With three new trustees starting July 1, school board to vote Wednesday on four-year contract for Champ
At its last meeting of the year and with three newly elected trustees set to begin their terms July 1, the Pelham Board of Education plans to vote Wednesday on a new four-year contract for Superintendent Dr. Cheryl Champ that would extend her term as schools chief by an additional two years through 2026.
According to the resolution posted with the school board’s agenda, “The board of education of the Pelham Union Free School District hereby appoints Dr. Cheryl Champ to the position of superintendent of schools for a four-year term to commence July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2026, and rescinds all prior appointments of Dr. Champ for any different term of appointment effective upon commencement of said term; and be it further resolved, that the board of education hereby approves an employment agreement with Dr. Champ dated June 15, 2022 setting forth the terms and conditions of employment under which Dr. Champ will continue to serve as superintendent of schools during the aforementioned term, and hereby authorized the president of the board to execute same.”
Champ’s new contract would run one year longer than the terms of the three newly elected school trustees, Will Treves, Jackie De Angelis and Natalie Marrero. The resolution does not state what compensation Champ will receive under the new deal.
Champ’s current agreement took effect in August 2019 and is set to end in August 2024, according to a copy provided by the district clerk’s office. That contract states the board is not required to notify Champ of whether it wants to negotiate a new contract until the end of the sixth month of the last year of the pact—which would be in January 2024.
Treves, De Angelis and Marrero will be taking the seats of John Brice, Leah Tahbaz and Vincent Mazzaro, all of whom decided to step down. The terms of the new trustees run from July 1 to June 30, 2025. The school board’s organizational meeting is July 12.
Tomorrow’s vote on the new contract will come after several weeks when the school board held hour-and-a-half-long executive sessions before the regular portions of its meetings “to discuss the employment history of a particular person(s).” The board also held a hastily called virtual special meeting for an executive session last Thursday at 2 p.m.
The board abandoned the historic practice of inviting trustees-elect to attend executive sessions after their election so they will be up to speed on what they’ll be dealing with when they take office, according to two sources.
Treves, De Angelis and Marrero have been invited to attend the executive session at Wednesday’s board meeting as is “the tradition,” said Trustee John Brice in a comment on the Pelham Examiner’s website. He did not address the Pelham Examiner’s question on whether the board had invited them to executive sessions prior to Wednesday’s.
In an email response, Trustee Michael Owen-Michaane, who was elected to the board in May 2021, said, “From my personal experience, I recall being invited to executive session prior to being sworn in last year, but I was out of town and unable to attend.”
Also at the last meeting of the year, the school board plans to vote on nominating Eileen Miller to be a board of education member of the Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES). Miller lost her seat on the school board last year and lost an election bid in May.
According to its meeting notice, the school board will meet Wednesday at 6 p.m. in the chorus room of Pelham Middle School (Room 054). “It is anticipated that the board will immediately consider a motion to enter executive session to discuss the employment history of a particular person(s),” the notice said. “The board is expected to reconvene in public at approximately 7:30 p.m. for the regular business portion of the meeting in the middle school library. The meeting can be viewed on YouTube live.”
Cristina is a senior at Pelham Memorial High School. She is the class of 2023 secretary and the Editor-in-Chief of the PMHS Pelican Yearbook. Cristina...
Tiffany Hebert • Jun 15, 2022 at 9:01 pm
Sad to see how this paper is being used as a bully pulpit.
Todd Nice • Jun 15, 2022 at 1:21 pm
The timing and seemingly rushed nature of this process is shameful. I have no opinion on the contract extension itself.
Everitt Speros • Jun 14, 2022 at 8:00 pm
Why not let the newly elected board members take up Dr. Champs extension?
Why is this being rushed?
When does her current contract expire?
It seems like the town was not provided with any real notice that this was happening.
Blake Bell • Jun 14, 2022 at 8:17 pm
Your concern is well founded. This is being done at the very last minute so it is very difficult to determine what really is happening. What it all LOOKS like is an effort by a lame duck Board to ignore the 2019 Board decision to give Champ a five year contract and, instead, give her a contract that extends until one year AFTER the terms of the newly-elected Board members have ended — all while NOT following the longstanding tradition of inviting such newly-elected Board members to post-election Board meetings in which such issues are considered. It is, in short, an effort to place the current Progressive Superintendent in place until those elected in an effort to reject Progressive values are no longer on the Board. If I am correct, it is very, very, very, very, sneaky.
John Brice • Jun 14, 2022 at 7:47 pm
You might want to prepare a retraction; the three newly elected board members will be attending tomorrow’s last executive session as is the tradition. I also think an apology to Eileen Miller is in store; she has worked tirelessly for the district both on and off the Board. To imply that this she is somehow unworthy of this appointment because she lost an election is unseemly. In fact serving on the BOCES board is hard work with very little recognition, they will be very lucky to have her. Lastly, if you truly want the Board to respond you will give them at least an hour to respond to your questions before you “go to print”.
Scott Wolfgang • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:23 pm
John, no one is saying anything about unworthiness. It is the lack of transparency exhibited by the BOE time and again and this is the latest, most egregious, example. There is a lack of community trust for our BOE (hence the last 2 election results) and it’s unfortunate the outgoing BOE members like yourself can not recognize that a decision like this will only drive further division. Hopefully you can do the right thing at tomorrow’s vote and have the integrity to leave key decisions to the duly elected BOE.
