The Beat Goes On During the past year and one-half I have written numerous articles with respect to the operations of the Saugerties Central School District, the School Board and its Administration. I have spent countless hours of personal time gathering information in order to keep the public informed about those operations, such as: nepotism and favoritism; conflict of interest; wasteful spending of taxpayers dollars; contract violations; inappropriate behavior; spitefulness; secret meetings; violations of the Open Government laws; failure to follow Court Orders; board members voting on issues that personally affect them and/or their families; thousands spent on trips and rented cars; failure by the board to establish checks and balances and accountability; board members calling other members derogatory and obscene names; unethical conduct; private luncheons with certain board members at taxpayers' expense; missing records mysteriously reappearing; board members' relatives given special assignments which require a stipend; board members jockeying for positions; hiring personnel with questionable backgrounds; board members sitting on contract negotiations while their siblings are teachers; board's refusal to answer public complaints during board meetings; board members seeking teaching positions for their children; administrative personnel charging 62-cents for driving down Washington Avenue and back; the abrupt termination of e-mails between the Administration and the Board; the borrowing of 4-million dollars and failure to tell certain board members; and the list goes on and on. While it's been 153-days without any official answer to my request to discuss some of these issues with the Board, I must give credit where it is due: under Brennan's leadership, together with the support of certain board members, some minor changes have been made in a positive direction and board meetings have become a little more organized and informative.   Rumors Although I've received many notes of appreciation for some of the eye-opening facts that I have uncovered, my efforts have also netted me a considerable amount of criticism from the "elite" members of the Saugerties School Board (and I think we all know the "good old boys" who belong to that "clique"—just go to any school board meeting to see them in a huddle in the corner). Condemnation has also come from their friends and certain members of the Administration, whose attempts to discredit me have proven to be an exercise in futility for them, and attempts to silence me have inspired me to work even harder. I've received numerous calls and e-mails from individuals who have come forward with information but have requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation—and rightfully so, I might add, since much of that info is shocking at best (some even unprintable). While I'm not a member of the Board and thus don't have the authority to determine the veracity of these allegations through an internal investigation, I still try to make it my business to fairly and accurately verify any accusations and/or rumors that seem to be newsworthy before reporting them. For instance, it has been alleged that a school principal who will be eligible to retire next year has been asked by the administration to stay on for another year to both help with the school project and to groom a hand-picked math teacher (who will remain nameless at this time) to replace him when he leaves. In an attempt to determine whether this information is true, I contacted the principal in question and asked him. I was assured by both he and that math teacher (in the presence of Mr Rhau) that the rumors are "not true." We'll see, but as of now, I have no reason to disbelieve them.....unless, of course, someone can prove otherwise.   Shocking Event At the December 12th school board meeting Superintendent Rhau, for the very first time since I've been attending these meetings, included information in his presentation to the board about a seminar that he had attended. In his presentation, he also explained how lawyers for the school were looking into making language changes to the Staff Protocol Handbook to bring it in line with a federal court order. These changes came right on the heels of a letter written by Donald Price (no relation to Tim Price) accusing two of the "elite" board members (McCaig and Kovac) of having an appalling ignorance of the rule of law in believing that they can choose to ignore a federal court order. Could this letter have inspired the administration to suddenly move on this issue because the "elite" were under fire? You be the judge on that one.   On Spending Taxpayer Dollars According to a newspaper report (December 7, 2006), Business Manager Joe Dziadik stated that the District has already spent 1.3-million dollars on the school project, which includes "architectural, engineering and construction management fees," along with "legal and advertising costs." Seems like a lot of money to me–about one-half percent of the total bond. And, just what is "construction management fees," anyway? In order to continue to inform the public, I have FOILed for a specific detailed account of the 1.3-million dollars the District has already spent from the 4–million dollar Bond Anticipation Note (and, as a side note, the Superintendent has agreed to go over the information with me). Although no official documentation has been found indicating that the full board was aware of this loan, it is my understanding that former board president Buono signed the 4-million dollar note in June, shortly after the budget was defeated. As soon as I have compiled this information, it will be written up in The Heidcamp Report as well as appear on the Watchdog web site. In the meantime, Superintendent Rhau has assured me that the District will keep the public informed during the construction project. We'll see. But, in order to keep things in perspective, I will write a report as well, so we can compare it to the District's report.   More to come.... George D. Heidcamp, Sr. December 21, 2006