News -> INDReporter THU, OCT 27 12:20PM by Heather Miller

Board games tainting LPSS super search

Some called it a “miscommunication.” Others went a step further and deemed it “misinformation.” But the events leading up to a heated Lafayette Parish School Board meeting Tuesday night, at which the board voted to widen the superintendent candidate field from 10 to 11 applicants, were nothing less than “troubling,” says board attorney Jimmy Simon.

Dr. Pat Cooper, one of 10 superintendent applicants selected by the board to be interviewed for the district’s top administrative slot, confirmed last week that if selected for the job he would be unable to start full-time until May 2012, five months later than the start date outlined when the board advertised for the position.

When he learned of the potential conflict, Board President Mark Babineaux, who also sits on the three-member Superintendent Selection Committee, called fellow committee member Tommy Angelle and school board Vice President Shelton Cobb to meet over what to do with the latest news. Cobb doesn’t sit on the super selection committee, but because the third committee member, school board member Hunter Beasley, was out of state, Cobb was called in Beasley’s place.

From the office of LPSS Marketing Director Angie Simoneaux, Babineaux called board attorney Simon for advice on how to proceed.

“The word disqualification remained in the back of my mind,” Babineaux said during Tuesday’s meeting. “Mr. Angelle and myself both felt that it was obvious because it started on Jan. 1, not any time later, and the fact that if we make an exception then we should possibly have to reopen the application process. Others might have submitted their application had they known we would make an exception.”

Simon, however, said in a later email to board members that the decision wasn’t Babineaux’s to make.

“I told Mark B at that time that an ‘emergency meeting’ including all board members should be held to decide whether this person was to be disqualified, and how his slot would be filled if so,” Simon wrote in that email.

Babineaux decided to call an emergency meeting of the committee, not the full board, scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Friday. Because Beasley was unable to attend, Board member Mark Cockerham was chosen to take Beasley’s place as the third committee member.

But sometime in between Thursday's phone call to Simon from Simoneaux’s office and Friday’s 2:30 meeting, Cooper had mysteriously withdrawn his name from the search, leaving the three committee members tasked with recommending someone to replace Cooper’s application to keep the field at 10 candidates. Cockerham was unable to attend the meeting, which left the committee with no quorum and therefore unable to take any action.

Unbeknownst to Simon — and apparently to most board members — Cooper had received a phone call from Simoneaux before the scheduled meeting, informing Cooper that the board’s wishes are for the new superintendent to start in January. The phone call to Cooper was made without formal meeting or vote from the board ever taking place.

“It is my legal opinion that, short of something to the contrary in writing, it takes a vote of the entire board to have someone removed from this list. Mark C told me that there are several board members that did not know what was happening last Friday. I find this very troubling, and I hope it is not the case," Simon wrote in the email to board members. "The entire board should be included in any decisions of this nature.” 

Confused over Cooper’s withdrawal, Cockerham, who says he views Cooper’s application as one of the strongest on the list, called Cooper to learn what prompted him to abandon the application process.

“I had a feeling something happened to make him pull out,” Cockerham says. “I called the number on his resume the next day and just asked him what happened. He said he got a phone call from Angie saying it would inconvenience the board, and he didn’t want to inconvenience us. I was livid. The only people that can disqualify a candidate is with a vote of the board.”

What’s more disturbing for board member Tehmi Chassion is that not only were he and other board members unaware of a scheduled committee meeting on Friday, he also received a thank you card in the mail over the weekend from Scott Middle Principal John Pate, who had already been informed by either Simoneaux or Babineaux that he would replace Cooper in the list of the top 10 candidates.

“I found out that a recommendation had pretty much been made, and Mr. Pate was going to be included in the top 10 on the news that night,” Chassion says. “It hit me like a brick in the head. In my eyes [Cooper] was one of the stronger candidates. But it wouldn’t have mattered one way or the other whether it was the number one candidate or the number 10, to inform someone that we have issues with your application without getting a majority vote of the board is just wrong. If you’re going to make it fair and gain the trust of the community, if we want to one day see taxes passed to rebuild the facilities, we’ve got to get the simple things right when it comes to a superintendent search.”