Jason Feldman • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:24 pm
It is a little ironic to ask for notice when the BOE didn’t post details of this extension until the last minute while I still have not seen any details of the contract posted.
Scott Wolfgang • Jun 14, 2022 at 11:16 pm
Jason,
I spent the last week reaching out the BOE reminding them of the requirement to post the agenda with ample time to review. If not, there is no chance it gets released early. The last 2 were up with less than a few hours of the meeting time. This is not a transparent group in any way shape or form.
Scott
Carla Caccavale • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:24 pm
The 3 new BOE members are attending, but not allowed to vote on a contract extension that goes beyond all of their terms.
Scott Wolfgang • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:26 pm
Also, John, could you share the rationale that the BOE used to extend the contract of our Superintendent in the final meeting of the year when the there will be a new majority and the existing President and VP will be replaced. Rather than wait for new BOE leadership and members to decide?
Andrew Lyons • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:34 pm
This is not correct. At least one of the new board members is not able to attend. Nobody is criticizing Eileen personally. This appears to be a maneuver to subvert the will of the people of this town who voted to reject the ideology of the past board and to protect the administrator they installed from accountability owed to the new board members and the community that elected them. A clear attempt to avoid the just consequences of the last 2 BOE elections. Shameful behavior if true.
Eileen Miller Miller • Jun 15, 2022 at 12:05 am
Andrew, you may see this as no one criticizing me personally, but every ounce of the initial article, plus comments all over FB, including in People of Pelham, insinuate or state that my BOE loss should be a factor in this appointment. Additionally, this article suggests this is a last minute pushing through of my appointment. That’s entirely false – this is the timing and the process for these appointments. Both suggestions are entirely intended to question my fitness for this job. It’s beyond insulting. As is your suggestion that this is a maneuver of any kind. Will of the people? It’s an appointment to fill a vacancy. Many of the people commenting don’t even know what BOCES does. What will is being avoided?
Megan Garufi • Jun 15, 2022 at 11:27 am
You really should read the by laws of BOCES and their own board documents. Pelham Bd of Ed is not in chare of the BOCES Board. Anyone in the geographic region (made up of 187 schools) can put their name in the hat to be considered for a BOCES board seat. One of the requirements is that they have to be an eligible voter in one of the districts that they cover. Based on past resolutions for this same exact position (Yup we have had Peham folks on the BOCES board before), all this resolution is saying is that they confirm that Eileen is a resident of Pelham. The Pelham BOE did not hand pick her for this. Eileen independently inquired about this position and went through the process OUTSIDE of Pelham.
Megan Garufi • Jun 15, 2022 at 11:57 am
correcting my typo***Pelham Bd of Ed is not in charge of the BOCES Board***
Evelyn Riedel • Jun 14, 2022 at 9:35 pm
At least the “lame duck” references have been removed from the original article.
Michelle Marcellino • Jun 15, 2022 at 12:48 am
Freedom of speech… Why would “lame duck ” references need to be removed or applauded for being removed. What is this teaching the “student” run newsletter? Only write what others what to hear?? Much worse has been spewed through the Examiner. This student shouldn’t have to revise.
Evelyn Riedel • Jun 15, 2022 at 9:58 am
This is not an opinion piece. News articles are supposed to be neutral, leaving the readers to interpret the facts for themselves. It’s Journalism 101. I did not ask for it to be removed; apparently, either the writer removed it or was advised by the editor to do so.
Rich Zahradnik • Jun 15, 2022 at 10:57 am
Fact: Lame duck is defined as “an elected official or group continuing to hold political office during the period between the election and the inauguration of a successor.” It is approved for use by the Associated Press Style Manual. Journalism 101.
Tara Lyons • Jun 15, 2022 at 10:56 am
We appreciate Eileen Miller and all of her years of service! She’s wonderful person, mother, and neighbor!
I think the main issue here is excluding the newly elected BOE members from making decisions…It’s just deliberately unkind. Do we need this BOE to have the optics of being exclusionary, manipulative and unkind? Doesn’t our community deserve better? And transparency isn’t asking too much! Don’t post within 24 hours of an executive meeting.
There is no time pressure for either decision.
The BOE leadership needs to stop creating conflict and start focusing on a united front.
Why can’t the LAST BOE meeting focus on celebrating the successful class of 2022?! Why add on last minute employment decisions when there is so much to celebrate? Do this in the fall!
Pete Liaskos • Jun 16, 2022 at 6:54 pm
To the extent that John Brice’s comment implies that it is the Board’s
“tradition” to allow the newly elected Board members to attend the last executive meeting — but not the earlier executive meetings, I respectfully do not believe that this is accurate. It was certainly not the case when I was on the Board between 2016-19 (and there were no new board members wo rotated on in 2020). I will let Ian and Michael speak to 2021. To avoid any dispute on this point, I have confirmed this with another BOE member who was on the Board from 2014 to 2018. The exclusion of these newly elected members from these earlier executive sessions was, in fact, a fundamental departure from the actual tradition. It was one of many unfortunate maneuvers that were undertaken in connection with this eleventh hour contract approval.