In the Southside Times and Indianapolis Star editorials, the editorial boards of each paper have researched this situation and published their findings. The boards are not board members nor are they members of TBPS. Their job is to research the facts and come up with a stand based on the facts they find. In the case of the termination of Dr. Williams, I might say the facts they didn’t find.

At any rate, some of you have written that you were waiting to discover the facts and then make your decisions about this gang of 4 board. At last, you have some credible information to add to your analysis. Good luck to each of you. Perhaps now you better understand why so many of us fellow residents are so upset. The 4 need to go, and not just because of Dr. Williams!

http://www.in.gov

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/

http://www.in.gov/sboa/

http://www.doe.state.in.us/reed/

http://www.nsba.org/site/index.asp

I found a LOT of useful information on these sites…and just on the IC website alone found numerous indiscretions of Dr. Williams and some members of his administration.

Also, regarding the hiring of an “additional” attorney: He is not an “additional” attorney come to find out. John Bailey is being kept as the district’s attorney (the whole district of Perry Township-not JUST the Gang of Four) and in his own discovery of the current investigation wanted a seperate legal counsel to conclude the investigation of Dr. Williams based on his own findings. Just like Lou Borgman did not think he could represent the Township (as a whole) based on his friendship with Dr. Williams, he stepped down and let John Bailey take over. Well now John Bailey is stepping down in order to keep his role as the Counsel for Perry Township (again as a whole). This one legal issue regarding Dr. Williams is obviously a lot larger than any one of us knows. If there wasn’t something there, no legal counsel in the world would want to take this case of, what seems like, epic proportions. Attorneys don’t like to lose. That is a fact. And Attorneys also know when they have a case and when they don’t. This wouldn’t have gone on for as long as it has without SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. That is also a fact.

I appreciate your effort, but you are naive.

Borgman was the school board attorney who was relegated to school township attorney due to conflict of interest i.e. a friendly relationship with Williams.

Bailey, hired by the four, now represents the entire board, as he should. He cannot conduct an investigation because it would be a conflict of interest against the school corporation. It would have been nice if he had figured that one out 3 months ago.

Lawyers won’t take a case without substantial evidence if they they are paid on contingency basis. Otherwise, they will happily bill until someone gets tired of paying the bill. It doesn’t matter if it’s a no-win situation. Trial lawyers don’t like to lose. Most other lawyers are quite content with spending a lot of billable hours reaching a compromise or simply fact finding and arguing in court.

I say offer the lawyers the job on a contingency basis and let’s see how many lawyers line up to take a shot at taking Williams down. THAT would be the litmus test as to whether the ‘majority’ board has a leg to stand on.

You are right in stating that attorneys do not like to lose. Instead of assuming that “this one legal issue regarding Dr. Williams is obviously a lot larger than any one of us knows”, is it not a possibility that Mr. Bailey wants someone else to press this issue because he doesn’t want to be the “loser”?? If Mr. Bailey represents the township as a whole, why doesn’t he attend the board meetings and address the township as a whole?

Regardless, this is one question that has NEVER been answered….How much does our township owe Mr. Bailey up to this point?? I’d be willing to bet that it’s more than a tenderloin dinner! It is a simple question, but Mrs. Adams simply refuses to answer it. Mr. Maple has repeatedly asked her, but she refuses to answer. Mrs. Houchin asked her at the last board meeting, but she answered her question with a question. Several individuals have asked her during public comments at board meetings. I have emailed her myself, but she does not answer. She has had plenty of time to create a website and put together her “facts”, and she criticizes Dr. Williams for not providing receipts to her in a timely fashion. Why can she not gather this information that WE have requested for weeks?? Simply asking Mr. Bailey how many accumulated hours he has recorded up to now is all that Mrs. Adams would need to do. We can all multiply the number of hours by $250 to get the final answer! $$$$$$$$$$

Your statement, “Attorneys don’t like to lose. That is a fact,” is not true. In every case 50% of the attorneys lose. They know this and accept it as a matter of fact. If not losing was a goal in their profession, then 50% of the time they fail. Your statement defies logic.

