An open reply to Ms. Andrew

Ms. Andrew:

First, let me thank you for addressing our concerns.  However, although you state that I am “reading too much in to the date on a letter”, you add nothing to assuage those concerns.

Certainly you can understand how the Board of Education (BoE) contributed to the public’s skepticism by choosing to conduct the search for a new superintendent under a cloak of secrecy. The BoE continually asked us to believe that you had no knowledge of the identities of these candidates.

Perhaps I “read too much” into Rev, Tyus’s words in his letter-to-the editor dated 12/16/2009 wherein he wrote:

“CSA made over 80-plus contacts, of which they then screened over 60-plus applicants, and then presented 30 resumes to the board. Like any employer, the district wanted to have the largest possible pool of candidates from which to choose.”

Somehow, I “read into” that exactly what it says--that the MCSD BoE had, in their possession “30 resumes…of candidates from which to choose.” prior to your interviews with the “short list” of eight candidates on December 11^th and 12^th!

Need I remind you that not only Rev. Tyus, but also you and the other three BoE members signed that letter-to-the-editor?

In summary, Rev. Tyus’s letter (signed by the entire BoE) clearly states that the BoE had the resumes of the top THIRTY candidates in their possession not only PRIOR to December 11, but with enough lead time to narrow the THIRTY down to EIGHT with enough additional lead time for those eight to arrange trips to Middletown for interviews over the weekend of December 11. According to The Middletown Journal: “Board members Monday night, Dec. 7 said they have not received from their consultant the names of the candidates they will interview this weekend.”

Am I “reading too much” into this to wonder aloud, if the list had NOT been narrowed down yet from 30 to 8 by the night of December 7, and there were NO MEETINGS of the BoE between the December 7 meeting and the December 11^th and 12^th interviews, how in the world did the list get narrowed down from THIRTY to EIGHT???

And with all of these apparent conflicts, improbabilities and impossibilities in mind, what would you expect a reasonable person to “read into” the facts that:

1. You had in your possession the resumes of the top 30 (of over 80) applicants (apparently including those of Mr. Rasmussen, Mr. Sommers, and Mr. Martin) on December 7, but you did not know their identities.

2. The BoE somehow narrowed this group of 30 down to a shorter list of eight top candidates (apparently including Mr. Rasmussen, Mr. Sommers, and Mr. Martin) WITHOUT a BoE meeting in time for arrangements to be made for travel and scheduling to interview these top eight over the weekend of December 11 and 12.

3. On December 16, in a letter-to-the-Editor signed by the entire school board, Rev, Tyus announces the new, shorter short list consisting of: Mr. Rasmussen, Mr. Sommers, and Mr. Martin.

4. On January 6, 2010, the letters-of-interest and resumes of the three finalists are made public. Two of the three (those of Mr. Sommers, who later withdrew, and Mr. Rasmussen) are dated December 15, 2009, well AFTER the BoE were reported to have had same in-hand and just one day before the shorter short-list was revealed. The third letter-of-interest, that of Mr. Martin, had a header indicating that it had been faxed on December 19, 2009, from an unlisted telephone number in Toronto, Ontario, Canada..

5. On January 9^th, 2010, someone purporting to be Marcia Andrew posts on MiddletownUSA advising that I am “reading too much in to the date on a letter.”

You see, those five items are already a part of the "record"!  Please tell me, Ms. Andrews, what possible explanation is reasonable and plausible; is consistent the above facts; and does not involve miracles nor Santa’s magic sleigh!

Please lay out for me some scenario that would not require a child-like disbelief of reality to accept.

Please, Ms. Andrews, I want to trust Middletown’s public officials, but in order for that to occur, somehow the facts and what the public officials expect us to believe must somehow be reasonable.

The “record” is the “record”! Please go over the record of what has occurred and provide some logical, plausible explanation that makes everything fit together in a way that a reasonable person would conclude that everything on “the record” is true and above board, and all that follows is logical.

I really do want to hear it. I will try hard to believe! I will try very hard, but you have to give me something to work with!

Regards,

Mike Presta