Crappiest Reporting This Year (and It's Only May)!

Ousted Monroe-Woodbury school board chief blames administrative changes, influence of teacher’s union


By John Sullivan


May 17, 2007
Central Valley - Recent reviews of Monroe-Woodbury schools have been nothing but glowing.

Morale at the high school and middle schools has never been better under new Principals Aldo Fillipone and Elsie Rodriguez.

The school budget considered outrageous two years ago is the lowest it has been in years. And parents and students can’t say enough about all the good things happening in the classrooms.

So why then did a field of three relatively unknown challengers running on a platform of change, easily oust a 13-year-incumbent and her running mates? Answers to that question remain unclear in an election being described by some as an attempt by teachers and administrators to gain influence over decisions long controlled by powerful school board President Claire Perez. Her running mates were Elizabeth Levine, who was also an incumbent, and Joseph Ross.

“The perception in the community was that Claire was too powerful,” said board member John Huberth, whose seat was not up for re-election. “It was parents and residents, but I also think it was staff.

”Huberth disagreed with this perception of Perez, who he described as an effective leader, but it was clear that a contingent of people in the community did hold this opinion.

The winners of the election were evasive in their responses to questions about their campaign.

James Galvin, for example, declined to offer specifics when questioned about comments he made to the Times Herald-Record that staff and parents were being ignored by the current leadership. “To the degree that this was a contested election, that’s over, and now it’s a question of how are we going to go forward from here,” he said.

Galvin’s running mate Erich Tusch was equally brief. “We knew that there were rumbling in the community, where they were not happy with our incumbents,” he said.

Attempts to reach Michael DiGeronimo, who received the most votes, were unsuccessful.

The three ran against Perez, Levine and Ross.

Perez interpreted her opponents’ reluctance to talk as a sign of their deceptiveness. She claimed the candidates ran to gain power for teachers and administrators who feel disenfranchised by recent changes in the central administration. Some of those changes include greater financial accountability, more demands on teacher performance, and scrutiny of staff who take sick leave or go home early without explanations. “As a result, we have some very disgruntled and unhappy teachers and directors, and obviously they have taken over the teachers union,” said Theresa Budich, school board vice president and a Perez supporter.

Perez and Budich alleged that some union teachers and administrators opposed to Perez used their influence to mobilize their colleagues to show support for DiGeronimo and his running mates. The grass-roots effort proved pivotal in an election with the lowest turnout in five years, Perez said.

“This was a turnout orchestrated by the union,” Perez said, adding that she did not suspect all members of the union of supporting the opposition.

“Either it was controlled by the union, which is troubling, or the union has lost control of its members, which is also troubling,” she said.

Anne Pavek, the head of Monroe-Woodbury’s teachers union denied any adversarial relationship between teachers and the current district leadership. She also dismissed Perez’s claim that DiGeronimo’s wife, who is a union member, influenced his decision to run.

“Every school board member has a relationship with the district, whether it be through a child or as members of the community,” she said. “So, I would not try to pick apart why any one member is running for the board.”


Wowie Zowie! Fresh from his blunders in reporting on the imminent $215,000 payout by Woodbury that doesn't exist, cracked reporter John Sullivan screws up another story.

By finding exactly the wrong people to listen to (again) Sullivan comes up with this stinkeroo.

"The winners of the election were evasive in their responses to questions about their campaign."

OMIGOD, evasive? How so?

"James Galvin, for example, declined to offer specifics when questioned about comments he made to the Times Herald-Record that staff and parents were being ignored by the current leadership. 'To the degree that this was a contested election, that’s over, and now it’s a question of how are we going to go forward from here,' he said."

Ah, so AFTER the election is over, Galvin refuses to go on bashing the losers. Boy, that's evasive! How dare he!?!

But the winning candidates aren't the only villains of the piece. There's the EVIL UNION.

"Perez and Budich alleged that some union teachers and administrators opposed to Perez used their influence to mobilize their colleagues to show support for DiGeronimo and his running mates."

Holy Crud! You mean that certain people who liked one set of candidates encouraged others to vote for those candidates? How low can you get?

But there's more. "The grass-roots effort proved pivotal in an election with the lowest turnout in five years, Perez said.

“This was a turnout orchestrated by the union,” Perez said, adding that she did not suspect all members of the union of supporting the opposition."

In other words, those awful people who did vote ended up getting their way simply because other people didn't vote. Where will this manipulation of society end?

And the "turnout was orchestrated by the union." Somehow the EVIL UNION convinced its lackeys to show up at the polls despite the fact that others (supposedly folks who support Perez) couldn't be bothered. That EVIL UNION is soooooo manipulative.

And what's worse: “Either it was controlled by the union, which is troubling, or the union has lost control of its members, which is also troubling,”

SO, either the EVIL UNION got its supporters to vote (disgusting) or they didn't (also disgusting).

One question.

Since Galvin, Tusch and DiGeronimo were evasive because they didn't see the need to kick the losers once the election was over - how come it didn't occur to Sullivan to ask Perez and Budich to explain what the f**k they were talking about?