|
Another wrinkle Some time ago, information was passed to me about the hiring of Joe Dziadik as Business Administrator for our District. I was advised that a problem existed in his background, that he carried "baggage," and further that Richard Rhau very likely had knowledge of the problem but had basically brushed it off during the hiring process. But no one seemed to know just what that "baggage" was. Finally, I have been able to get to the root of the allegation, and it is a bombshell. And, not surprisingly, it adds a new wrinkle to Rhau's questionable credibility! Early in 2005, Superintendent Richard Rhau and Assistant-Superintendent Cheryl Nucifaro made a recommendation to the Saugerties Board of Education that the board hire Joseph Dziadik, of Phoenix, New York, as the new district business administrator (out of 21-applicants for the position). I was told that Rhau informed the board that Dziadik had had a little trouble with his former employment but that "it was no big deal," and "would not affect his job here in the District." The board took Rhau's and Nucifaro's recommendations and hired Dziadik, who now earns more than $100,000 per year plus benefits in his position with the Saugerties School District. He does not own any property in this Town nor pay any taxes locally. To date, Rhau has never told the board exactly what constituted that "little trouble." Now, for the first time, we can reveal. the "baggage" that Dziadik brought with him when he took the position of business administrator for the Saugerties School District. The sad part is what happened there could also happen here.
Discovery of a Huge Deficit The Fabius-Pompey School District (where Dzidiak had been employed for five years prior to coming to Saugerties) sent a letter informing the public of a "large and unforeseen deficit" of nearly $600,000 dollars for the 2003-2004 budget, and indicating that District officials were looking at an annual independent audit to figure out just what happened. The letter also stated, "Our former business manager failed to inform the Board of Education and superintendent of the accurate information relevant to the 2003-2004 budget, and withheld information concerning shortages in this year's budget since last August." Taxpayers couldn't believe the amount, and wondered where it was and how such a shortage developed. One parent commented, "... I know that the business manger just took another job out of town [in Saugerties], and while I don't have all of the facts, those two things seem a little incongruent," and that's exactly what many parents were saying about former business manager, Joseph Dziadik. When questioned by the local news (News 10 Now), Dziadik commented that he was "disappointed the letter went out with that language...." and that he had done his "best." He also insisted that the board had been "constantly" informed for three years about "budget tightness." But according to members of the board of education, they too, had only recently learned about the budget shortfall, stating, "Our previous business manager knew about the year-end deficit, and did not inform the board of education or the superintendent. We had several budget meetings this fall with no indication from the business manager of any budget deficit ..." Meeting to Discuss Audit As a result of financial trouble the district found itself in, they hired an auditor to conduct a full review and a forensic audit was planned to look for any illegal actions. The district also froze all non-health and safety spending and held a public meeting to discuss the findings of the audit, with a full crowd showing up to hear from district officials about the story that had broken regarding the huge budget deficit. The report concluded that the deficit was the result of overspending by almost $200,000 together with a lack of expected state-aid. Dziadik would not comment on the meeting until he could review the audit in detail. The Cost to the Taxpayers As a result of the story that had broken on mismanagement in the Fabius-Pompey School District, voters rejected a proposed budget and sent the board members "back to the drawing board" to come up with a new plan, one that could include more position and program cuts. The proposed budget included a tax increase between five and seven percent for most people, but in the end, concerns over the deficit won out. Eventually voters in the district approved a revised budget proposal. The downside is that the budget came with a tax increase of 21 percent. Let all this be a lesson to us. The saugertieswatchdog.com web site's copy of this article contains links to the News-10-Now web site where these articles are offered in more and further detail, in both audio and a printed version for reading. Available space here prohibits such in-depth detail, but readers are encouraged to read or listen to them online. What is the Root of the Problem? There are