School Superintendent, Activist Clash Over Construction
BY BUDDY NEVINS
Broward School Superintendent Robert Runcie would feel at home in an echo chamber, hearing only his own voice and those of his supporters.
That was made clear at the January meeting of the Facilities Task Force, a community group appointed to monitor school construction.
Runcie warned the board that he has little tolerance for criticism. He threatened that he would keep his staff away from the group’s meetings if they continued to be “adversarial.”
“I’m not going have staff come to these meetings like it’s some Inquisition,” Runcie snapped.
Nathalie Lynch-Walsh makes presentation at the Facilities Task Force. Robert Runcie is seated third from the left. (Photo: Mark O’Laughlin, Facebook)
Runcie didn’t like how Task Force Chair Nathalie Lynch-Walsh was grilling his new construction chief Leo Bobadilla.
It was Bobadilla’s public introduction to Broward.
Some members of the task force were skeptical of Bobadilla before they even met him.
Bobadilla’s hiring to oversee an $800 million-plus renovation of Broward schools was controversial due to his spotty record in Houston. The Texas metropolis is running a $211 million cost overrun in the $2.1 billion construction bond program managed by Bobadilla.
Despite auditors that blamed poor management, Bobadilla has repeatedly stonewalled. He has refused to take blame for the shortfall.
It was his ducking responsibility that Nathalie Lynch-Walsh, chair of the task force, immediately jumped at the start of a two-hour meeting last week at Plantation High School.
“Your response to the audit does not put you in the most favorable light,” Lynch-Walsh said.
The deficit in Houston was “a reflection on you,” she contended.
Recounting how both state and local Grand Juries have blasted Broward schools’ construction program, Lynch-Walsh warned Bobadilla: The task force would be watching his every move.
Bobadilla refused to get drawn into an argument.
“I don’t expect there to be trust,” the new construction chief said. “Trust is something you earn. I expect you to give me a chance.”
Runcie Attacks Critic
Runcie, who handpicked Bobadilla over a number of skeptical School Board members and the media, jumped in to the fray.
He accused the task force of having “an adversarial relationship with the district” and criticized Lynch-Walsh for not backing the $800 million bond issue.
“You are wrong. I voted for it,” she fired back.
And then to Runcie’s visible annoyance, Lynch-Walsh got the last words.
She pointed out that the task force had heard promises of cooperation and openness many times in the past.
Instead, Runcie’s last construction chief refused to even attend task force meetings, although the School Board appointed the group to scrutinize building projects.
Noted Lynch-Walsh: “This district does have the habit of being misleading.”
Runcie’s comments at the meeting doesn’t engender much confidence that there is change at the top of the school system.
Being a public school administrator requires a thick skin. It requires being able to handle criticism from the system’s ultimate bosses, the public.
This is especially true in Broward where school activism is a contact sport. And in Broward, there is oh, so much going on in the schools to criticize.
Runcie and Bobadilla are signaling that they will play the same old public school system game with the task force.
They will claim to embrace transparency, while refusing to share key records.
They will claim cooperation, while evading questions.
That’s wrong, because if there is one thing the school system needs is more skeptics asking questions.
We don’t need a task force that is a lapdog.
We need a watchdog.
A fierce one.
January 14th, 2016 at 1:27 pm
it’s “DOCTOR” Nathalie Lynch-Walsh not Chief Nathalie Lynch-Walsh.
January 14th, 2016 at 2:44 pm
I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
January 14th, 2016 at 2:48 pm
I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000800369/polls_shocked_to_find_gaming_5550_960009_answer_2_xlarge.jpeg
January 14th, 2016 at 3:58 pm
Here we go again! Citizens volunteer their time to oversee or monitor government spending and appointed NOT elected public SERVANTS act like medieval Italian petty tyrants! Will someone please tell the Broward Superintendent this is a democracy not a dictatorship! I mean the Sun King Louis XIV gave more respect to the citizens than this person does to his EMPLOYERS the PUBLIC!
January 14th, 2016 at 4:46 pm
@#3
Thank you for the laugh. The School Board and its Superintendent’s shenanigans are pathetic and your take on that is actually descriptive.
January 14th, 2016 at 5:25 pm
Mr. Runcie, If you & your “henchmen” can’t stand the heat then you should “stay out of the kitchen”.
