Last Thoughts from the Board

 I actually left the Board meeting last night before the last 10 minutes because President Rankin was going on and on without saying much. But I thought it important just to hear the votes so I went back and listened. Boy, am I glad I did because there were interesting statements all around.

Superintendent Brent Jones asked, "When do you want this timeline?" This appeared to confuse the Board because the timeline is part of the plan so if they vote for the plan, it includes the timeline. He said, "I just wanted to make sure you are are deliberate in date you set." This was weird because the Board isn't setting any dates except the ones staff puts out. 

Director Brandon Hersey broke in and said that the upcoming engagement is for "what families would want to see?"

He then said, "We often times towards the end of the year get flack for like presenting new big things and folks are very rightfully so ready for summer.  So I would like to know during the engagement sessions if it’s possible to ask a question when would be the ideal time for students and families to know the plan so that they can adequately engage."

There's the district in a nutshell. 

They KNOW it's the end of the year, a busy and exhausting time for families and school staff. 

They KNOW that everyone has a right to know what the plan is but are these engagement sessions going to be about explaining this presentation to parents? Please.

Then he curiously said, "Not saying we have to do that." You mean give some of the most important and vital information there is for parents to know? What the future of this school district will look like?

Rankin then went on a ramble: "Can you do the work and produce the supporting analysis that we are expecting within the time - I think it would it would be best to get this, we don’t want to wait, we don’t want to say oh yeah, we’re planning on this and then and then drag it out for, even though to be very very clear, nothing’s changing this fall - laughs - nothing’s changing this fall but I also know that there’s a lot you know any decision that we push out means less time later for other engagement work."

So is she saying that the staff should come prepared to the engagement session with actual analysis of how they decided closing schools is the best bang for the buck? And why they didn't consider selling some properties (ones that are non-school)? 

Then Director Gina Topp said something HUGE, although I'm not sure she realized it.

"I think we set a timeline and we ought to try to stick to the timeline unless there is - through the engagement process - a massive outcry that this is happening too fast."

Oh my. Naturally there was dead silence after that because staff did NOT want to hear that nor did Rankin want it to get traction. (In an upcoming post with my thoughts, I think it would be GREAT to have a "massive outcry." )

Rankin, who feels the need to "and/or", "if this, then that" every single sentence said:

"I think I will say it sounds like we have we expect a recommendation in June unless you provide information that says that’s not possible."

What? How could she believe the staff would have done all this work and could NOT be ready in June?

Jones replies:

"If we are clear-eyed and bring a feasibility back that says we cannot do the depth of engagement that what I heard you all expecting, then I will ask for an extension perhaps or for. You all to consider. But otherwise we are going to plan for sometimes in June."

But, but the Board didn't say ANYTHING about what they want to see in the public engagement sessions. They had every opportunity to provide that firm guidance to staff and no one did. The depth of engagement might mean MORE meetings, not only the necessary ones.  (And there should be one for every one of the seven districts in the overall district. My money is on just five of them.)

Rankin then delivered a quick bombshell:

"And I think it’s important that again engagement doesn’t mean “what do you think about this?”

Wow. I guess I could crudely say that neither the president of the School Board nor the Superintendent give a rat's ass what parents and community members think.

Meaning parents there is NOTHING you can do or say about the plan so we don't care what you think but we are going to have a dog and pony show to allow you to vent a bit and then we all go home and watch Law and Order. FFS. 

She went on:

"It means being really honest and clear and transparent about this is what we are grappling with, here are the recommendations, you will be impacted and we want to hear from you about that but I mean just like with during COVID - “open schools now, never open schools” like we are not gonna, there’s gonna be, yeah, but I think the the best we can do as a system is be really clear and give people the opportunity to bring up things that maybe we missed or you missed (indicating staff) to strengthen your recommendations but when we have, we as a Board want to know that anything being brought to us has been honoring engagement and understanding of our community."

Being transparent would mean showing the analysis. Being transparent would mean meetings that are open-ended, not facilitated. 

I do not think this Board or senior leadership have honored engagement and the community one little bit. It's all necessary blather to be able to say, "yes, we had public engagement." 

Jones replied,  "We share that and in fact we need engagement. That drove kind of the ideation of this and so it’s not just to check the box by any stretch in imagination. We glean so much information from engagement that it’s necessary for us to do our work. I mean we can’t do this in isolation without the insight, wisdom, knowledge of both internal and external folks to the district so it’s really important to do that. We value it." 

I believe Jones to be a good-hearted person but this kind of shape-shifting of public engagement is unpleasant. Parents and community members, with their input at the last group of meetings, did NOT endorse closing schools. Jones "gleans" talking points from parents, not real input.

Rankin said, "Be on the lookout for engagement - “you didn’t think of this” engagement before recommendations. 

I think she means listening in case staff overlooked some key thing that the public can come back and hit back with. 

She continued, "We have to take final action which doesn’t happen until November." As if that's a long time off. In a school year, it's just around the corner.

People then poke off mic but could not be heard and then they all laughed. I'm glad they find humor in this situation.

Rankin concluded by saying "there are lots of engagement opportunities." 

She then took the vote. Director Joe Mizrahi's name came up first but he was at the airport but on the phone line. But there was silence. Then Rankin said he texted her that he was in security and that he was voting yes. She asked if they could take his vote that way since the text was now in the public domain. (Off mic, Legal head Garver said yes.)

Everyone else voted a simple aye for a unanimous vote.