They will all play Oliver North......dont tell me no one knew or that no one directed him......who's pitbull is he??????
someone dropped the leash or let the dogs out........

He's not that smart all alone......he has a boss

Quoted Text

Carl Strock THE VIEW FROM HERE
Raucci’s acts no secret to HR director
Carl Strock can be reached at 395-3085 or by e-mail at carlstrock@dailygazette.com.

    I have been scrutinizing notes handwritten four years ago by Michael Stricos, director of human resources for the Schenectady City School District, and although they are fragmented and disjointed, as notes often are, one thing stands out: Stricos was well aware of the behavior of the school district’s head of buildings and grounds, the now-notorious Steve Raucci.
    In his notes of a phone conversation “w/ Steve,” on April 26, 2005, Stricos wrote, “If I can make Hal and Debbie’s life miserable — that is what I’m going to do,” apparently quoting Raucci, and followed by a question mark, which seems to indicate a question on Stricos’ part.
    Hal and Debbie are Harold and Deborah Gray, both of whom worked under Raucci and whose home and vehicles were vandalized, allegedly by Raucci. Deborah Gray’s son, Ryan Rakoske, had protested his own treatment to Stricos, as well as the treatment of his mother and stepfather, and much of Stricos’ notes concerns those complaints.
    Raucci was angry at Deborah Gray because he believed she was the author of an anonymous letter that was sent to the president of the Capital Region CSEA, claiming Raucci’s management was like something out of a gangster movie. (Raucci was simultaneously department manager and president of the CSEA local representing the 125 workers he managed.)
    I had often wondered how the letter happened to get back to Raucci, and now my leading suspicion is confirmed. Stricos refers to it in his notes as “anonymous letter from Campon,” apparently referring to Michael Campon, the CSEA delegate to the Schenectady local and a close friend of Jeff Janiszewski, then president of the school board and still a member of it.
    “If him and your mother do not back off, plain and simple I will beat you up,” Stricos wrote at another point, apparently quoting Raucci, either directly or indirectly, and referring to the Grays and to Rakoske. Following which he wrote, “No.”
    He quotes Raucci as telling a staff meeting, “We don’t want any [crude name for people] around here,” and then, “Called Debbie a [vile anatomical name for a woman] and Hal a [vulgar word for excrement] — then distributed work papers.”
    I omit the obscenities as unfi t for a family newspaper, but they are not omitted in Stricos’ notes. If you could read them for yourself, you would get the flavor of how things were done in the Schenectady school district.
    Allow me to mention for the record that Stricos, in his capacity as director of human resources, did not discipline Raucci, nor did anyone else in the school administration. Rather Raucci continued his unique form of management right up until he was arrested in February of this year.
    Did Stricos know about the spray painting of the Grays’ house in Saratoga County overnight from April 30 to May 1, 2005?
    He wrote in his notes: “w/e 4/30-5/1 — parents house spray painted? Aware of incident.”
    He recorded on Sunday, May 1: “visited by police — investigating vandalism.” And on May 4, after Raucci allegedly led a caravan of his employees up to the Grays’ to see what happens to people who cross him, Stricos wrote, “Drive by — Steve Raucci [plus another name, unclear] … Guys were in shop. Steve asked them to go up to see the damage. 3 vans — drove by.” ..........................>>>>.............>>>>............http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar01100

Quoted Text

Judge: Raucci bail decision to be made in a week
Friday, July 17, 2009
By Steven Cook (Contact)
Gazette Reporter

