Mar 19, 2013 3 min read

In a March 5 letter, Fort Cherry School Board member Leann Darnley explained her position on the revision of Policy 616, Payment of Claims. It’s worth noting that at the December meeting, Darnley read into the record a report revealing that an executive session was held in October to discuss an investigation by the Fort Cherry administration regarding the unauthorized, personal use of a district credit card by an administrator.

Darnley stated that the board was told of this issue, and of the reprimand imposed on the offending employee. Members were shown a letter from the auditor recommending a policy be created to address the use of credit cards. Members were forbidden a copy of this letter as well as financial documents related to the offense. The board had no say in how the incident was handled. Darnley’s board report was undisputed.

Isn’t unauthorized, personal use of another’s credit card a form of theft? Shouldn’t the police be called in? Board members have a responsibility to ensure that tax dollars are spent appropriately. The very administration being investigated conducted the investigation without board input, taking away the board’s ability to fulfill its duty to taxpayers.

At the December meeting, Darnley wisely attempted to have the board begin the process of launching an independent investigation of all credit card use in the district for the past three years. That motion failed 5-4, with board members Elmo Cecchetti, Larry Heirendt, Christopher Lauff, Brant Miller, and James White voting no. Instead, two months later, the majority of the board voted to add one sentence to an existing, unrelated policy on how the district pays bills. Darnley is correct that one sentence is not comprehensive enough.

Why were those members unwilling to look into Fort Cherry’s credit card use? It seems to me that our board may be doing the taxpayers a serious disservice if they are unwilling to protect our financial integrity.

Darnley submitted a right-to-know request for information that should have already been given to board members. But the district’s right-to-know officer (who is also a school administrator) denied her request and spent our money for the solicitor to fight her. Darnley won her right to have copies of the financial documents used in the investigation. That February 19 decision can be found on the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records website. The district has 30 days to provide the documents to Darnley or appeal to the Court of Common Pleas. It is my hope that the district abides by the Office of Open Records ruling, instead of spending more of our money to appeal.

Additionally, I hope the board will realize the need for a separate, strongly written credit card policy.

Toni Sidick

McDonald