January 14th, 2016 at 7:11 pm
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Substitute Runcie’s name for Till and Bobadillo’s name for any of the previous Deputies and there’s no difference.
January 15th, 2016 at 8:05 am
As per Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:
“Citizens volunteer their time to oversee or monitor government spending and appointed NOT elected public SERVANTS act like medieval Italian petty tyrants!”
The most important thing to note here is that this Facility Task Force is a volunteer group of private citizens who have no accountability for their actions and need not treat Public Employees as servants. Those days are long gone and passed.
Instead in an enlightened era the citizens and Public employees are partners to effect continuous improvement. The role of the volunteer group is to offer advice and commentary to the School and the Board ultimately decides what actions to take if any.
Being impolite and to insult someone you are meeting for the first time, is just not the way to foster a collaborative team.
Like it or not, the School Board made the decision to hire Mr. Bobodilla and it would have been more polite to give the gentleman the opportunity to earn the community’s trust before making statements that contradict the democratic process of the SBBC.
The decision was voted on and approved by the majority and the Chief was hired.
Doctor Lynch-Walsh, you can make the contributions of the Facility Task Force more of a Team effort than a subservient medieval Italian petty tyrant relationship.
FROM BUDDY:
I was at the meeting. Lynch-Walsh was asking questions, not being impolite or insulting. Querying the new construction chief about his background and his controversial history in Houston should not be out-of-bounds.
I have watched this school system for decades. I am always amazed that anyone volunteers to spend their precious time on advisory boards only to be stonewalled, belittled and ultimately ignored by the staff.
I have written this in the past many times: The NUMBER ONE complaint I received during my many years at the Sun-Sentinel about the schools was that the staff was non-responsive and downright nasty to parents and taxpayers. The staff was accused of being insular and refusing to listen to suggestions, recommendations or any comments about how schools should be run. I was regularly presented with reams of written documentation to back up these allegations.
No one in the school system is above being asked to answer questions. They are spending our money and we deserve answers on how it is spent. This is especially true about the new construction chief, whose background in Houston was highly controversial.
As somebody commented here: If the staff doesn’t like the heat, get out of the kitchen.
January 15th, 2016 at 10:25 am
#4…Italian petty tyrants?…..Should I be upset or educated on this?..lol……I agree with the entire post. This is the same as the staff of any city recommending something they did more work on then the people who will vote on the item, then the officials vote against staff recommendations..Why go thru the hoops?
Thanks Count for the post & observations..
Rico Petrocelli
Plantation Councilman (2005-2009)
January 15th, 2016 at 1:05 pm
Speaking of accountability…I have yet to see Broward Schools take true accountability for the multiple debacles at Facilities. We have been through more management than water, but the problems are still there. People are jumping ship like rats. When someone new comes along, they only tow the same line and then leave like the rest of them.
Broward Schools and all those employed by Broward Schools have a fiscal responsibility to all taxpayers in this county. Again and again Broward Schools management and board have been given the opportunity to prove themselves only to fail again and make a mockery of the hard workers in the district who truly believe in doing a good job and take the responsibility of the students in this county seriously.
It is up to Mr. Bobadilla to take responsibility for his reputation. If he has done nothing wrong,then he can hold strong in his integrity and prove his worth to the taxpayers by making high quality staff decisions and by completing projects on time and on budget. If he needs a mouth piece this early in the game, he might as well head back to Houston. Broward is not for the faint of heart.
January 15th, 2016 at 1:20 pm
Buddy,
As per your response to my comment (#8), I must say that I am concerned and deeply troubled by you broad brush categorization of all the staff at the School Board of Broward County.
I was not at the recent Task Force Meeting so I was merely responding to the contents of your posted opinion piece.
You cannot say generally that “that the staff (is or) was non-responsive and downright nasty to parents and taxpayers. The staff was accused of being insular and refusing to listen to suggestions, recommendations or any comments about how schools should be run.” No matter what documentation you may have.
Buddy, not every suggestion, recommendation or comment, about how schools should be run coming from private citizens, it is just not always practical to implement.
Professional Individuals with the prerequisite of credentials, are hired and appointed to positions to be held accountable for making the hard choices of management decisions.
I guess since I do not like your opinion piece and you would not implement my suggestion to allow the new Chief to earn the public’s trust and respect, my option would be to get out of your kitchen.
Thanks!!! I am out.
January 15th, 2016 at 4:10 pm
Time for Runcie & his four bodyguards to go back to Chicago PLEASE!