SCHENECTADY — In sometimes heated arguments Thursday, Steven Raucci’s defense attorney told a judge that a lower court was arbitrary in ordering his client held without bail.
Ronald DeAngelus argued that Raucci wasn’t given a proper hearing on the matter to confront key witnesses whose testimony prosecutors used to help keep Raucci behind bars pending trial.
But Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney argued that the issue was a simple one, pointing to the two dozen counts lodged against Raucci, three of them top-level felonies.
The top-level felonies are on the same legal par as murder charges, Carney noted, carrying sentences of up to 25 years to life in state prison upon conviction.
“In the eyes of the law, he stands no different than somebody charged with a triple homicide,” Carney said, pointing to the arson and terrorism charges Raucci faces.
None of the charges against Raucci allege that anyone was physically hurt.
“He’s 60 years old. That puts him in the position of a near certainty of life in prison. That criteria alone is enough to support Judge [Polly] Hoye’s decision,” Carney said.
A decision on the appeal is not expected until July 23. Acting Supreme Court Justice Richard Giardino said from the bench that he expected to hand down a written decision then.
The day’s arguments were just the latest chapter in the protracted bail saga involving the retired city schools director of facilities. It began shortly after his Feb. 20 arrest in Schenectady on a single arson charge with $200,000 bond being set and posted. He never saw freedom, as he was immediately arrested on charges from other jurisdictions.
Two bail decisions have followed, as the charges piled on, ordering that Raucci be held without bail pending trial. Raucci has been jailed continuously for nearly five months now.
Raucci is accused of placing incendiary devices at four homes around the Capital Region. Two of the devices exploded. He is also accused of damaging the cars and homes of people who disagreed with him, slashing tires, damaging paint or damaging windshields. One couple reported their car being vandalized five times.
During Thursday’s arguments, attorneys on both sides briefly strayed into the initial bail arguments before being brought back to the issue at hand, whether the decision by Hoye was arbitrary.
DeAngelus strayed to the witnesses themselves, one of whom is believed to be former school district employee Harold Gray, the alleged victim in a number of counts against Raucci..............>>>>................>>>>..............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/17/0717_rauccibail/

He's not that smart......who are his 'handlers'????

Jobs at ANY SCHOOL IN NYS are only via 'folks in the know'............plllleeeease.....are we that dumb?

again I ask-------who are his 'handlers'??????

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Raucci report to stay secret Attorney reverses district’s plan to release summary
BY STEVEN COOK Gazette Reporter

    The city school district’s independent internal investigation into allegations against former facilities director Steven Raucci won’t be released in any form on advice of attorneys, district officials said Friday.
    The decision reverses earlier statements that at least a summary would be made public as early as this week.
    The district cited advice from legal counsel for its latest position. Patrick J. Fitzgerald III, attorney for the district, “strongly advised district officials against publicly sharing or discussing any portion of the completed report,” the school district said in a statement.
    Fitzgerald has been busy defending the district against claims from seven individuals related to alleged acts committed by Raucci against school employees and others.
    The filings in the lawsuits or attempted lawsuits have provided a steady stream of revelations into what district officials might have known or done regarding complaints about Raucci, who is being held in Schenectady County Jail on arson and terrorism charges.
    “In light of pending claims and legal proceedings, I do not feel that it is appropriate for the school district to comment on the investigation,” Fitzgerald said in the statement. “I am asking my client not to share or comment on the report, any summary of the report or any portion of the report.”
    “I am confident that at any hearing,” Fitzgerald added, “the evidence will demonstrate that the school district followed....................>>>>...................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....mp;DataChunk=Ar00302

The $100/hr taxpayer funded whitewash report-authorized by disgraced "President" Jeffy Janiszewski-will remain secret. So bad that it cannot see the light of day? The Schenectady School Bored is pathetic. They authorized this "to open up the process"-and "to get to the bottom of the matter"? It's all public knowledge but these School Bored idiots keep pretending they can ride this out. Get out and take your buddy Stricos with you.  

     Everyone knew since at least 2005. Newcomers were informed. In dereliction of duty to the students and employees they knowingly let it happen. The administration was afraid of him too. Who else beyond the pathetic Schenectady schools knew and did nothing?

Well, the way I see it, is that there are a couple new school board members on the board now. So who promised change and transparency. Well here is their chance.

Are we really only talking about the board here???? there are WAY MORE FOLKS INVOLVED......dig dig dig......

