Thank you, Jonathan, for the great article. I am interested in your statement about sources who said we, the school committee, may be picking an interim. I have reviewed the open meeting sessions several times and did not hear once any discussion of this matter of an interim. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also, you write that one member of the screening committee did reach out through E-mail with a change in her opinion yesterday. I was very surprised since this same member just a short while ago told me how incredible both candidates are. I would further add that we also received multiple other E-mails from other screening committee members reaffirming the confidence in their choices. I would welcome everyone to should share their opinions on this, or any other subject, to their Ward and At-Large representatives. Here is a link with our names, phone numbers and E-mails: http://www.attleboroschools.com/school_committee/index.php

Golly, I wonder who the interim would be? I bet someone on the committee would recommend Dr. Durkin. As a parent with 3 sons in this school system I want new leadership. I am disgusted that no decision was made. I want a superintendent with no favorites on the school committee and a mission to bring the best education available to all the children of Attleboro. Keep politics and high school games out out of the committee and out of the Superintendents office!

Mr. Parent can you tell me why over and over again last night I heard many of you talk about how you could not come to a concensus and a narrow slim majority when it is my understanding you should not have been discussing your picks rather just contract details. Any discussion related to voting for a candidate should have been done in open meeting. How do you know you do not have a concensus if you did not talk about your personal picks. I would love to hear an explanation. thank you
Trisha K

It is a shame that once again our school committee has let the students of Attleboro down. Not only is it a embarrsment to the city (once again) but there behavior is truly
unprofesional. If they truly have the children of Attleboro's best interest in mind. Then
several of them need to step down or not run for re election. I won't even go into how two sisters are allowed to serve on the committee together. "come on!"

I feel that Committee Chair Tyler needs to set a date for a decision. Do what you need to do, talk about what you need to talk about, then vote. Stop wasting time and leaving open ended dates. You owe the parents of this school district that have already given you their opinions, a decision, not more beating around the bush. Take a stand and set a date for a final decision.

Everything about central office is unprofessional! They only one's on that committee that do show any are those TWO sisters... They must have had a good upbringing with good parents!!!

@ ken parent, you say you questioned the attorney about it several times??? My case specifically you know the right thing isn't being done but yet you do nothing. Why?? Again last night you do nothing, why?? Somebody needs to look into this! I know you read my email addressed to the whole SC and Durkin!

I happened to be having my parent teacher conferences at the same time as Brenda Furtado. She cares deeply not only for her family's interests but for all of the children in Attleboro Schools. She is never off duty and I think these nasty comments about her are really cruel and set a tone of bullying, something by the way that is not supposed to be allowed in our schools and shouldn't be allowed on the school committee or in the central office or superintendents office. After dealing with Dr. Durkin on numerous occasions I felt bullied and berated for not agreeing with her about my children. She needs to be gone and we need someone in the office that is willing to work with everyone and not think of themselves as the all knowing and better than everyone else!

I do want to point out that I was in attendance at the beginning of the meeting last night when it was Mr.Parent who was the only one who questioned what was, and what was not allowed to happen in Executive Session. The attorney, in response to Mr.Parent explained that diliberation on a new superintendent had to happen in Executive Session. This led to Mr.Parent voting no on entering Executive Session and Brenda Furtado changing her vote to no and stating that they were "putting the cart before the horse", meaning first select the superintendent and then go into Executive Session and debate the contract.

Barbara Craw was not yet there, so she too is not to blame if anything unethical happened.

Sarah, I think you're attacking th wrong person on this issue. If Mr.Parent, Chairman Tyler, Miss Furtado and Miss Craw discussed that they were ready to offer a contract to one of the finalists and wanted to discus the specifics, that would be legal. But if the other members started to debate why they were not willing to support either of the finalists, then they would be walking a very fine line. Debate of support for either finalist should be done, as Mr.Parent pointed out, in open session. Transparency is key and when it comes to what these four members (Murphy, Larson, O'Neil and Zito) did last night, it was missing!

Mr Parent from an outsider looking in it appears all sorts of open meeting laws were broken last night and as a Attleboro resident and parent I am embarressed that this decision isn't being taken more seriously.

Mr. Parent, Ms. Craw, Ms. Furtado and the search committee- thank you for your diligence and attention to the matters at hand. I commend you for your openness as willingness to question the ethics used last night and I appreciate you. Mr. Stors- thank you for the clear explanation. It appears to me that other members have no respect for the decisions made by the search committee and they want to hold status quo. They showed their lack of respect towards the candidates as well. Unless Dr. Durkin has signed a contract with New Bedford, then technically she is still able to reapply- are these committee members holding out and trying to use this as means to keep Dr. Durkin??? It seems awfully suspicious to me…. I just hope Dr. Durkin has signed her contract with New Bedford so our schools can move forward and in a positive direction. I believe there are 2 great candidates and to disrespect them like this disgusting.

I dont' see what not selected a new superintendent last evening has anything to do with Durkin. She is gone and has a new job. Now the SC has to do what they were elected to do and stop acting like children.

