PA Public School Code, Section 5-508: "The affirmative vote of a majority of all the members of the board of school directors, duly recorded, showing how each member voted, shall be required in order to take action on the following subjects: Entering into contracts of any kind where the amount involved exceeds one hundred dollars ($100). Fixing salaries or compensation of officers, teachers, or other appointees of the board. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall render such acts of the board void and unenforceable".
You don't need a law degree to understand. Only a school board can enter into school contracts, or decide on compensation. So how did Michael I. Levin, Esq. presume to give legal advice to Quakertown Community School District? And exactly how good was that advice, both for the board, and the community that paid him?
If you missed last week's column: on January 10, the school board met 75 minutes before their regular, advertised session for something they called a "Public Conference" on the Sunshine Act. A law that they have violated about 40 times in the past three years. But there is no such thing as a "Public Conference". There is no legal meaning, nor requirements, as there are for a "Meeting", or "Conference". QCSD created the term, and then used that deception to avoid giving public notice.
When the PA Newspaper Association objected, Levin, who had been hired as speaker for the night, lead the board into a private Executive Session. Director Kathy Mosley even arrogantly proclaimed that Levin was the board's solicitor! That must have come as news to Ellis Katz, who wasn't there, but has held the position for years. And it certainly came as news to board members.
According to director Paul Stepanoff, "When a lecturer calls an executive session, it is clearly not proper, nor a legal reason. This must be the first time in the history of the school district that someone who was asked to address a board conference then acted as solicitor. He had not even been introduced that way." But the board majority followed him into the secret session, despite their promise to make the matter "public".
An Open Records Request to QCSD turned up a letter of January 2, 2008, from Levin to Superintendent Dr Lisa Andrejko, stating "This letter is in response to your request that we provide our terms and conditions for engagement for representation of the Quakertown Community School District." It then went on to list the hourly rates for his firm's attorneys, and other various charges. Nothing whatsoever about what "representation" means. And, at the bottom, "I agree to the terms set forth in this letter. (signed) Lisa Andrejko".
Remember Section 5-508? The board apparently didn't. Shades of Quakertown, and former manager Dave Woglom. The superintendent does not have the authority to make such a contract, so there wasn't the attorney-client privilege necessary to permit the executive session. Four directors rightfully objected, particularly to Levin's very questionable, likely illegal, advice, about finding ways to avoid the Sunshine Act rather than follow it. But the self-protective majority allowed him to secretly advise how to keep you in the dark. And them paid him with your tax dollars!!!
I asked Levin to explain, and copied board members, Andrejko, the PNA, and the press: "Superintendent Dr. Lisa Andrejko has provided me with a two-page letter from you to her, dated January 2, 2008, which you term as a letter of representation. While it does state your firm's fees, it does not state the nature of your alleged representation. You provided a signature line for only her, and she was the only representative of QCSD to sign it. As I am sure you are aware, only the school board, meeting in public session, and with the vote duly recorded in the minutes, can actually enter into any such contract. The pertinent portion of the PA Public School Code reads as follows: (Section 5-508 was quoted). At least four of the nine school directors claim to be totally unaware that there had been any contract created with you, or your firm, to perform any duties, or provide any "representation" to the school district. There is nothing in any meeting minutes to reflect such a vote. If, in fact, there was no valid contractual relationship between you and QCSD on the evening of January 10, 2008, what exception do you cite in the Sunshine Act that would have permitted them to hold an executive session to hear from you? For the record, please provide your explanation of any relationship you believe you have, or had, with QCSD on the evening of January 10, 2008, if any, and please further explain how, in your opinion, the Superintendent of a school district can create a contract with you in light of Section 5-508."
Levin's response: "I disagree with your factual statements and your legal analysis. I disagree with your methods and your conduct. Your disruption of the conference of the school board was, in my opinion, a disgrace."
And mine: "Your answer is not responsive to the questions. I also note that you have failed to copy the other parties in your email. This matter will not go away. If you choose not to answer, you can not later complain that you did not have the opportunity to do so."
His final words: "Don't threaten me and don't waste my time." And mine: "As you wish. Unless I hear from you further, I will consider your answer as complete." That's it. The entire conversation. Michael I. Levin, Esq. is the perfect addition to the Quite Commonly Secret District.
The PA Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys: "A lawyer should further the public's understanding of, and confidence in, the rule of law and the justice system because legal institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and support to maintain their authority." QCSD, and Levin, have a duty to the 38,000 community residents to find ways to be more open and honest, not create excuses and hide what they are doing. If it looks wrong, it is wrong.