The role of the attorney as an agent of the court is to ensure their client’s rights are protected and to ensure that they represent their client to the best of their ability. Other than this, attorneys like to get paid. They do occasional pro bono work, but otherwise they do the job of providing legal advice and get paid to do it.

This is another example of why the school board majority is losing this battle. They and their supporters convince themselves of something’s truth without consideration of reality. It is very easy to convince yourself that Dr. Williams has done all manner of bad things if you conduct the investigation in a vacuum. I am very thankful to TBPS for ensuring the vacuum is filled with facts and reality.

And trial lawyers do NOT bill until someone gets tired of paying the bill-it is quite unethical and many attorneys have had their licenses taken away for the very practice. A common misconception that people have of lawyers/attorneys. I wish someone would question Lou Borgman and his billing practices.

The bylaws of the School Board, State Board of Accounts bylaws, and Indiana Code ALONE is enough to fire Dr. Williams. Like I said earlier, I encourage independent research on this matter. I did it and it was interestingly enough quite easy. And Not Impressed was right in stating “Bailey, hired by the four, now represents the entire board, as he should. He cannot conduct an investigation because it would be a conflict of interest against the school corporation.” and that was all I was trying to say as well. I will commend Not Impressed for wording it better than I.

My opinion (from reading years of legalese briefs) is that Mr. Bailey is trying to bow out of an impossible situation. He suggests hiring additional attorneys to do the investigation and has provided a list of attys.

I don’t know how you get your information. I ask. I don’t know if it’s public knowledge or if it’s supposed to be, so it’s not my job to make it public, or my sources public.

You didn’t read my reply about Bailey. He is a board atty and deals with board issues. He may be at the next meeting. There has been no invoice submitted to the board, and his rate is $205 per hour. Most attys bill in 10 minute increments.

You are right about Mrs. Adams. She’s been very vocal about others not being forthcoming in providing her information, but doesn’t feel she needs to be as forthcoming in providing information. What little she does provide is confusing and poorly organized, and not substantiated. Even her resolutions lack focus and clarity.

Valid point. Thank you.

As far as fees for Mr. Borgman….I believe several months ago it was stated at the board meeting that his services are only $75 per hour, which is nearly 1/3 the cost of Mr. Bailey.

Even if Mr. Bailey chooses to bill quarterly, he has been representing the board since early October. That’s more than ‘a quarter’. Surely Mr. Bailey has shared SOME idea of the number of hours that have accumulated by now. If he has not, then Mrs. Adams needs to be asking!! I have a feeling that if she had an attorney representing her personally and it was her own bill to pay, that she would be asking the approximate amount she owed. It’s just irresponsible not to inquire.

Isn’t that what Adams is doing? Isn’t she overseeing the spending of revenues, the hiring of key personnel, contract obligations and setting the policies and practices to direct day-to-day operations?

Overseeing of revenue spending: Williams allowed the township to buy $700 worth of tenderloin dinners. Everyone has to admit this was wasteful. She questions travel expenses and Williams refuses to produce receipts.

Hiring of key personnel: sitting on a committee to oversee hiring, did not Williams strongly oppose this?

Contract obligations: Adams questions the value of the Edison contract. Is not that the job to question it’s value?

Setting of policy: Adams ask Williams to stop the negative comments about the board and he refuses (BB & shotgun comments). Was not his day-to-day activity in violation of that policy?

Since Adams IS doing her job, what is the fuss all about?

Regarding hiring key personnel, with the leadership skills and personal ethics of Susan Adams that I’ve personally seen by attending board meetings, I wouldn’t trust her to hire somebody to mow my yard, much less a position in our township.

It’s absolutely fine for Susan Adams to question the value of the Edison schools and share her opinions of them. The problem is when she doesn’t do the research or ignores the findings and presents incomplete truth to try and validate her opinions.

If the entire case for getting rid of Dr. Williams is the violation of the stated policies you suggest. Then the entire board should step down as well. Since Dr. Williams works for the board, did they follow procedure for verbal and written warnings with agreed and stated expectations and timeline for fulfilling the requirements? No? They just put him on paid administrative leave. Seems a little like overkill.