January 15th, 2016 at 7:35 pm
Dr. Lynch-Walsh and FTF won’t be cowed by petulant incompetents. The district has responded the same to FTF for the years I was on it as well.
So glad you went to the meeting, Buddy!
Watch…the next move by Runcie and his puppet Board supporters will be to eliminate FTF.
January 15th, 2016 at 11:46 pm
I wrote a piece either too long, off the subject or it didnt go through to explain only cities in Italy during the Renaissance had tryants ruling them. Since other city states outside of this time n place after the breakup of the Western Roman Empire had ruling eites who elected ruling councils not rulers as it Italy the historic period is called the Italian Petty Tryants Era although Genova n Venice also had electec councils and elected non hereditary Doges equivalent to Dukes elsewhere and Naples was always a large Kingdom n Milano went from a Visconti petty tryany to a major Duchy under the Sforza dukes. Ferrera Mantua were oetty states but had counts later narchese finally dukes who were legal hereditary rulers subject to the Papal not Holy Roman Imperial Law that when the last male heir died the state reverted to the Pope. Eventually all petty tyrants came under Papal rule or were annexed to larger hereditary Grand Duchies Duchies or the Kingdom of Naples or Milano which became the Austrian controlled Kingdom of Lombardy (Milano) and Venezia (Venice).
No slight was meant or inferred as the term Italian Petty Tyrants comes from 19th century Italian hustorians.
The petty tyrany of Rimini held by the great Malatesta family who created the great Tempio Malatesta n Castel Sismondo there is the sister city to Ft Lauderdale. Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta is one of the greatest Renaissance patrons n an “Italian petty tyrant”.
FROM BUDDY:
Off topic.
January 16th, 2016 at 1:25 pm
Dr. Lynch-Walsh is one of the heroes in all of this! She and the people on the task force are more than willing to work with the district, but how long do you allow your government officials to go uncheck. His majesty Robert W. Runcie has NO accountability! This is according to Florida department of education, Florida governors office and the Florida division of law enforcement all say they have NO over sight of Robert W. Runcie and the US department of justice is sitting on an investigation request!
Runcie is responding this way because we (advocates that speak the truth) refuse to go away! I finally moved out of the area, but still write and will begin a new phase of exposure to the crimes and corruption within Broward Schools. If I so desire, I will drive down and speak!
Sadly, too many want others to solve all the problems, but we could quickly change things if people would stand up!
January 16th, 2016 at 5:00 pm
Juliet, have you moved anywhere near New Tampa? We should get together on that book. I still have meeting minutes from years of corruption and incompetence.
January 16th, 2016 at 5:42 pm
Corruption has flourished under Runcie more than any other Superintendents that I can remember in recent history. It will be long list if I want to tell everything. He totally corrupt top to bottom. In my opinion he is taking advantage of his race. There is no question about it.
Broward voters should change the board composition this November. Then this corrupt Runcie and his cronies will start running to towards Chicago.
January 16th, 2016 at 6:07 pm
Friends,
Broward would do much better creating an independent School Construction Authority with an independent IG to provide construction audit services and ethical oversight. Their projects should be funded by the school district which should decide what jobs they want done. Maintenence and repairs of facilities should also fall under the management of that agency.
This will better ensure advantages on the quality, cost and time to construct projects and maintain facilities. The suggestion is not a knock on the district. I’m just trying to avoid another disaster.
Angelo
January 18th, 2016 at 6:46 am
Mr. or Ms. PaulGiordanoMarchetti,
Please tell the public what you know. You should not wait or hold things in or you are part of prolonging the problem that you believe is occurring. To use my name and make some general accusations is not my style. I have always confronted those I have accused of wrong doing or mismanagement face to face or in writing including Mr. Runcie and the Board.
Neither do I believe that any corruption or mismanagement at the school board is associated with race or racial intimidation or influence. I have seen and believe that those negative issues are not limited to racial, gender, religious, or political stature or being.
So if you are going to use my name please at least use my style, put what you know on the table or choose another name to post under. Be specific and someday maybe people will want to use your real name to post under.
January 18th, 2016 at 12:46 pm
MORE GOVERNMENT PATRONAGE JOBS NEVER SOLVED A PROBLEM IT ONLY COSYS THE TAXPAYER MORE MONEY LIKE IN NEW YORK CITY!
