LETTER: Appearance of conflict is a troubling trend
May 28, 2024To the Community:
I recently wrote to the Harwood Unified Union School Board raising my serious concerns about a conflict of interest involving Moretown school board member Ben Clark, stemming from his spouse's position as a principal within the district. I warned that Clark’s personal connection could unduly influence board decisions, compromising the integrity of the board's actions. Waterbury Roundabout reported on this issue before and following the May 8 school board meeting.
The May 22 school board meeting confirmed my fears, highlighting a troubling trend in decision-making that warrants immediate attention.
At the meeting, the board discussed the possibility of directing the administration to develop various options for achieving a reduced budget if the next budget proposal passes. This step would have allowed the board to evaluate different cuts against each other, potentially offering a more balanced approach to budget reduction. It could have provided an opportunity to save the elementary World Language program.
However, the board voted down this opportunity to explore alternative options, effectively sealing the fate of the world language program. Ben Clark was notably vocal in his opposition to considering further options, a stance that seemed to sway the board’s final decision. This move is particularly troubling given his spouse's role as a principal, suggesting he may have a vested interest in protecting certain positions at the expense of broader cuts.
Although administrative cuts are already off the table due to contractual obligations—an area Ben Clark does not have control over—his influence on the board's decision-making process remains problematic. By focusing solely on staff cuts, the board avoids a thorough evaluation of all possible budgetary adjustments, raising questions about the fairness and transparency of the process.
After the meeting, I emailed the board expressing my concerns about their decision to vote down exploring other budget options. In response, Steve Rosenberg, the board member who motioned to discuss further budget options, acknowledged the strong objections from his colleagues. He stated, “The objections board members raised to my motions were very good, so good that I wasn’t really sorry the motion got defeated.”
While Rosenberg’s acceptance of the outcome might seem conciliatory, it also highlights the underlying issue: the undue influence exerted by Ben Clark.
This incident demonstrates how Ben Clark’s conflict of interest can impede a fair and thorough examination of all possible solutions. The refusal to even discuss alternative budget cuts suggests a lack of openness and a predetermined agenda, influenced by personal relationships rather than the best interests of the students and the community.
For the sake of transparency and fairness, the board must reconsider its approach to decision-making. It should commit to evaluating all possible options for budget cuts in a manner that is free from personal conflicts of interest. By doing so, the board can ensure that it acts in the best interests of the district as a whole.
Brian Dalla Mura
Duxbury