The board took Simon’s advice and “put the issue to rest as quickly as possible” with a 5-3 vote Tuesday to reinstate Cooper’s application and also include Pate in the field of candidates. Trahan, Babineaux and Angelle voted against Cooper being allowed back into the race. Beasley, Cockerham, Chassion, Cobb and board member Kermit Bouillion voted in favor of the measure. Board member Greg Awbrey was absent.

Coincidentally, Babineaux and board member Rae Trahan did not vote for Cooper as one of their top 10 candidates. Angelle was absent for the top 10 list vote due to an unavoidable family conflict, but he did tell The Advertiser recently that if he would have been present, Pate would have been included in his list of 10 candidates.

“I know with the [board] president being in the minority on a lot of things, it’s a little tricky,” Cockerham says. “I don’t think he speaks for us. It’s just one of those things. We’re really just lucky to get [Cooper] back in the race. My goal was to get him back in. That’s all I wanted to do. I don’t have a problem with him starting later if selected. I think if this is the person we choose to lead this system, that position is so important. If we gotta wait a couple of months to get that person, so be it. For what we’re trying to do in this system, it’s too important to just draw the line in the sand and say sorry, if you can’t start here, you’re out.”


Comments (23)add
...
written by Cracklin Patin , October 27, 2011 - 05:38 pm
What a story. No wonder the property tax failed.
...
written by blackchamberpot , October 27, 2011 - 06:11 pm
Stupid, more stupid and most stupid, or in this case stupid, stupider and stupidest.
...
written by Ophelia 46 , October 27, 2011 - 06:45 pm
Tehmi you are so right. To rebuild the trust of the public, the board cannot be using these kinds of underhanded tactics. Who told Simoneaux to call Cooper? It was obviously not done at the direction of the full committee or the full board. The Tea Party was vilified for opposing the tax, but this is just the kind of backroom dealing they were talking about. Stop the games and do the right thing. Now more than ever, we need a strong superintendent who can build consensus
...
written by Pedro , October 27, 2011 - 07:21 pm
Seems Simoneaux is a very good fit for central office. Her behavior is normal for central office. The word "disqualification" should always be in the FRONT of Babineaux's and Simon's minds. Neither man is qualified for their present position.
...
written by Helloooo , October 27, 2011 - 11:06 pm
Blame Mr. Cooper for this. He applied. He knew the start date was January. He decided HE could change the rules and still be a candidate. Now HE is responsible.

Also, I didn't read anything above that said Ms. Simoneaux or Mr. Babineaux disqualified Mr. Cooper. He was rightfully and ethically informed of the application criteria as voted on by the board, and HE chose to take himself out of the candidate pool.

Obvious question now is: What about those qualified candidates, possibly the most qualified candidates, who did NOT apply because the stated job start date is Jan. 1? If a person can start in May, we may have a completely different candidate pool from which to choose, potentially a much better candidate pool.

Oh, and any candidates who were eliminated because they could NOT start on Jan. 1 probably have legal options to take.

You can't change the rules at the end of the race.
Mr. Cooper should have been disqualified and the next person should have moved up.
This is common sense, which most board members as evidenced by there actions obviously don't have.
...
written by the original northsidian , October 27, 2011 - 11:36 pm
Politics as usual. That is why know one trusts the LPSB. And that is why tax increases will fail at the ballot box! Is it in their DNA?
...
written by You get what you ask for , October 28, 2011 - 12:47 pm
This is exactly why my kids attend a private school. This is totally crazy. You will see more people leave and more trouble for the LPSB. This is why I did not vote for the tax. I give you enough of my money and don't use the services or lack of services. What a disgrace. The right thing to do is to get rid of all candidates and start the process all over. Again, wasting tax payers money. If you do not be prepared to pay for lawyers. You will need them. Also, what is up with the local candidates. We need to go out and find someone out there in the country that is a proven leader. You think that someone that has been in this system can do that. If they could why haven't they shared that yet. To me that is a complete turn off. Lafayette wants to be the best but they can't even find good leaders to lead. Get off of your horses school board and use common sense. You have egg on your faces once again. I will also say that any new tax is still a no for me until you can prove on how to be accountable and trustworthy and you are far from that. The nerve of you people.
...
written by ragin_cajun , October 28, 2011 - 01:08 pm
Hellooooo--

"Also, I didn't read anything above that said Ms. Simoneaux or Mr. Babineaux disqualified Mr. Cooper." You didn't. I think you should re-read it, then.

