subject matter and the information is way too brief to comply with the Open Mtg law. But, although what I said might be debatable, what I don’t think is debatable is that there was not an OPEN MEETING where official MINUTES were approved. Why is the chair calling his one-sentence Minutes when his colleagues have not approved?
The opportunity was presented to dot “i”s and cross “t’s. Unless this editorial has inaccuracies, their are compounding mistakes. A subject of taking shortcuts in a three minute address to the work-product of Newton’s schools, and not some higher insult like harassment or lost funds, should have been very business-like and acted out with an ethicist’s mindset.
Screw up with the small stuff — the big stuff should be a great concern.
@Greg — The TAB has used the word “plagiarism” in our news stories and headlines. Readers shouldn’t infer anything significant in the use of a different phrase in the editorial.
BTW — Has anyone tried to get evidence for this $5,000+ fine? Was his pay docked? Was he asked to donate to the School Foundation? How do we know it was $5,000+ other than inferring that figure because of the assertion of one-week in pay?
I would have preferred that his “fine” be a stated dollar figure (not tied to pay) to be donated to the School Foundation such that the typical recourse of asking for compensation back at the end of contract does not play out.
Really, really well done editorial. I especially appreciate how Emily took the time to applaud the work of the Lion’s Roar journalists who brought this to light.
After reading the editorial, I find myself in the camp of people who believe Matt Hills should resign his leadership position. His style of ‘corporate’ leadership is inappropriate for the mission of the School Committee.
@ Former SC Supporter: You wrote: “Has anyone heard talk that some aldermen might docket a non-binding resolution seeking an apology from the superintendent and a fuller accounting from the School Committee?”
Why do you think that the BOA should be in the position to request an apology from the Superintendent? Do you know something I don’t know? I don’t believe that the BOA has any jurisdiction over the Superintendent. The only possible outcome of an apology is if the community does not push it under the rug, and continues to advocate for a true apology. IMHO
@Jo-Louise Allen: You are right, the BoA has no jurisdisction over the superintendent, but in the past a lack of jurisdiction hasn’t stopped the BoA from weighing on on any number of subjects via non-binding resolutions. The goal as a I understand it would be to maintain pressure on the superintendent to issue the “true apology” that you seem to be advocating. The only real jurisdiction the BoA has relates to monetary issues, and short of seeking to, say, withhold from the school budget an amount of money equal to the superintendent’s salary, there’s not much they can formally do. But informally, via non-binding resolution, perhaps they could represent the views of those of us who feel that the superintendent owes Newton an apology and the School Committee owes Newton a full accounting as to how and why they thought their resolution was appropriate. Whether the BoA has the gumption to actually stand up and be counted on this issue, well, that’s a different question.
@Former SCS: Just because our aldermen have wasted our time voting on resolutions outside their jurisdiction before doesn’t justify doing so now. Individual aldermen can express themselves as they wish, or not, but they should otherwise stay out of this.
As for whether or not the School Committee followed proper open meeting laws or engaged in some sort of coverup, that’s the media’s job (as well as the Secretary of State and Attorney General)
Hopefully by now reporters at the TAB and the Globe — and yes the Lions Roar — have FOIA’d all the school committee members, the mayor and David Fleishman for all emails, letters, documents and other correspondence related to this matter from the date of the speeches until now. If they haven’t, I urge them to do so tomorrow.
Oh and by the way, reporters aren’t the only people who can make a public records request. Anyone can.
FOIA is easier to verb (remember that Calvin & Hobbes cartoon? http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/01/25#.U9mqI-OIB8E ) but technically, FOIA is for federal. For state and local, it’s Mass Public Records Law, and yes, anyone can make a request. http://www.sec.state.ma.us/pre/prepdf/guide.pdf
Thanks Julia. You are correct!
Is anyone is volunteering… Greg??? Here’s my short list:
1) A copy of the two contracts sign by the Super. Are there definitions of professional conduct?
2) A copy of the exact accounting entry for this fine such that we know it is real and where the funds went to.
3) A printout of all other monetary fines imposed under this Administration, in any dept.
4) Detailed minutes to what is now not a private matter, including all votes taken and who attended and whether mtgs started in Open Session.
@Hoss,
A public record request only allows access to documents which are already in existence. Thus, if detailed minutes do not already exist then there is no obligation by the public body to create the document to satisfy the request. Second, while we do now know what action was taken as a result of the executive session, that does not mean that the discussions held during the executive session are likewise subject to public disclosure provided that those matters were properly subject to meeting in executive session.
Lisap – Understood. It would be better if the request asked for the proper Minutes under the Open Meeting law since they supplied none This would include Open Meeting procedures, votes under exec session, attendance records, etc. I would then suggest a request for all notes and or recordings by anyone and let them assert the public has no right to that if they wish to do so at this point.
Do you have any experience in employment law? What kind of precedence does this “fine” give us? Seems likely to cause others to request it as a remedy if their professional conduct is in question – no?
….I’d also like to see any handouts (to determine if they ever brought forward the contracts to determine if anything was violated)
Hoss – we are like a professional sports team – they fine athletes for bad behavior. This is what they did with Fleischman – no real apology, just a fine. They should have made him go to every school in Newton and give a speech as to why what he did was wrong. Oh wait – as my child said – he would probably copy that from the internet too.
Great editorial.
Emily, since I criticized you twice for shoddy reporting regarding this issue, I feel obligated to commend your editorial for being very well written and on point.
The one minor concern I have is your comment that there is no public support for firing DF. What are your source(s) for making that observation. The only letter addressing this issue in the “Letters to the Editor” next to your editorial explicitly calls for DF’s resignation. Comments in this thread also call for his resignation. I personally do not think that will happen given the position the mayor and SC have taken. The students and parents would need to really ramp up the noise to make it happen. Yet, that does not mean there is no public support. I am guessing that many people are of the same opinion as I am.
BTW, I have not seen the printed correction for the TAB’s embarrassing version of DF’s acknowledgement of his “mistake” that I suggested the paper owes him. Given he has not raised the issue publicly, I am guessing he just wants the whole thing to go away. So if DF does not think he deserves an apology, then I withdraw my expectation of seeing one.