Everyone knows the creation of a bloated construction authority where it has been tried ends up with confusion duplication and ENDLESS patronage flunkies hiding cost overruns because despite limited public access to Board documents construction authorities never get the same public review of their actions n expenditures.
Robbers rob banks.
Bureaucrats and politicians creat Construction Authorities to milk the public as in New York
January 18th, 2016 at 3:52 pm
Charlotte.
Contact via hibbsforchange@gmail.Com. I would love to work on something with you
January 18th, 2016 at 9:40 pm
too late now.
voters gave SBBC Runcie $800 million dollars in construction funds to squander.
those of us in the business know you don’t need a gun to rob a bank.
just a set of construction drawings.
too late now.
January 19th, 2016 at 8:45 am
One thing for sure(Super Runcie take note) never,never underestimate the power, resources, and skill(yes) of an activist…..
January 19th, 2016 at 10:10 am
As Miss Greenbarg n Miss Hibbs have demonstrated activists are powerless against the Broward School Board because ethnic feelings enable small cliques to make deals with wealthy vendors n activists dont have any such financial allies.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:43 am
#14..Count…Thanks for the info…
Rico Petrocelli
Plantation Councilman (2005-2009)
January 19th, 2016 at 6:28 pm
If Mr. Runcie doesn’t like to hear the Negative, he should learn how to “have a conversation” or “communicate” to have his people “work together to accomplish mutual goals”, same goes for how he educates our Students…. He doesn’t want to hear Parents to complain, and at the same time he doesn’t want to fix the problems… He shouldn’t be the Superintendent for our Children. We need Change!!!!
January 20th, 2016 at 2:34 pm
Count. I disagree…progress takes time. I have only been at this for about 4 years now. I have already seen change! I see more, just over the hill. Have to keep hammering it. Hopefully people will join us…because it is WE THE PEOPLE’S money and children
January 20th, 2016 at 4:15 pm
Count LF Etc., here in Hillsborough the story is different. Just as much corruption but in the County Commission. Here we have more bipartisan activists who don’t follow the D or R party lines. In Broward of course the Ds control the corruption.
Here we also have a very strong Tea Party that isn’t culturally biased, but concentrates on fiscal and tax matters, which is true to the original Tea Partiers.
WTSP TV’s Noah Pransky has eviscerated the County Commission with his investigations of Go Hillsborough (tax scheme for rail)
January 21st, 2016 at 2:33 pm
Ms Charlotte #28 – from Buddy’s article:
Runcie, who handpicked Bobadilla over a number of skeptical School Board members and the media, jumped in to the fray.
He accused the task force of having “an adversarial relationship with the district” and criticized Lynch-Walsh for not backing the 800 million bond issue.
Ms Charlotte, did you ask Mr, Pat Reilly for the email, subject: “Manager Facility Audits position which was not advertised” and his response to the email?
I am still interested in your analysis of Mr. Pat Reilly’s response to the email.
January 21st, 2016 at 11:16 pm
@ Pz Ask
Who are you talking about? Hiring of Manager Facility Audits – Jerry Useless? Man that was a big scam by Pat Reilly!! He is a manager managing (supervising) nobody, who was hand picked by Reilly with any experience in Audit at all!!!
I am not sure why Ms.Charlotte is not asking for the truth from Reilly???
January 25th, 2016 at 1:23 am
@ #30 Ex Manager Facility Audits – as you mentioned experience – FYI.
School Board website records show Gerardo Usallan Jr. was Board approved for hire for the position of Auditor III on 5/17/2011. He resigned from that position on 6/19/2012. He was Board approved for hire for the position of Manager, Facility Audits on 12/18/2012.
The Manager, Facility Audits position was not advertised regardless of what the “Recommended Position and Summary of Advertised Position” document on the School Board website shows. Also, there was NO Selection Committee as shown on the document because there were NO interviews held for the position, which makes the document inaccurate and probably fraudulent, similar to “Per Bid No. 28-134T”.
Comment – if a position (hire) had been processed in that EXACT MANNER by Derek Messier or his predecessor Tom Lindner or Michael Garretson (RIP) before him or Shelley Meloni or Sam Bays, every CPA and every other Auditor in Mr. Pat Reilly’s Dept. would view the hire as FRAUD. I would bet my left eye on it and that’s my good eye.