"He said he got a phone call from Angie saying it would inconvenience the board, and he didn’t want to inconvenience us."

And then, "Scott Middle Principal John Pate, who had already been informed by either Simoneaux or Babineaux that he would replace Cooper in the list of the top 10 candidates."

I think it's crystal clear that Simoneaux, Babineaux, or both, got way ahead of the rest of the School Board in qualifying/disqualifying candidates.


...
written by Dig deeper , October 28, 2011 - 01:24 pm
Agreed, ragin. Helllooooo - I'm not sure how you don't see anything wrong with Babineaux's actions and Simoneaux's willful participation. You say you don't want a local candidate, yet Babineaux was trying to quietly out one of the best candidates so a local principal could get in the running.

Thanks to Mr. Cockerham and the small majority of the board that finally see the bigger picture.
...
written by rambeaux rawlings , October 28, 2011 - 01:41 pm
Uh, who elected these people, and hired the others? You can say "I told you so" all you want and pat yourself on the back because you are , uh, smart enough and rich enough to send your kids to private schools and knew all along that giving this Board extra money to spend was foolish but the fact remains a community is only as good as its public schools.
...
written by Hope , October 28, 2011 - 02:03 pm
I find it ironic Mr. Babineaux would call the 69 % misinformed or uninformed and now those terms are being used to describe him. Its difficult to excuse his mistake because of his arrogance toward the NO voters, but people make mistakes. Maybe the NO prop rattled the school board more than we know, of course, we don't know much because they were keeping their pie holes very closed... But I'm thinking this is a MAJOR mistake. Ms. Simoneaux should learn a valueable lesson herself to check on what she's asked to do. I can't understand why Director of Marketing would have the responsibility of asking an applicant to withdraw... Humble pie is hard to swallow and I really am more sympathetic than I sound because I'd be rattled had the tax prop passed. Up until the tax prop, I was more sympathetic all around because I realize trying to run the school system is supremely difficult. I really hope this quicksand mess can be cleared up without any litigation and done quickly.
...
written by ragin_cajun , October 28, 2011 - 06:49 pm
"because you are , uh, smart enough and rich enough to send your kids to private schools "

I work weekends to send MY kids to private schools. Don't even try to use that against me, or make me feel guilty about it.

"a community is only as good as its public schools." I disagree. Maybe the people of Lafayette are wiser, more forward thinking, and more dedicated to their childrens' education than you care to admit. Maybe Public Schools are a fool's errand, and everbody knows it.

...
written by rambeaux rawlings , October 29, 2011 - 01:44 pm
Ragin, Tnis may come as a shock to you but many in the Lafayette area work weekends so they can adequately support their kids in public schools.
"Public schools are a fool's errand" is probably the saddest most ominous sentiment I've read on this blog. Fortunately, most realize it's a foolish statement.
...
written by BoFred , October 29, 2011 - 05:21 pm
I have supported public schools in many ways through the years via time, materials, dollars, tax dollars. I expected the LPSB to provide decent schools & an opportunity for a student to obtain a good education if they applied themselves. I have paid out thousands & thousands of $ by way of prop taxes & sales taxes. What I regret most about public schools is that kids with mental deficiences, severe behaviorial problems, emotional problems or just a rotten meaness in them, hold back other students from obtaining their education & the public school system has little recourse. I don't know what the recourse is, but its the only reason I would consider private schools. People who pay tuition demand proper behavior from other students & people who pay tuition want their children to stay in that school, so they demand better behavior from their kids. I think the "specialty schools" have caused more harm than good. I think its a "gimmick" that drains the coffers of the school system. Generations have attended highschools that were not "specialty" schools & went on to university & succeeded! Imagine that, obtaining a college degree & a job without a specialty highschool! I do favor a "trade school" since there doesn't seem to be much effort to train those who don't want a 4 yr degree. I'll not support any increases in taxes for the school board. They collect enough. I resent the resentment for voting NO. The LPSB & the administration act like spoiled children throwing tantrums for being told to live within their means. I suggest money saving measures - such as starting school in Sept since the extra days have only resulted in more time off during the year and not better performance or better learning. There is more than enough money for schools to be built & for maintenance to occur.
...
written by ragin_cajun , October 30, 2011 - 04:02 pm
rambeaux --