Where was ward one representative Teri Energrin in all this drama? Oh wait I know, she was in Florida (as usual) where all active members of the Attleboro School Committee should be during Committee meetings. As for last nights meeting, the only violation of the open meeting laws were violated by Ken, Barbara, Brenda ,and Jim Storrs. Woops! My mistake: he only thinks he is on the school committee .

Mr. Stors you speak of 4 people being aligned (Murphy, Larson, O'neil and Zito) can't the same be said for the people you are defending (Furtado, Parent, Craw and Tyler)? How come it is ok for "your" friends to be aligned in a decision, but its wrong for others to agree. Honestly, you are not a member of the committee anymore and while you entitled to your opinion you should let the decision process proceed by the officials that were elected to do so.

The people I respect the most are Murphy, Larson, O'Neil, and of course Mrs. Zito.
Just want to say that all this speculation and comment is hugely premature. I know we all want answers, but it's unhelpful when the public jumps in with their own preconceived opinions. (Including me in the first sentence--- but I leave it in place to show that I'm not immune).

This whole situation is broken. Has anyone considered that neither candidate will want to come into a situation where they were only (at best) a 50% selection?! For the good of the people in the schools (students and dedicated staff), please do not stick them with a Superintendent that isn't an overwhelmingly confident choice. The next version of the School Committee after November's election should have a completely different complexion as either the 'good guys' will win out or the 'dark side' will add minions to their troops. Let the state help to find an interim superintendent, let the election play out, and have the new School Committee navigate the process. This version of School Committee can and should take credit for the documents and data created that will simplify, what I hope is, another process in 2014.

Trisha- I think you might be misunderstanding Mr. Stors- Craw, Furtado, Parent, and Tyler are "aligned" in the thought that they are ready to start deciding between the two candidates. They want to move forward with the process. They may not be all thinking the same candidate. It is clear that Murphy, Oneill, Larson, and Zeto are against these 2 candidates and want someone else. These are the 2 that the search committee chose and these are the candidates that the sc decided to interview. Why bother interviewing them if they were already against them and waste everyones time?

@ Jen: The SC evaluates the candidates for Superintendent from those sent to them. They couldn't influence who came out of the screening committee. If they are not solidly supportive of one of the 2 choices, then you thank the screening committee for their service, name an interim, and start over. Perhaps in starting over, the new screening committee has representation from ALL groups who will work daily with the Superintendent...not just union reps.

there are procedures for arriving at an amicable decisions. I served on a committee to choose our church's next minister. We had to avoid forming into two sides right away and stay open. However, nationally we have a political system that falls into two hard and fast stands, that ill serves the public.

Parent, Craw, Tyler and Furtado are trying to move the district forward. Because someone does not fit into Murphy, Oneil or Larson's plan it makes it alright to disregard these candidates. To not make a decision last night was an injustice to our community. 4 school committee members did their job last night and tried to do what was best for Attleboro (Parent, Craw, Tryler and Furtado). The other 4 just did what they always do, try to stop progress, hinder our children's education and create diversity and public humiliation for our city. I have looked into both candidates backgrounds and they blow Durkin away. Why would the Murphy stooges want to stop such talent from coming to our district? This meeting should have been open to the public and then we could all see the ridiculous antics of Murphy, Larson, O'neill and Zito. I can't wait for the minutes on this meeting. Open meeting law violation...... Let's see who tries to hide the minutes from coming out to the public. We should of had a new Superintendent announced and should have been celebrating today, but the same 4 have even managed to sabotage this decision.

I think you are 180 degrees wrong.
Anytime you get a cabal of two family members
you get the kind of Machiavellian tactics I see and
have always seen in Furtado. Now with Craw
in the mix, their personality and ideology-driven
tactics have shown their true fruit.

They hate David Murphy. I don't know why. Maybe
because he sees their tactics for what they are (power trips, not progress).
Furtado and Craw badgered and made his life miserable.

O'Neill is a top notch SC member, decent, fair, balanced. Fran
Zito exemplifies human decency and fairness and
her life-long committment to Attleboro's children.

We all can see by the decisions made by committee members who believes in our schools and children and does not. All the negative talk about Craw and Furtado because they are sisters. Machiavellian tactics. They are attacked because they are sisters. They have done what they were elected to do. They have supported our schools and the children. So let's attack them for being sisters. You make me laugh. I hope they have 7 more sisters or brothers who will run for school committee and get elected. If the rest of the family is as fair an honest, we should vote for all of them. As for tactics....hmm. Mr. Murphy plays attorney in a court room and tries to pursuade and coerce other members to agree with him. He does not care about our schools. What about these tactics? What about him not knowing what goes on in the schools because he is not there? Ms. Zito is a top notch community member, this I will agree with, but as a school committee member she cannot make her own decisions and follows Murphy's lead. I watch the meetings and she repeats and follows whatever Murphy has to say. O'Neill has not done anything since he has been elected. Ask the people in his ward. Look back at his own article he submitted to Patch. His words "I only checked my packet the Sunday night before the meeting." His own ward members speaking out to say he never returns calls or emails. These members are "TOP NOTCH"..HA - More like "DON"T CARE" and "USELESS"

all this is your opinion and in my opinion: skewed
probably to fit a preconceived ideology

Unfortunately, I was not able to attend last night's meeting or watch it on TV so please forgive me if I seem confused.