January 25th, 2016 at 6:29 pm
I do not think it’s fair to refer to the employee in this blog by name. Regardless he’s employed By actions that you had no control over. The issue however is that Miss Charlotte Greenbarg would have criticized any other administrator in the school system as being corrupt. I agree with the previous comments by JW but it would have been a little more polite to exclude the name of the employee.
January 26th, 2016 at 9:08 am
Employee names and positions are public record.
January 26th, 2016 at 9:09 am
Funny you don’t mention that when they refer to Pat Reilly.
January 26th, 2016 at 11:36 am
Mr. McIntosh does not want the GUILTY named? Public Servants are paid by the PUBLIC, HELL YES! print THEIR NAMES were they screw up or worse screw us!
January 26th, 2016 at 5:37 pm
OK, now to deal with and put an end to the issue that 29, 30, 31 and 32 are chewing on.
I have the emails that are public record that I’ve been repeatedly asked to look at. I did some research into the process as well. And they’re wrong about what happened.
Joe Wright sent an email to Pat Reilly 2-25-13 complaining that the second position of (Manager, Facility Audits) was not advertised and there was no interview. He further states he would have been a viable candidate but had no opportunity.
Pat Reilly responded on 2-26-13 explaining that there was an advertisement for the first position, and all candidates who applied were interviewed. Joe Wright did not apply.
Pat Reilly said the District’s procedures were followed for both positions.
He further responded that he had asked Joe Wright several times when the position had opened up prior when Dave Rhodes and Mark Magli left, but Joe Wright repeatedly said he didn’t want the position because he was in drop and wanted to teach tennis in the evenings.
I also spoke with Pat Reilly, and he further explained that he had also asked Joe Wright to apply when Luis Flores (held the position before Dave Rhodes) left the position, and Joe Wright said he didn’t want to apply.
It’s just not fair to charge that one was prevented from applying for a position that was advertised because of some kind of subterfuge, especially when the offer to apply had been made several times, but was refused.
In the 10 years that I served on the Audit Committee, and as Vice-Chair for two or three, I observed Pat Reilly always following policy and procedure to the letter. His ethics are beyond reproach.
I have forwarded the emails to Buddy.
January 27th, 2016 at 3:35 pm
Of course they/we are wrong, only the so called activist are ever correct, they never spin anything to validate their cause.
If Mr. Wright sent the e-mail, then one should assume that he changed his mind and maybe wanted to finish his career with the District as Manager, Facility Audits. It appears that there were two Manager, Facility Audits positions. So it is implied that since he didn’t apply to the first, then he doesn’t deserve to be considered for the second. Were both positions advertised at the same time?
Mr. Wright could have said no to the opportunity when Dave Rhodes and Mark Magli left which was prior to this opportunity, does that preclude him from applying or wanting the position at a later date?
It may not be fair to charge that Mr. Wright was prevented from applying for a position that may or may not have been advertised because of some kind of subterfuge, especially when the offer to apply had been made several times, but was refused. But if it was fair, why did Mr. Wright send the original e-mail?
I agree with JW, if a position (hire) had been processed in this EXACT MANNER by anyone else in the District, the Facility Task Force and Audit Committee and the Office of the Chief Auditor would be all over this and it would be said here in this blog that the hire was as FRAUD.
January 28th, 2016 at 12:37 am
Ms. Charlotte, thank you for your comments and research. I have more information on this subject (Manager, Facility Audits position which was not advertised) both documented and verbal. Verification of the verbal is subject to individuals being forthright and truthful. The documented information stands for itself.
The entire issue is the SECOND position (Manager, Facility Audits) was NOT advertised and NO interviews were held for that position (vacancy). I request you and/or Mr. Pat Reilly provide the readers here with the dates the SECOND position was advertised and the date interviews were held for the SECOND position as you both continually state the position was advertised. I am surprised and frankly dumbfounded that you did obtain that information from Mr. Pat Reilly and include it in your comments here. I would think Mr. Reilly would have willing and quickly provided you with that information for verification and not just say it for you to continually repeat.
School Board records on the School Board website show the position was added to the Org Chart on 12/04/2012 and Mr. Gerardo Usallan was recommended for hire on 12/11/2012 which is the first date the School Board Agenda was available for public view. Mr. Usallan was Board approved for hire on 12/18/2012.
School Board Policy 4011 (link below) requires vacancies to be posted (advertised) for five (5) workdays.