This is a quote from The Law, by Frederic Bastiat...

"Legal Plunder Has Many Names
Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, PUBLIC SCHOOOLS, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole --with their common aim of legal plunder -- constitute socialism. "

You can read this very short pamphlet yourself for the clear and unassailable construction of the argument against legalized plunder and its inevitable consequence. You will see many familiar examples in modern America. Germane to this discussion is public education. I say it is a fool's errand because it has nothing to do with educating kids, and it will always fall short of the mark because it allows people with no real stake in the process to control the system, and to use other people's wealth to do it.

Bastiat wrote this in the early 1800's. That's how long "public education" has been failing to educate kids.


...
written by the original northsidian , October 30, 2011 - 04:56 pm
Did Mark Babineaux ever attend public schools in Lafayette Parish? If so, when and where.
...
written by ragin_cajun , October 31, 2011 - 01:09 am
uhhh.....he attended the "Infinity School of Hypnosis" in Baton Rouge and he fancies himself a "hypnotherapist".
...
written by the original northsidian , October 31, 2011 - 08:00 pm
ragin_cajun: Fa true?
...
written by ragin_cajun , November 01, 2011 - 02:34 pm
:) I really wish I were lying, but I'm not....

This is him, right? http://www.hypnothoughts.com/p...nBabineaux

What's really funny, in a sort of dark and sad way, is that we could email him and ask him at " This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it " according to the SCHOOL SYSTEM WEBSITE!!! http://www.lpssonline.com/site573.php

Now if this guy were some kind of Creationist or something, there'd be a furor. But a hypnotist?...no problem.
...
written by Layne St.Julien , November 01, 2011 - 04:14 pm
For the record, he also holds a law degree, according to his on-line bio, and is a practicing attorney.
...
written by ragin_cajun , November 01, 2011 - 09:08 pm
"For the record, he also holds a law degree, according to his on-line bio, and is a practicing attorney. "

Are you saying he's a responsible and respectable professional because he's an attorney? Is that what you're saying? Just for the record and all....

And is that in addition to being a hypnotist, or in spite of being a hypnotist. I'm just curious.
...
written by Dudley E. LaBauve, III , November 02, 2011 - 03:43 pm
Hey rajun_cajun, the question is: Does Mark B. use his powers of hypnosis for Good or Evil? :) or :o
...
written by Hope , November 03, 2011 - 09:46 am
Babineaux, however, said speculation about why the tax failed is irrelevant.

"The truth is that no one will ever know why it actually failed," Babineaux said. "All of the speculation is simply someone's opinion. I've heard that it was too much too soon, and that's a little absurd because this started in 1991, so it wasn't a surprise to the public. Some criticized it as being unrealistic, but unfortunately it is brutally realistic. To not put it back on the ballot because it may not pass is the most ridiculous reason to step back at this time."

Ok, so Mr. Babineaux is admitting he cares not one bit about what the public thinks of him, his performance, his board. Seems as if he disrespects several members of his board as much as the intelligent voting public. Mr. Babineaux's opinion of himself is amazing. Talk about inflated ego!

Bring it on Mr. Babineaux! You'll only make more people disgruntled with the LPSB.

And Mr. Awbry: expect more emails. Since he characterized the emails as negligent, we're I think he needs to receive more to convince him there's a big population out here who will not throw more money into a bad system.




You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it