Quoted Text

Schenectady school district says speaker worth expense
Retreat keynote cost $18,000-plus
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
By Michael Goot (Contact)
Gazette Reporter

SCHENECTADY — The Schenectady City School District paid $18,000 for the keynote speaker at its recent retreat at Dunham’s Bay Lake George Resort.
District officials said the cost was covered by federal grant funds.
The Daily Gazette had filed a Freedom of Information Law request for the costs of the retreat that 45 of the school district’s administrators attended June 29 and 30 and July 1 at the resort. An invoice showed the $18,000 fee paid to the Utah-based School Improvement Network, which arranged the visit of Thomas Guskey of the University of Kentucky. Guskey is the author of the book “Developing, Grading and Reporting Systems for Student Learning” and spoke about using student assessments to improve instruction. The district will also have to pay for Guskey’s airfare, meals and car rental or other local transportation costs; he has not submitted an invoice yet for those expenses, which are not included in his fee.
Superintendent Eric Ely called Guskey the national and world expert in creating student assessments.
“He’s well worth it,” he said. “We’re not happy with the level of our assessments and use of assessments for improved student learning.”
Ely said the district made a decision to invest in professional development a few years ago.
“The only way to effect student learning is to create a situation where there are obviously better teachers who have more tools in their toolbox,” he said.
While Guskey’s fee is expensive, Ely said, other speakers can top $20,000 for a two-day conference. He added that if the district were to send people to hear Guskey speak it could cost anywhere from $300 to $500 per person.
“It actually becomes much cheaper to bring somebody in than to send everybody away,” he said.
Ely said every year, administrators develop a short list of nationally known speakers they would like to have attend. Then, they start trying to determine who is available and at what cost.
This was the first year the district was able to book someone of Guskey’s caliber, Ely said. School officials tried to book a speaker last year, but they started too late and couldn’t find anyone. The district booked Guskey last summer and will find a speaker for next year during the next few weeks.
$9,000 PER DAY
School Improvement Network training coordinator Sandy Moon said Guskey’s base fee per day is $8,000. However, because he served as a keynote speaker and also led a workshop, his total was $9,000 for each of the two days.
Moon called Guskey a dynamic speaker. She said his fee is on the high end and an average speaker runs about $6,000 a day. “He’s kind of a highly sought speaker,” she said.
................>>>>..................>>>>..............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/21/0721_speaker/

Quoted Text

Editorial: 'Transparent' report for their eyes only
Tuesday, July 21, 2009

How convenient that a law firm hired by the Schenectady school district has advised it to, under no terms, disclose any of the contents of the “independent” investigation it commissioned on l’affaire Raucci. That’s not what district taxpayers paid $100 an hour for, not what district officials promised at the time they announced the investigation, and certainly not what is needed to restore any credibility to a school administration that has lost it over this and a series of other issues in recent months.
Steve Raucci, of course, is the former buildings and grounds supervisor and union chief who was arrested in February and charged with terrorism for setting explosives and otherwise vandalizing the property of people who had “crossed” him. The incidents began in 2001 and continued up to the time he was arrested.
When it soon became clear that some of those people had worked with or for Raucci, and that he had bullied them or others on the job as well, questions naturally arose about how district officials could have had a guy like this around and not known what he was doing. The questions still haven’t been answered, and subsequent revelations, including lawsuit affidavits and other written documents, indicate they did know about at least some of it, and chose to ignore it.
The investigation was supposed to answer those questions for the public, to be thorough and transparent in the words of then-Board President Jeff Janiszewski, whose own involvement was supposedly to be investigated. But from the start, it was tainted by the fact that the investigator, Rachel Rissetto, is a friend of the school district’s own lawyer and isn’t a real investigator but a human resources director for BOCES.
That’s not to say she wasn’t capable of doing a serious, comprehensive investigation. But to have any confidence in that it would be necessary to know whom she spoke to, what she looked at and what she found, even if some names and specifics were redacted for reasons of privacy.
.................>>>>..........>>>>.............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/21/0721_edit1/

There are 2 new members on the 7 member bored. Mr. Janiszewski is still running the circus.

     According to the Gazetto he was present in 2005 when Stricos was taking notes on The Mad Bomber. Stricos did nothing. Janiszeski did nothing. The Super then did nothing.