The manner in which the position (vacancy) was processed was a violation of School Board Policy (4011) at best and FRAUD at worst.
The comments by Mr. Pat Reilly stating, I was asked to apply (for the first and at that time only) position are true, but Ms. Charlotte please tell me and the readers how does me applying or not applying affect whether the SECOND (or really any) position should have been advertised as required by School board Policy 4011.
Your comment, “it’s not fair to charge that one was prevented from applying for a position that was advertised because of some kind subterfuge, especially when the offer to apply had been made several times, but was refused”. Again, I ask, when was the (SECOND) position advertised? Again, an offer to apply made to me several times, but was refused has no affect on advertising a position. Is advertising a position predicated upon who it’s believed will or will not apply?
It’s not that ONE was prevented from applying but, MAYBE MANY from both within the School District and the general public were prevented from applying because the position was NOT advertised. If the position was advertised, please provide readers the dates.
Also, you state, some kind “subterfuge”. Please provide FACTS relating to any “subterfuge”.
Ms. Charlotte, when you make comments like that… “some kind of subterfuge” it reminds me of a comment you made in a previous Buddy story. Your comment was “… a classic example of the district’s apologists at work”. See your comments from Buddy’s story dated Sept 15, 2015 – Brow School Super Tried To Keep Contract Secret.
While there, review comments #17 (FACTS), #18 (Charlotte Greenbarg), #19 (FACTS) and your comment #21 (Charlotte Greenbarg) “Not to me. Just a convoluted attempt to justify what Runcie did” which is your response to comment #19. Your comments on that story show you had a different philosophy when, as Buddy reported, Superintendent Runcie rewarded Derek Messier with a consultant contract with no other consultants apparently being considered.
Link to School Board Policy 4011.
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/sbbcpolicies/docs/P4011.000.pdf
Buddy, in Mr. Reilly’s response email dated 2/26/2013, he states “The manner in which we interviewed and selected the candidates for the vacant position and the additional position was consistent with the District’s hiring procedures and the Human Resources Department and approved by the Superintendent prior to the interviews”.
Why was Superintendent approval needed and given prior to the interviews? Rhetorical question!
There additional information available.
January 28th, 2016 at 1:18 am
I have great faith in long time organized with documents Miss Greenbarg. Her recitation must stand I believe absent documentation to the contrary.
But what I am confused by is the statement (s) we have TWO manager,
Facility Audits!
Yes in commercial and investment banks there are “co Managers” going back to the 19th century banking Tombstones” announcing new stock and bond and loans as public notices and I’ve heard of co managers in insurance firms and more than one Managing Directors, again in banks but TWO Managers with the same title?
It seems unweldly at best chaos at worst to have two heads of a department.
Is there something I am missing? Does the Broward County School Board have a unique management setup?
January 28th, 2016 at 1:28 am
Ms. Charlotte and readers. I would like to tell you all how George C. Scott aka Mordecai Jones aka The Flim-Flam Man would operate.
Advertise the (only) existing Manager, Facility Audits position on the Org Chart.
11/16/2012 hold interviews for that position and have a specified individual participate in the interviews.
12/4/2012 select and see Board approval of a qualified interviewed candidate (not the specified individual).
12/4/2012 add a SECOND Manager, Facility Audits position to the Org Chart.
12/11/2012 recommend the specified individual for hire.
12/18/2012 the specified individual is approved for hire.
If you will, the “Art of the Con”, the “Beauty of the Fraud” is the SECOND position is disguised by the advertisement and interviews of the first position.
Mordecai would love it. That is how the “Flim-Flam Man would operate.
Maybe some of you think I am trying to identify deceit and deception which is not there. However, when I look at the factual dates and listen to what’s being said, the two DO NOT match.
Nowhere do I see where the SECOND position was advertised.
Nowhere do I see when interviews were held for the SECOND position.
Maybe Ms. Charlotte or a reader can help me by providing the dates of advertisement and interviews for the SECOND Manager, Facility Audits position.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:59 pm
Joe, you were in the system long enough to know how this goes.
They are busy circling the wagons.
Nothing to see here, keep it moving.
It’s a shame there is a double standard, and who are you to question them.
We will just have to wait until this happens outside of the Audit Department and a position (hire) is processed in this EXACT MANNER by anyone else in the District.
Then there will be concern from the Facility Task Force, Audit Committee and the Office of the Chief Auditor sounding the warning FRAUD.
