Saturday, January 11, 2014

Gloucester, VA A Letter From The Kiser, School Board Superintendant

I am in receipt of your complaint alleging a violation of policy regarding an employee driving a School Board-owned vehicle. The School Board Policy reads “Employees are prohibited from utilizing school property for personal use or gain.” School Board owned vehicles are provided to employees to use during the work day to accomplish tasks throughout the county at 8 different schools. Most of our vehicles are used vehicles with high mileage and the availability of these vehicles, for employee use, actually saves the county money and time. This resource also creates efficiency with our technicians moving from site to site.

Our Director of Facilities manages our technicians, their schedule, and the use of vehicles. He continually has conversations with them about how they use the vehicles to ensure that taxpayer money is not abused. We do not consider a technician occasionally stopping at a convenience store between sites or at a fast-food restaurant between sites as abuse or a violation of the School Board Policy.

Our technicians begin their days early and work hard to ensure that schools are safe and orderly for children and staff. We take our stewardship responsibility of public monies seriously and your pictures have been shared with our Facilities Director.

Ben Kiser, Division Superintendent

Gloucester County Public Schools

This was sent to us and it speaks for itself.  We had no idea that a straightforward law was open to such broad interpretations.  VDOT does not seem to share these sentiments from what we have learned.  Neither does the county from emails we have gathered.  Yet the schools consider themselves exempt from having to follow what everyone else in the state has to follow in state government?  Wow, that is simply amazing.  

  Guess the Kiser failed to factor in the potential insurance consequences should an employee cause an accident in an area where he was not designated to be and conducting personal business?  From what we understand, no insurance company would be obligated to pay anything on a claim because of the above.  Instead, the county would get stuck with the bill which means that you, the taxpayer pays the claim through taxes.  That is not abuse?  That is not fraud?  We do not discount that the employees work hard.  We are sure they do.  But that should exempt them from state laws how?  

We take our stewardship responsibility of public monies seriously .

Can you then please explain to us the Page Middle School issues then?  We simply do not see this statement as factual and we keep uncovering still many more issues that will soon be coming forward.  For that matter, can you explain the issues with the TC Walker school?  At least the Kiser sent this response through his county assigned email address.  Yeah, we are watching.

Oh, and here is the string he copied his response to;  More personal email addresses in here.  

 Randy Burak
 Kevin's Phone
 Anita Parker
 Kimberly Hensley
 Carla Hook
 Troy Andersen
 Charles Records <
 Dave Miller
 John Hutchinson

Clear evidence that county officials have no problems with conducting
county business using personal email addresses.  Evidence is right in
front of everyone.  So what are they hiding?  You really have to wonder.
Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank You for taking the time to comment on this article. Please note, we moderate every comment before we allow it to post. Comments do not show up right away because of this.