The Committee's legal counsel stated that the candidates could not be discussed in the executive session. Mr. Tyler is quoted as saying that this guideline was abided by. However, Mr. Parent's posts about the executive session lead me to believe that discussion about the candidates did take place. Others citizens here- none of whom would have been in the executive session or have legal access to the notes of said session- are making the same claims. If there was discussion in the exectuive session related to the candidates because each candidate may warrant different contractual considerations, then I do not think an open meeting law would be violated. The discussion would technically be about contractual considerations as required. Splitting hairs? Yes, but such is the nature of law.

I do not think that this is disrespectful to the search committee or the community. If anything, it is a sign of respect for their effort. This is not a decision to take lightly. I hope the School Committee takes as much time as needed. We are three weeks ahead of their goal of April 15th. As far as we know, neither candidate is being considered for another position; both seem to be extremely dedicated to getting this position. If the Committee cannot decide between these two, then so be it. I agree it will not be ideal, but if that is the case, then that is the case.

If there is question (and from posts here it certainly appears probable/possible) a complaint can be made to the Attorney General's office. ASC has violations on record (dating back a number of years, but I doubt there is a statute of limitations?). ASC could be fined a significant sum of money! What a grand way to spend the city's money designated for the kids!!!! OPEN MEETING LAW should not be played around with. That being said an additional observation...did not a couple of communities around us go through a search and upon not being able to hire someone of the best liking, choose to go out for a second search? Since it is being done in house there is not a money reason to SETTLE if there is not a candidate that can fulfill the needs of the system. (I am not saying that these two possibilities are not good...as I truly have no way of knowing...but if those who do know have questions it certainly seems better to wait).

And this is what happens when the voters of Attleboro don't value the school system. "Well it's just school committee" is a common phrase at the polls. Perhaps after this mess people will pay attention and encourage good and qualified people to run for office. People who will actually show up. People with a bit of business sense. People who have an agenda for the schools as a whole, not pushing through one dogma to benefit their child or their own school district.

The SC manages more than half the city budget. HALF THE CITY BUDGET! Look who you have chosen for the last decade Attleboro. We can do better. We need to do better.

Agree, George.
As for "half the city budget" what is our money for? I think the prime directive of as a species is to educate, feed, protect 'our' children. Educating the next generation is our responsiblity. Shall we be like Mississippi and let kids go ignorant? You get what you pay for: good teachers are worth the pay they get. Teaching is hard work. So is heating building, maintenance. I don't begrudge my local tax money that I pay. My husband was born and grew up in Attleboro and got a good education, enough so he went on to Northeastern. And our son went all the way through Attleboro schools and then went to RIC.
"Taxes are the rent we pay for living."

Jerry
I'm not sure what you are saying. It's true I don't like much about today's Republicans. They are not decent people, on the national level. I don't know who is who here. I don't know if John is a Republican or what. And as for being a man hater, or whatever you are insinuating, everyone I know would disagree with your comments.
I came into this discussion to say to people not to jump to conclusions. We do that, especially, when there's controversy and not much info. And then I read posts with negative comments about the members of the SC who I admire most. My efforts went toward making positive comments about those SC members.

I hope this is a wake up call to people. We need to pay attention to who we vote for even if it's "just the school committee". The reputation of our schools is important to the well being of our city and the future of our children. Just look at the communities that have, through apathy, allowed their curriculum be taken over by those with a religious, rather than educational, agenda. We need to move forward and put the children's needs, even if that means setting aside personal politics and long standing grudges.

Sara SB:
I agree. The SC is dysfunctional. There are ways for groups of disaffected or divided to come together and resolve conflicts. But often it takes an outside person to do conflict resolution. That is what happens in other arenas. Not sure it can be done here.

I agree with you on the 'religious agenda' -- our schools are secular institutions of learning. If parents want religion, let them send their children to a religious school.
I am also concerned at this forum. First that it seems to be premature to be discussing what amounts to heresay. We have precious little info on what really happened. And just the acrimonious discussion about an interim superintendent (above) is evidence that writers are grasping at straws.

Second, it feels like many posters are just waiting to jump all over someone for expressing a different view than theirs. I must say, too, that I've never heard the phrase, "it's just the school committee," thought I agree that our schools and the reputation of our schools is vitally important. It's one thing parents look at when they consider moving to Attleboro. And for some parents it's the most important factor in choosing whether to move her. We can do better and we must do better.
With that in mind, it's important to focus on the future and learn how to manage conflict so that the outcome is constructive.

*hearsay*