Superintendent vote reveals big problem with family ties Thursday, June 28, 2007 • The Express-Times Editorial School board The Phillipsburg School Board's decision this week not to renew Superintendent Gordon Pethick's contract comes as no surprise. The board's disenchantment has been building for some time. Board members cited several issues -- differences over a labor attorney, ethics complaints and Pethick's failure to notify a principal of a pending contract termination. The breaking point probably was Pethick's refusal to offer administrative job cuts, even after a judge, the state and town council signaled that the district's staff was top-heavy. Voters concurred on a general level, rejecting this year's school budget. It didn't help, either, that teachers had endured job cuts and waged a bitter contract fight this past year, focusing on contributions to health care coverage. The union won that battle; taxpayers should note Pethick hung in for the health-care concessions. Still, a school board needs confidence in its leader, and this relationship was eroding. The board's decision to cut two administrative jobs and reduce the tax rate is a reasonable response to taxpayers' disgruntlement. The most surprising part of his firing is that just seven members of the 12-member board took part in the 4-3 vote; four members abstained because family members are employed by the district. If this vote is a conflict for them, so is every other decision involving money, personnel, discipline, administrative moves, contracts, etc. How is it not? Stocking school boards with relatives of employees is a bad idea, blurring what should be a clear line between labor and management. Similarly, teachers and retired teachers should refrain from serving. With the power of unions, the deck is stacked on issues involving pay, benefits, tenure protection, sick days and buyouts. If the school board thinks the district needs a more pro-labor superintendent and lawyer, taxpayers beware.