January 30th, 2016 at 7:25 pm
Joe Wright did not apply. And Pat Reilly offered Joe Wright an opportunity to interview for the job at least three times prior and was turned down.
That’s really the crux of this tempest. And totally without merit.
Dr. Who: I’m not part of the establishment, never worked for the district, was a volunteer on the Audit Committee.
And this time I really am finished with the issue.
January 30th, 2016 at 7:26 pm
IF Mr Wright’s compelling account is accurate and complete the School employees concerned should be disciplined or fired!
Are county school board hires regulated? It would appear IF regulared regulations would appear to be violated. Therefore why wasn’t or isn’t there a State Attorney or US Attorney investigation?
January 30th, 2016 at 7:29 pm
Count, sorry I cut my reply to you from my response.
The OCA used to have more than one, but got cut by Sup’ts who didn’t like what the audits were finding.. Now at least he’s got one more.
January 31st, 2016 at 11:55 pm
@ Dr. Who #41 – Doc., thank you for bringing me back to reality. You are absolutely correct, “the wagons have been circled”.
For the record, this situation is not about me applying, or not applying, being qualified or unqualified, playing tennis or washing my car. What it’s about is the position was NOT advertised which was a violation of School Board Policy 4011. Also, no one from the School District (like Glenn Parks who did apply previously) and no one from the general public had an opportunity to apply because the position was NOT advertised.
A few comments and questions. Rhetorical of course.
When I was new to the School District I heard a word often used to describe corrupt and illicit acts and individuals who participated in those acts. The word used was “DIRTY”. I wonder if the Manager, Facility Audits position NOT being advertised and individuals involved could be considered “DIRTY”!
It’s puzzling to me why Ms Charlotte Greenbarg would self unveil and sacrifice her self and her pseudo integrity and reputation for Mr. Pat Reilly and this situation.
Maybe Mr. Leo Bobadilla will see the policy violation as a positive (for him) and maybe he will consider Mr. Pat Reilly and the entire Audit Dept comrades.
There is the possibility Superintendent Runcie could be expecting future considerations from Mr. Pat Reilly. A favor received is a favor owed!!
Doc, how do you think members of the Facilities Task Force (Nick Sakhnovsky, Dr. Lynch-Walsh and others) now view Ms Charlotte and Mr. Pat Reilly. Oh, and the auditor.
How do you think Facilities’ staff especially Project Managers, will receive auditors going to the Facilities Dept and pointing out policy and/or contract violations to them, considering the policy violation in the Audit Dept?
I wonder if any auditors in the Audit Dept will now look at Mr. Pat Reilly differently?
I know, I know Doc. You are probably saying to yourself “do you think Reilly cares”.
February 1st, 2016 at 1:42 pm
@ #42 Ms Charlotte and #43 Count – Ms Charlotte, the crux of this tempest, as you put it, is the SECOND position Manager, Facility Audits was NOT advertised which was a violation of School Board Policy (4011).
The FACTS are
12/4/2014 the SECOND position was added to the Org Chart
12/11/2012 (first date the School Board Agenda was available for public view) an individual was recommended for hire
Count refer to the Link in comment #38 above to see School Board Policy 4011.
Ms Charlotte tell the Count and readers the dates the SECOND position was advertised.
Count can you see how “Transparent” Ms Charlotte is? She will NOT address the FACT that the SECOND position was NOT advertised. She will NOT provide any dates. She only repeats that I did not apply when the first position was previously vacant which is true.
However, the newly added SECOND position was not available for any one to apply as that position was NOT advertised.
Ms Charlotte should consider there are many people on the Facilities Task Force, in the School System and in the general public who know how to access the School Board website and obtain and review the FACTS.
February 1st, 2016 at 2:13 pm
@ #42 Charlotte Greenbarg
With all due respect Ms. Greenbarg you were more a part of the establishment then you give yourself credit for, you and the Audit Committee run by the other fake Doctor controlled the agenda of the Office of the Chief Auditor as well as a number of the staff.
Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Reilly did exactly what you and the good Doctor wanted, so you are a part of the establishment, as much as you want to hide that fact.
@ #43 Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz
No one is going to be investigated, especially the Office of the Chief Auditor. As our parents use to say, “Do as I say, not as I do”.
@ #45 Joe Wright
You are correct, this situation is not about you applying, or not applying, being qualified or unqualified, playing tennis or washing your car. It’s about a position that was filled and NOT advertised in violation of School Board Policy 4011.
