 |
Logo of PHS Cardinals. |
That is the question that arose last week as word got around that the District might have to cancel last Saturday's game between the PHS Cardinals and Montgomery at Hub Stine Field. The cancellation would have meant forfeiting the game, Plainfield's third of the current season.
The reason for the threatened cancellation was that students' sports physicals for the current season had not been properly processed, even though they were submitted over the summer and the season's sports events had already gotten under way.
As a matter of fact, Saturday's game against Montgomery was the third of the season, suggesting that the previous two games, played with the same students whose physicals had not been certified, left the District exposed to potential liability suits if any players fell victim to pre-existing conditions.
Students wanting to participate in District sports programs must take a physical exam over the summer, which then must be individually certified by school nurses.
I noted in August (see here) that the District was awarding a contract to Plainfield's Neighborhood Health Services Center that rang up at $107,000 per year and included athletic physicals.
I have also been told that the school nurses were paid for the work, though it seems not to have been performed -- causing the panic last week when it was discovered.
No one has taken the blame for the failure to certify the students' physicals, but it seems clear that the District dropped the ball after a Board of Ed member is said to have personally instigated the removal of Athletic Director Daniel Cone early in the summer. Cone honchoed the athletic physicals process. No replacement was in place until the school year began. (Full disclosure: Daniel Cone grew up next door to me.)
Now I have been told that the nurses were paid (again?!) and the reviews and certifications of the physicals was mostly completed by the end of school last Friday. Was this a double payment for the same work?
In the secretive world of the Board of Ed, it is always difficult to get answers to questions about dubious policies and practices.
But the public does have a chance for input -- at the ballot box. Two current board members -- president Wilma Campbell and Frederick D. Moore, Sr. -- are part of a slate that also includes Plainfield's newest blogger David Rutherford.
Campbell has fallen into an ethical morass after engineering the selection of a law firm for the District that has business ties with her husband.
Time to sweep the stables clean!
Posts
3 comments:
There's no need to fear Pootie Tang is here
ALL the board members need to GO, every last one of them! They do nothing for the District, they don't even show up at any of the schools they claim to support! A few members children attend these schools and they do NOTHING! It's shameful! What does Plainfield BOE and Congress have in common? Plenty because they do NOTHING!
We'll see if Plainfied wakes up. The head of this team is the epitome of hypocrisy. She purports to be an instrument of integrity but has cut so many shady deals that it is disgusting.
If they are reelected then Plainfield will continue to prove how inept and disgraceful it is when it comes to our children.
They have pilfered the district long enough.
Time for change.
Post a Comment