The comments suggest a lack of real-world experience.

Kelly M/S,

The State Board of Accounts has an obligation in their findings to look at ‘intent’. Sloppy bookkeeping is one thing and is not something you necessarily fire someone for - particularly if they weren’t directly responsible for the bookkeeping. Fraud and misuse is another thing. The State Board of Accounts leaned on the side of sloppiness in their findings. If you audit any larger corporation’s books you will find things that look irregular - it’s just the nature of the beast.

Why do you find a need to interpret these findings as an intent to misuse? Would you not want someone to look at your intent?

I am 24 years old, a paralegal and currently a law student. That is where I base my knowledge and fact. Maybe I don’t have 40 yrs of “real-world” experience in your opinion, but I am going to use what knowledge and fact finding investigative resources that I do have at my fingertips to find the truth in any capacity that I can.

I could be wrong, but based on the information I have in front of me, you should already know the answer to the question you have asked of me. Although again, as I have stated before, I found this out on my own. It’s very easy to research these simple questions; especially when you know what you are looking for.

Kelly M/S, as a paralegal and law student, you are and will be held to a higher standard in everything you do…..especially when it comes to disclosing easy to find “known” information. The nature of your profession dictates that level of professional standard.
I am not saying I agree with it, but as the spouse of an attorney I am very aware of that standard.

What I’m about to say probably won’t be very popular, but it’s the way I feel. Although I don’t understand all of the details of NCLB, I believe the desire to not have any of our children be ill equipped for the real world should be pursued. Therefore we should strive to provide as good an opportunity for them to learn as possible.

My problem is that if teachers have to consistently slow down or degrade the efforts of their task to educate the majority of children that are succeeding at the given pace, it’s only further dumbing down the entire community.

Mr. Robbins said Dr. Williams articulated at the Opening Day meeting
how difficult education has become with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) standards that are in place. He believes that having two elementary schools published in the newspaper as deficient schools must be
demoralizing and hurtful not only to those in the schools, but to the entire educational community. Mr. Robbins said Dr. Williams explained at the Opening Day meeting that NCLB standards aren’t working as they should and the tests don’t measure the success of the teachers. The standards don’t reward teachers for their efforts, but actually punish them for their work. Mr. Robbins believes that Dr. Williams’ comments at the meeting would soften the effects of NCLB and motivate all teachers. He said Dr. Williams’ comments needed to be made and he appreciates the fact that he was willing to speak about it.

From the minutes of 11/10/03

Mr. Maple said the more he reads national coverage the more obvious it becomes that educators throughout the country are frustrated with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. He noted that the emphasis is on criticizing public schools and making it virtually impossible for them to succeed. Mr. Maple believes this school corporation needs to continue to emphasize serious reservations about the statute and that we won’t be complacent about the federal government destroying public schools. He noted that there was an article in the New York Times about the Houston school corporation underreporting their crimes and that the current Secretary of Education was selected from the Houston school system.

From the minutes of 09/12/05

Dr. Williams noted that our schools would be conducting ISTEP testing next week. He informed the Board that he will continue to keep them informed on our progress and how it relates to the current No Child Left Behind Act.

On Norman Clampitt, I believe he has run for a Perry board position several times and has never had enough support to win. If memory serves me correctly, he’s been a pretty outspoken opponent of the majority of past and present board members and administrators.

What I have heard from those who knew him is that he has an axe to grind with not being supported by adminstration while he was a teacher. He has been retired for quite some time.

I think he feels he wasn’t treated well by Williams during Norm’s time as a teacher, hence the grudge.

Notice that many of the people leading the “Ditch Doug” movement all have grudges?

Kelly, be careful. You are receiving your information from dangerous people. They have turned on many people and won’t blink an eye before turning on you. I hope in your research you find what we have. Nothing! The only thing they really have is that they don’t like Dr. Williams’ personality–I wonder if a personality conflict is really worth the thousands of dollars they are willing to waste!

