Trinity PTA Special Meeting Tonight: Questions that remain unanswered surrounding the sudden resignation of former Trinity School Assistant Principal, Nadine A. Pacheco

From: Trinity School PTA <ptatrinity@gmail.com>

Questions that remain unanswered surrounding the sudden resignation of former Trinity School Assistant Principal, Nadine A. Pacheco

On Monday evening, October 24^th, Trinity School Principal, Rolando Briceño, sent a ConnectEd message to the Trinity community informing families that “due to personal reasons,” Mrs. Nadine Pacheco had resigned her position as Assistant Principal for Trinity School, effective immediately.  The message from Mr. Briceño continued, informing parents that Mrs. Pacheco would remain at Trinity School “… in a teaching capacity.”  The truth of the matter is, Mrs. Pacheco did not resign from the position of Assistant Principal for “personal reasons,” but because it had come to light that she did not have the proper certification to hold the position of Assistant Principal.

Questions Concerning the Hiring of Mrs. Pacheco in 2007

• Mrs. Pacheco has been in administrative role at Trinity School since 2007.  How is it possible that an uncertified administrator could be allowed to hold a position in the New Rochelle school system as long as she has?

• During the hiring process of Mrs. Pacheco for Trinity Elementary School 5 years ago, did she indicate on her job application, resume or during the interview process that she was properly certified?

• What individuals interviewed Mrs. Pacheco for the administrative position?

• Who, during the hiring process, verified her credentials?

• What are the procedures for verifying credentials?

• Who is responsible for ensuring that all personnel within the New Rochelle School District who apply for positions that REQUIRE certification are duly certified?

Mrs. Pacheco’s 2009 Realization that Her Certification Had Expired

According to the October 28, 2011, letter written by Superintendent Organisciak and Board of Education President Petrone, Mrs. Pacheco learned in the Fall of 2009 that her provisional School Administrator and Supervisor Administrative Certificate had expired.  At that time, she notified the then Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources.

• Back in 2009, are we to believe that Principal Mr. Briceño, Superintendent Dr. Organisciak and/or the Board of Education were not made aware of the facts discovered by Mrs. Pacheco and the then Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources?

• Upon the district being made aware that Mrs. Pacheco was not properly certified, why wasn’t the Trinity community made aware of the facts?

• Who else was made aware that Mrs. Pacheco’s certification had expired?

• Is the Principal kept abreast of all the certification status of all school employees requiring certification?

• Is the Principal responsible for knowing all building employees are in good status?

• What are the procedures and protocols in place upon discovering proper certificates have expired?  Who is contacted and alerted and in what order?

Questions Concerning Trinity School’s Administrative Staff Going Forward

Since the release of Mr. Briceño’s ConnectEd message on October 24^th announcing Mrs. Pacheco’s resignation “effective immediately,” a number of individuals have seen Mrs. Pacheco working out of her office in the main office, walking around the school with a radio, overseeing the cafeteria and continuing to work in her former capacity of Assistant Principal.

• How and why is the being allowed to continue?

• Trinity School has a large student body population, one which requires more than a Principal in the school building filling an administrative role.  What is the New Rochelle Board of Education’s plan to fill the now vacant position of Assistant Principal, both on an interim basis immediately and on a permanent basis going forward?

• Will there be a posting for the job of Assistant Principal at Trinity Elementary?  Will a new Assistant Principal be named?

Questions Concerning Events that Reportedly Took Place at Trinity School on Wednesday, November 2^nd

It has been reported that Principal Briceño held mandatory meetings during teachers’ lunch on Wednesday, November 2^nd.  During the meetings, he encouraged every teacher to come to the November 3^rd PTA meeting under the premise their presence is a sign of support for former Assistant Principal Nadine Pacheco. This is another example of the “us against them” mentality perpetrated by this administration.  Additionally, it has been alleged that Ms. Mussolini’s second-grade class is being taken away from her and she is being forced into a substitute teaching position.  Ms. Mussolini had been assigned as the replacement teacher for the year while Mrs. Zweback is on maternity leave.  On Nov. 2^nd, however, it has been reported that former Assistant Principal Pacheco was given Ms. Mussolini’s class as the replacement teacher during Mrs. Zweback’s leave. Both of these actions have led to additional questions:

• What is the Teacher’s Union policy in regard to teachers’ lunch?

• Can a school administrator within the District of New Rochelle legally mandate teachers to give up any to all of their lunch time?

• Why is Principal Briceño attempting to fracture the bridge between parents and teachers?  Isn’t it a principal’s responsibility to foster a sense of community?

• What did Ms. Mussolini do to deserve having her class taken away?  Is it fair that an innocent teacher suffers financial ramifications because of her colleague’s mistake/deception?

• How and when will the parents of Ms. Mussolini’s class be notified?  How will the transition be made?

• What assistance will be given to the students of Ms. Mussolini to understand why they have lost their beloved teacher?

Questions Concerning Transparency with Regards to Trinity Principal Briceño and the New Rochelle Board of Education

In the October 28, 2011, letter from Superintendent Organisciak and Board President Petrone, it states: “… we believe it is important to mention that until the Board of Education and administration had the opportunity to review this matter, specific details could not be discussed.”

• What did the Board of Education and the Superintendent need to review before alerting the community?

• As the Trinity community is known for being mostly working-class parents without computer access, why did you choose to disseminate information via a letter posted on a website versus an open meeting with the entire community?

• The matter of Mrs. Pacheco’s and any other administrator/teacher certification is one of public record.  Mr. Briceño stated that Mrs. Pacheco’s resignation was for “personal reasons,” which was nothing short of misleading.  The Trinity communities’ initial belief was one of concern that Mrs. Pacheco might be ill and in need of our help.  Why was the Trinity community mislead from the very beginning?

• Are Principal Briceño, as well as Superintendent Dr. Organisciak and the entire New Rochelle Board of Education, able to display transparency?

For off-line comments, questions, concerns and tips email us at trinity.stakeholders@gmail.com