Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public asks about new athletic facility coordinator and payroll transparency; trustees clarify privacy practice
Summary
A resident asked whether an athletic facility coordinator listed on the Dec. 16 agenda is a new position and what the role entails; trustees said the role had previously been held part time and noted employee‑privacy reasons for some agenda listings by employee number.
A resident’s questions about a newly listed athletic facility coordinator and how the district lists staff on agendas drew responses from trustees and administrators at the Belleville Board of Education meeting Dec. 16.
Michael Sheldon, a resident who spoke during public comment, asked whether agenda item 9.18 — an athletic facility coordinator appointment listed on the Dec. 16 agenda — represented a new position and what facilities and duties would be covered. He also raised a procedural question about why some personnel items are shown by employee number while others are listed by name.
"Is this a new position? And what facility or facilities will this person be overseeing, and exactly what does this job entail?" Sheldon asked.
Board members acknowledged the question and said the position was previously held on a part‑time basis. Trustee remarks during the meeting said the role had been formerly held by a part‑time employee identified as Mr. Luna; the district posted the position and hired a candidate through normal personnel processes. Trustee comments did not specify the exact facilities to be overseen.
Sheldon also asked whether listings by employee number indicate forced resignations. Mr. Paladino, speaking for the board, said there is no uniform rule for when agendas use numbers versus names and that the variation can reflect privacy concerns. "I think there's some issues, particular privacy with respect to particular, employees. Maybe it's a health issue or something, and so we're just trying to be respectful of the employees," Paladino said.
Sheldon noted during a later public comment that he believed the athletic coordinator would be paid about $52,000–$55,000 annually; trustees did not provide a salary confirmation during the meeting. The board did not discuss changing the agenda format at the Dec. 16 meeting but said the superintendent’s office would respond in writing to any remaining procedural questions.
Personnel resolutions, including the athletic facility coordinator appointment, were included in agenda section 9 and were approved on a roll call. The board’s roll call on that block recorded seven votes in favor; no individual yes/no record was given for each listed personnel item in the public transcript.
Trustees asked the public to pursue any detailed personnel questions with the superintendent’s office so the district can provide a written response while protecting employee privacy.
The board also instructed staff to provide clarifications in writing if public inquiries remained after the meeting. No disciplinary or forced‑resignation claims were stated or confirmed during the public meeting record.