     Now they are circling the wagons and refuse to clean house removing those that knew everything and did nothing. This is a 3 year plan-every incumbent if they dare run again-will be bellicked.

If this speaker was REALLY needed to help the school system, than why weren't other surrounding city schools invited to share the expense? Not to mention, that the information would have been just as well received if it was done right at the schenectady high school gym.

But Lake George AND after the huge tax increase on the taxpayers..........what a disgrace!!

Did the new board members attend and was it mandatory to?

Quoted Text

School district paid $12,925 for Raucci report
District spent funds on probe it won’t release to public
July 22, 2009
Updated 6:09 a.m.
By Michael Goot (Contact)
Gazette Reporter

SCHENECTADY — It cost the Schenectady City School District nearly $13,000 for the report into Steven Raucci’s alleged workplace misconduct — a document that the general public cannot see.
Rachel Rissetto spent 21⁄2 months reviewing allegations that the former facilities director harassed and demeaned colleagues and that supervisors knew of his behavior and did nothing. Her fee was $100 per hour.
In response to a Freedom of Information Law request by The Daily Gazette, the district said that Rissetto spent 55.5 hours interviewing people, but who she interviewed and other documents she reviewed have been blacked out.
She spent 44.25 hours on something called “brief,” which district spokeswoman Karen Corona said refers to reports that Rissetto drafted. Rissetto spent 12.25 hours on prep work, 13.5 hours on summary, three hours on research and 3.75 hours at a Board of Education meeting. The total cost was $12,925.
Former Board of Education president Jeff Janiszewski, who led the board when it commissioned the report, said he believes it was worth the expense.
“We obviously had to properly assess whether we had problems in senior management in the Raucci matter. You can’t ask senior management to investigate itself,” he said.
Among the behavior alleged was that Raucci told a newly hired female employee to “keep your appearance pleasing for your supervisor” and that he inappropriately touched co-workers, including former employee Ronald Kriss, who is suing the district for $8 million. Kriss won a workers’ compensation ruling in his favor.
In addition, Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney, who is prosecuting Raucci on charges of arson and terrorism, alleged that school officials were “beholden” to Raucci; he resigned after his arrest from his position as the district’s facilities supervisor..............>>>>...........>>>>............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/22/0722_raucci/

Quoted Text

     
District rejects appeal of information denial
BY MICHAEL GOOT Gazette Reporter

    The Schenectady City School District has rejected an appeal of its denial of a Freedom of Information Law request from The Daily Gazette seeking information about the investigation of former facilities director Steven Raucci’s workplace misconduct.
    The Gazette had asked for the report compiled by Rachel Rissetto, who was hired by the district at a cost of $100 an hour to find out whether Raucci sexually harassed and demeaned colleagues and if school officials knew about it but did not act.
    Raucci is facing 26 counts of terrorism and other charges in a separate criminal investigation for allegedly planting explosive devices on the cars and homes of people that he perceived as his enemies. There are also allegations in civil court proceedings of workplace misconduct by Raucci.
    District officials had initially denied the newspaper’s request in a letter dated June 30, saying that there would be an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” if the report were disclosed and it is an intra-agency report and not a fi nal agency policy or determination.
    The Gazette appealed this decision on July 1. The district denied the appeal on Friday, citing the same reasons. The district’s FOIL officer, Sal DeAngelo, said that records that are intra-agency are exempt from disclosure provided that the material is not statistical or factual tabulations or data, instructions to staff that affect the public, final agency policy or determinations or external audits.
    “The purpose of this exemption is to permit people within an agency to exchange opinions, advice and criticism freely and frankly, without the chilling prospect of public disclosure,” DeAngelo wrote.
    Regarding the privacy issue, DeAngelo said that when allegations or charges of misconduct have either not been determined by the employer or resulted in disciplinary action, any records related to the alleged misconduct are not subject to disclosure by FOIL.
...........>>>>............>>>>..........http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar00803

Anyone who gets a job in a local school gets it by knowing folks......WE ALL KNOW THIS.....

WHO ARE HIS HANDLERS????