In saying it was gossip, I was stating that I had specifically heard gossip and wanted fact to back it up. I didn’t want anyone thinking I was putting out false information about Dr. Williams. It was gossip but if it is found to be true then how much longer would he have stayed in Perry anyway? That’s my main point to that question and if it is gossip then I will apologize as again, I do not want to relay false information about him when there is already plenty of that to go around.

Regardless of my opinions of anyone in opposition to my views, if they requested information from me that I had in my posession and the authority to provide to them, I’d do without question. I’m not sure why you couldn’t provide the same consideration. If we’re truly all in this together and trying to move forward in all of this mess, I don’t see how withholding information that you state is publicly available is helping the situation at all.

If you’d like me to personally give you a call to request the information, just let me know.

I find it interesting when certain individuals want to claim that they know something for a fact, yet they refuse to back it up. It seems rather childish to make a claim, then to say that if others want to know it, they’ll have to figure it out for themselves. It’s like saying, “I’ve got a new toy, and I’m not going to share it! If you want one…….you’ll have to get your own!”

I feel that this website is designed to SHARE information with others……as well as the source of said information. If Lee Robbins and Dr. Williams are truly “related” to the editors of the newspapers, then anyone with proof of that knowledge should gladly share it. Otherwise, it is nothing more than gossip.

As far as Teri Margason goes…….I’m proud of her for speaking up and standing up for what she believes in. She did an awesome job speaking last evening. She is a lovely person with a lovely family. Our daughters danced together as young girls, and I have had great respect for her as a parent, as well. Teri…….please don’t let the ugly words of individuals tear you down.

ALL of the individuals who spoke last evening did a terrific job, and I thank you for being the “voice” for many. I particularly enjoyed Barbara Need adding a touch of humor to this very heart-wrenching situation!! The board majority certainly have given women a bad name!

No one likes to be attacked or insulted (as it has been pointed out to me). Please leave Teri M out of this discussion as she didn’t bring it up, you did. You said you have this proof. All anyone has asked is for you to provide the proof. Please do not deflect; just back up your statements with facts.

My goodness! I checked all of those websites and find only general info about the govt. agency or assn. Any conclusions about Dr. Williams’ behavior is totally your interpretation of codes, laws, policies, etc. What you say is just more unfounded, unsustantiated gibberish. Let’s hear specifics with evidence!

Also, whether one attorney steps down or not, he is still an additional attorney on the payroll. We now have 4 attorneys -Mr. Borgman, John Bailey, the new gun from Lafayette, and his asst. That makes 4 attorneys we are paying. No matter how you count them, there are 4!

They are not CONCLUDING any investigation; they are
BEGINNING it. Your gang of 4 have already admitted that.

Attorneys don’t want to lose UNLESS they they see a goldmine being given to them by “easily-had,” incompetent women. Don’t be so naive, Kelly M/S.

Kelly M/S is just having some sort of sick fun with us who are so tied up in this township morass. Kelly M/S seems to enjoy being irrational because he/she knows it bothers many of us who take this situation so seriously.

I say let’s ignore Kelly M/S and turn our discussion to folks who really do not understand or agree with anti-board folks for legitimate, substantiated reasons. I love open discussion, and I encourage it. I wish there were more of it - esp. at school board meetings.

When someone comes up with a specific ‘wrongdoing’ and ties it with a specific code, I will listen,and then go look for myself. But whenever someone comes up and says they’ve read this and that and it proves that someone has done wrong without stating which specific code matched what specific wrong, I just ignore them. They’re nothing more than pot stirrers.

The truth is that nearly weekly it can be said that these women are guilty of the same abuses that they found themselves unable to tolerate out of others.

I have a call in to the administrative office right now asking why the funds set aside for 2 members of the board to attend the NASB conference in April are $400 more EACH than the other 2. I want to know why they couldn’t have made arrangements back when it was $160 less per person to attend.

It just appalls me when someone is griping about a $5 coke and a $700 meal (that THEY asked for) and then turn around and think nothing of pi$$ing away $1440 on a weekend in San Francisco, $8500 on a lawyer, and even the snacks they insist upon having served to them during board meetings.

They need to get a clue that this works both ways.