so many questions surrounding the events in Fabius-Pompey and the speculation here as a result of those questions is a natural outcome. After all, having a "minor problem" relating to finances, the very nature of his responsibilities here, and keeping the substance of that "minor problem" hidden, creates the appearance of impropriety and brings about speculation, suspicion, and loads of questions. One has to ask: "What did the board know? Just who on the board knew? Did they all know the same thing? Did then-president Buono know? .... obviously Rhau knew something. Of course we don't know exactly how much he knew as he just brushed it off as a minor annoyance." Dziadik is the one who signed Rhau's vouchers (the ones that other board members never saw or approved beforehand). He also signed the voucher for the $160 reimbursement for vehicle expenses incurred by Rhau on the Boston trip (which Rhau wasn't entitled to), signed off on the Chowhound bills, etc., and signed purchase orders relating to Rhau's coast-to-coast trips. As open to criticism as that seemed earlier, it is even more questionable now. And even more eyebrow-raising, Dziadik also submitted and authorized his own vouchers, as well as Cheryl's trips and vouchers. Did Rhau truly feel that the problem in Dziadik's background was just a minor or insignificant problem, not even worthy of addressing, as it seems he suggested, or is there more to it? As the superintendent, it is incumbent upon Rhau to bring such matters to the attention of all board members for discussion–certainly his loyalties should lie with the school district that employs him. Why didn't he? Is there some other connection between Rhau and Dziadik? Was one hand washing the other here? Did Rhau know Dziadik before he applied for the job? Was there some other influence in play here? Did Cheryl Nucifaro know Dziadik prior to the application.....is the connection there? Just who, if anyone, does background checks on proposed employees? Rhau and Nucifaro were the two in Dziadik's corner–and the first to interview him.. Can we presume that this was their faux-pas? The entire matter is suspicious. And it's when these other bits of information are factored in that really makes you wonder exactly what is going on here, and, mainly, could Saugerties face similar mismanagement and budgetary problems as they did in the Fabius-Pompey School District? Will we pay the price? I think everyone knows where I stand on Rhau and Nucifaro. In my opinion they have taken unprecedented advantage of Saugerties at every possible turn. Are these three amigos taking us to the cleaners? Dziadik Fails to Acknowledge Conflict of Interest Then there is the matter of the conflict of interest vs. McCaig issue. The State auditor's report stated unequivocally that it is a conflict of interest to have an immediate family member of a board member serve as internal claims auditor. In other words, Don McCaig should not be internal claims auditor while his brother, Bob McCaig, is a school board member. (In a footnote, the report defined "close and immediate family" to include, among others, sibling.) The rules are clear, but when questioned about it, Dziadik acted as if he had no knowledge of these requirements. About a month ago I made an e-mail inquiry of Joe Dziadik regarding the status of Don McCaig. His response to my question, also by e-mail, was, "Don McCaig is the District's Internal Claims Auditor - originally appointed back in February of 1995 and is appointed each year at the Board's annual organization meeting in July." He concluded his e-mail with the statement, " After December of 2006 the District will have one ... and one (1) Internal Claims Auditor (Don McCaig). Does this answer your question?" I think we may conclude that Don McCaig is the Internal Claims Auditor. I subsequently followed up my inquiry with a further question as to whether there had been any discussion about my "conflict of interest" concern when the school's Audit Committee met. The response was a "we'll research, assess and get back to you" type of answer." In other words, lip service. Joe Dziadik knows how to read. Why has he chosen to ignore the "black and white" requirements? Has he withheld this knowledge from the board? Diligence Needed for a Sound Future And finally, it is my understanding that Dziadik will be placed in charge of the $25-million reconstruction and repair project. Will the Saugerties taxpayers be protected better than the Fabius-Pompey taxpayers? Will the Saugerties School Board be kept better informed than the Fabius-Pompey School Board? If so, who is going to do it?
The following can be used to reference the article/video) ( click for Video-1 - then click Play in the Watch The Video box ) ( click for Video-2 - then click Play in the Watch The Video box ) ( click for Video-3 - then click Play in the Watch The Video box ) George D. Heidcamp, Sr. September 14, 2006 |