It is about what is right or wrong, and I as said of course we are wrong, only the so called activist are ever correct, they never spin anything to validate their cause. But in this case it’s them spinning the facts, trying to divert from the real facts with “but Joe was offered an opportunity to interview for the job at least three times prior and turned down it down”.
The real crux of this tempest is they don’t want to admit that they are just like the management that they are always saying is corrupt. This issue does have merit, just a shame we will never know the truth, just like every other issue that is blogged here.
Sad part is no one really cares, makes one wonder who is the real puppet master?
February 2nd, 2016 at 2:12 am
I believe
1. Federal State County Municipal jobs n contracts should NORMALLY be advertised AND ALWAYS ADVERTISED IF THE LAW STATES THEY SHOULD!
2. I assume if the FIRST MANAGER FACILITIES AUDIT had to be advertised SO DID THE SECOND MANAGER FACILITIES AUDIT.
3. The name of a particular potential applicant is irelevant as either a job is advertised OR NOT and personal discussions again are beside the point.
4. The sole I believe is: was a job that was mandated to be advertisec or not?
If a job that was supposed to be advertised was not and nepotism or favourism was involved at a county agency isnt the State Attorney redponsible to investigate?
February 2nd, 2016 at 10:13 am
@ #48
You make some good points Count. A good source for you to speak with would be Mr. Pat Reilly who is the Chief Auditor for the Broward School District.
Mr. Reilly can explain what laws or School Board Policies govern advertising vacant positions.
He can also explain how the first Manager, Facility Audits position was advertised. The SECOND Manager, Facility Audits position was NOT advertised, but Mr. Reilly can explain why it was not.
Mr. Reilly can explain or discuss nepotism and definitely favoritism when hiring for positions in county agencies.
He can discuss all of your points especially since the issue being discussed, on this Blog, took place in his department.
February 5th, 2016 at 9:21 am
Guess we will never know the truth.
Charlotte said She was done, which is standard answer when caught.
Buddy has the e-mails, but isn’t interested in finding the truth.
All the other district nay-sayers aren’t interested because it’s not about Runcie
February 5th, 2016 at 6:26 pm
Can’t Mr Nevins interview Mr Reilly and tell us what happened and why?
February 8th, 2016 at 11:28 am
Isn’t it convenient that the first 50 comments don’t show in the comment section.
@ Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewic; There isn’t going to be any interview or closure to this issue.
FROM BUDDY:
I have no idea why the first 50 comments are no longer posted on the site. I have my tech people checking. Thanks
February 9th, 2016 at 11:08 am
@ Count
Ms Charlotte Greenbarg said she spoke with Mr. Pat Reilly regarding the email subject: Position Manager, Facility Audits which was not advertised. Not sure if he used a School Board (office or cell) phone or his personal phone when they spoke.
Some of the information Mr. Pat Reilly gave Ms Charlotte she posted on this story as comments.
Ms Charlotte was not a resident of Broward County when she spoke with Mr. Reilly.
Count if you are a resident and Taxpayer of Broward County maybe Mr. Pat Reilly will speak with you and will give you information on the issue and email subject Position Manager, Facility Audits which was not advertised as he did with Ms Charlotte.
You commented earlier about two (2) Manager, Facility Audits positions. Yes there were two (2) Managers and one (1) auditor in the Facilities/Construction Audit Dept.
The SECOND Manager position was added but was NOT advertised (a violation of School Board Policy) and NO interviews were held for the position.
Count, it is odd that the position added was a Manager position rather than an auditor position. Also odd is the fact that someone was hired immediately after the position was added while the position had NOT been advertised and NO interviews were held for the position.
If you have a conversation with Mr. Pat Reilly, maybe he can give you some insight on why a Manager position was added (rather than an auditor) which resulted in two (2) Managers and one (1) auditor.
This staffing situation can be discussed later.
February 9th, 2016 at 12:49 pm
My basic issues are that “auditor”, “manager” “audit manager”, “manager, audits” are in a sane world specific jobs.
“Manager” means you manage others under you.
Again as the School Board is NOT a bank, insurance company or some specialized advertising agency where the title Co Manager for more than one person exists how can there be two people hired as Manager Facilities Audit”?
It appears a second questionably titled job was created and done so “sub rosa” which raises ethical and legal questions