2023-12-12

December 12, 2023

During the December 12, 2023, school board meeting, there were a few votes related to staffing that did not go the way that I would have liked.  Here's a brief description (obviously, I can't mention any protected personal information or anything discussed in executive session, but you'll get the gist).

Agenda Item K2: Administrative Recommendations

Motion 1: Yes

The first vote was to accept the administration's recommendations for the three assistant principals.  These people all went through the proper process, and I believe in allowing the administration to operate in the way that they see fit as long as there are no major red flags.  The board's job isn't to micromanage the district.

This motion was defeated.

Motion 2: No

The second vote was to approve the first two assistant principals, but to swap their assigned schools.  For reasons that I cannot begin to rationalize, the board thought it better to remove these assistant principals from the schools where they had previously worked and instead to put them somewhere else.

(There were some items mentioned during the discussion that I'll have to go back and re-listen to in order to better comment.)

This motion was carried.

Motion 3: Yes

The third vote was to approve the administration's third assistant principal recommendation as-is.  My first vote was already in favor of this, so I voted yes.

This motion was carried.

Agenda Item K3: Administrator Contract Renewals

Motion 1: No

As I mentioned before, our job on the board isn't to micromanage the district.  For years, the district has had a practice of giving administrators a 1-year contract renewal if they're doing okay but need some work, a 2-year contract renewal if they're doing great, and no renewal if they need improvement.  For these non-union employees, this has been a successful retention strategy, since an employee who is performing well can have her job guaranteed for a couple years out.  That's great for them, and it's great for us.

(Quick note: legally, we need to provide notice of any intent not to renew such a contract in December.  The non-renewal notice at this time does not mean that the employee will be terminated, but it does mean that we can terminate her.  Otherwise, her contract would auto-renew for another year.  At any time between December and the end of the school year, we could easily renew the contract, however.)

The board did not entertain a motion to accept the administration's contract renewal recommendations.  Rather, the motion was to extend the contacts of all such employees one year with the exception of the constables.  The president stated that he wanted to have a separate workshop to discuss their contract and how it worked.

(Note on the constables: I will vote down any contract that requires putting a firearm in a school.  However, I am not opposed to constables in our schools, just arming them.  Our constables are not "school cops"; they report directly to the district, have jurisdiction only on our properties, and perform important safety- and security-related work.  And I really mean that: they work on and manage our camera systems and our door lock systems.)

I believe that messing with the contract practices will have a negative effect on employee morale and will discourage people from working for the district.  I voted no.

This motion was carried.