This weeks Lakeville Journal has a great story on the annuity of Patricia Chamberlain 11

The Lakeville Journal has a great story on the annuity of Patricia Chamberlain

Here is a link to the Tricornernews.com the Lakeville Journal website…

http://tricornernews.com

Some excerpts from the story….

An April 13 email letter to the Region One Board of Education from former Assistant Business Manager Choo K. Singer, who worked for Region One from 1991 to 2010, raises questions about how Region One Superintendent Patricia Chamberlain’s annuity has been handled for tax and pension purposes. The letter, which has been widely circulated and posted on a website run by WHDD radio’s Marshall Miles, claims that Region One Business Manager Sam Herrick was wrong when he said at the April 4 public hearing on the Region One budget proposal “that the superintendent’s annuity had always been part of her base salary and had been reported as pensionable income to the Connecticut Teacher Retirement Board (CTRB). Herrick said in a phone interview Tuesday, April 17, that he did not dispute the substance of Singer’s letter. He said that at the public hearing he incorrectly stated that Chamberlain’s annuity had been processed through payroll, when in fact it had not until the current fiscal year. “I thought we had been doing it that way.” Region One board attorney Gary Brochu sent a memo to Region One Chairman Phil Hart Tuesday, April 17, stating “there is nothing illegal or inappropriate with the superintendent receiving some compensation in the form of a tax-sheltered annuity.” Brochu’s memo also says there is no prohibition on converting a nonelective annuity benefit to an elective annuity benefit. In a phone interview April 17, Brochu said, “The Board of Education and any employee are entitled to negotiate [contracts] as they see it.” He said that the CTRB evaluates the pension claims of retiring employees on a case-by-case basis, and in the event of a problem, it’s between the employee and the retirement board. “It has nothing to do with the school district,” he said.“The only impact is on the employee.”

Singer was out-of-town this week but said in an email ask ing for comment that her letter describes the “superintendent’s deliberate attempt to ‘deceive the public’ and get around the state government regulation for her personal gain through the business manager.” She also said that, “The annuity may not have any impact on our budget now but it could be costly to all Connecticut taxpayers in the future, if the public school administrators find a way to inflate the pension base a few years before their
retirement.”

 

regiononereport’s comment on this story…

Get the paper, read the whole story, you will see, that Choo Singer is right on target, it’s not what is paid now, but what we all will pay well into the future on a “pumped up”, deceptive retirement plan for our Superintendent.

 

11 comments

  1. The article also clearly says the annuities will have no impact on the budget. Are we still supposed to vote against it?

  2. Yes! The article says NO IMPACT ON THE BUDGET THIS YEAR (the article is on the Superintendents annuity only):

    1) The annuity for the Assistant is NEW this year, it DOES impact the budget this year.
    2) The annuity is only a part of the objection to the budget…the budget contains erroneous statements and language on the “extensions” of the administrations contracts. Each “extended” contract has NEW items in it, from new annuities, to more sick and vacation days, some have “raises” on top of the yearly raises…they are not “extensions”, they are NEW contracts. New contacts that were renegotiated in the first year of a three year contract.

    All the Board Of Education has to do to pass this budget EASILY, is to stick to the current contracts the administrators have, and open negotiations with administrator in the final year of their contract (as is stated in their contracts).

    The rest of the “accounting” problems can be addressed next year.

    • I asked a simple question. Go ahead and vote against the budget if it makes you feel better. We’re talking about a relatively small amount of money with these annuities and they don’t affect the quality of education in the region. How about looking at the budget itself? Programs, teacher-student ratios, Title 1 — things that really matter. Oh, but that would take some real digging and it might put your listeners to sleep. This annuity fight helps you with publicity for your station but it’s a fly-speck, really.

      • You asked a simple question, and you received a simple answer. Do you deny the story was not about ONE PERSONS CONTRACT? Answer NO! Do you deny that adding an additional annuity, adding more vacation days, more sick days to a contract is not extending the same contract, but changing a contract? Answer NO! Do you deny that change is not an extension? Answer NO! Again…it has NEVER been about the amount…it is about PROCESS. It simply is WRONG to take three year contracts and renegotiate them every year and then call them extensions. It never has been about money, it’s about honesty, process, and about honoring a contract with the taxpayers of Region One that you signed for three years. Honesty, honor and process. Three simple words. We can get into the Regions declining test scores, and academic achievements at a later time. That discussion is still to come. What appears to be a fly-speck is your knowledge and understanding about what the real issue is…honoring a commitment to the taxpayers of Region One for three years.

  3. I don’t deny anything. I’m saying you’re on a personal mission to destroy the top two admins in Region One, as evidenced by your obsession with them and their contracts to the exclusion of almost everything else.

    • Ah, so the writer is unmasked! No I am on a quest to have ALL the administrative contracts honored. The only way we can legally vote on the budget is a simple yes or no, so until contracts that are negotiated for three years are not renegotiated every year, it is a NO vote on the budget.

    • Our email to the Gilbert School and Terry Cowgill today after a post from The Gilbert School on regiononereport.com

      Dear Headmaster Hatch:

      I am not sure if The Gilbert School has rules about employees posting on social or internet web sites while at work, most schools do have rules
      against that. It’s obvious that one of your employees likes to use your computers to post personal opinions and commentary on your dime.

      Just thought you would like to know.

      I do believe, Terrry Cowgill is the employee as he constantly says in posts on other sites what this post says, and I do believe he is an employee of The Gilbert School.
      Now mind you I don’t mind his opinion of me, or my views, I do mind tht he is not doing it on his personal time.

      Thank you for you attention.

      Marshall Miles

      Terry Cowgill’s reply to me

      Terry Cowgill
      9:23 AM (8 minutes ago)

      We’re a private school, you fool. You are a pathetic thieving hack.

      Terry Cowgill
      9:24 AM (7 minutes ago)

      Plus, I don’t even work for Dan Hatch.

  4. More bile from Terry Cowgill and my final response…

    Terry Cowgill 9:54 AM (4 minutes ago)
    Now you’ve reached a new low. Posting private emails publicly. Your bullying tactics may work with some, but I will not intimidated by your attempts to silence me.

    Marshall Miles
    9:58 AM
    to Terry

    Write on, I removed your email address from the posts, but people should know how nasty, mean spirited your are. And now for this, any more emails from you will be considered harassment, and be reported to your email provider. This is the first and only time your will receive this notice.

  5. More email from Mr. Cowgill even after he was told NOT to email us anymore, guess he finds it hard to follow instructions, rules. Maybe he was trained by Aeron Watson.

    On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Terry Cowgill
    wrote:

    And you can’t even hector people without exposing yourself as a hypocrite.

    You have harassed me using your business email to conduct your personal affairs. I thought you objected to using company resources for such purposes. Shame on you. Maybe I should tell you boss — or the FCC …

    Our response from regiononereport.com
    BTW: Our company rules ALLOW personal use of the internet..for everyone.
    And the FCC could care less about a business workplace rule….

  6. Ahhhh, just followed great advice and added Terry Cowgill to the spam bin. He can send all he wants, but for everyone here his emails go to spam, never to be seen! (One problem solved today!)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s