The Little Rock School board had a very productive meeting tonight and they made some very important decisions including a new resolution that will guide board and superintendent relationships as they work together for our kids, a somber discussion of future budgets if we lose a sizable number of students to the voucher scam, and a vote to censure board member Vicki Hatter for violating some policies.
We also learned Thursday that board member Sandrekkia Morning will be resigning from the board in November. The board will take applications and decide on someone to fill out the rest of her term.
Cell phone policy, school calendar in flux
The Little Rock School District is considering major changes to the cell phone policy for students and the school year calendar. Through September and October, the board is having community meetings to discuss prohibiting phones in the classroom. It is clear, if you talk to any educator, that cell phones have become a problem in our classrooms. Students stay distracted and disengaged as they play on their phones. This is impeding education and there is growing evidence that discipline issues are more and more related to phones. The district wants to hear from parents, students and teachers on the best way forward.
There are three options. They could ban phones from our schools, they could leave the current policy in place, or they could find innovative ways to control phone use in the schools.
The other issue is moving from a traditional calendar to a non-traditional calendar. This does not mean year-round school; we would have the same number of school days for students (178), but they would be broken up differently.
Under the non-traditional calendar, there would be one-week breaks in the fall and winter, and for Thanksgiving. There would be a two-week break for the winter and spring break. Summer break would only be seven weeks. The idea is to have more teacher contact with students before the state exams. If you are interested in attending the remaining meetings where your voice can be heard on this, they are being held on the following dates:
Wednesday, Oct. 2 – With Zone 8 board member Greg Adams at McDermott Elementary School
Thursday, Oct. 3 – With Zone 4 board member Leigh Ann Wilson and City Director Capi Peck at Terry Elementary
Tuesday, Oct. 15 – With Zone 5 board member Anna Strong at Hall Media Center
Monday, Oct. 21 – With Zone 6 representative Vicki Hatter and City Director Andrea Lewis at Henderson
Wednesday, Oct. 23 – With Zone 9 representative Joyce Wesley at Roberts Elementary
Board/superintendent relations
The board approved a document called the LRSD Board of Directors’ Resolution. This document was created after Superintendent Jermall Wright rescinded his resignation. The resolution clearly defines the roles of the board and the superintendent and adds some much-needed reforms to the board meetings.
In the document, the board reaffirmed board policy that they hire a superintendent to run day-to-day operations and that the board will continue to set policy and evaluate the work the superintendent is doing. The board recognized the superintendent as the educational leader of the school district and clarified that it will refer all operational and management matters received from staff, parents and community members to the superintendent to address. Board members also agreed to allow the administration to facilitate the problem-solving and resolution process with district employees and parents and agreed to refrain from inserting themselves by directing employees and parents to take certain actions or positions during the problem-solving/resolution process.
The board agreed that all board members will show respect at board meetings and refrain from name-calling, disrespectful treatment or embarrassing other board members, the superintendent, administrators, staff members, guest presenters or members of the audience. This comes after months of tense and unpleasant board meetings rife with interpersonal conflict. And most importantly for me, they have agreed to make the staff attorney parliamentarian at board meetings to help ensure efficiency at board meetings using Robert’s Rules of Order.
The board and the superintendent also agreed to address the issue that our district currently has two sets of policy sources: board policies and the Policy Personnel Manual (PPM). Administrations in the past have argued that there should only be one set of policies. To rectify this, the board agreed to establish a committee to identify and implement a process to review and revise current board policies. This committee will be co-chaired by a board member and an attorney.
The board also agreed to a future debate and vote on reducing the membership of the Personnel Policy Committee to no more than nine teachers and three administrators. The documents provided by the district explained that the superintendent desires to work more closely with the committee. But in its current structure, with a representative from every school in the district, the committee’s size makes it difficult to facilitate effective collaboration, communication and outcomes.
Members of the Personnel Policy Committee raised concerns about the changes to the personnel policy manual and the makeup of their committee. I share some of their concerns and am excited that our board has agreed to hold public discussion and debate on a future plan.
The resolution passed 7-2, with Hatter and Norma Johnson voting no.
Finance report
The board approved the June 2024 financial report. The district is again strong financially. Revenue was up last year and the district ended with a $23,919,314 operational fund balance. Although the budget cuts have been hard, they are doing the job of keeping our district solvent.
The board also approved the fiscal year 2025 budget. Chief Financial Officer Kelsey Bailey and Wright told the board that if we lose more money because families pull out of the district to use the new state-funded LEARNS vouchers to enroll in private schools, we will have to start looking at consolidating our buildings.
A task force last year began to look at where our population is moving and where we need buildings. We have the buildings for a 23,000-student school district. But for over a decade now, we have been a 19,000-student district. We have been optimistic that we would attract students back, but at some point, we have to be realistic and admit we may have too many buildings and that 4,000 students are not coming back.
The administration also said we cannot continue to balance this budget on the backs of staff reduction. There is no plan to close buildings and no one wants to do it, but those conversations may have to happen. Do not read this as the LRSD is in financial trouble. We are strong right now, but we do have too many properties for the number of students we have. We have too many programs that have not been evaluated for effectiveness. Wright’s task will be to come up with a plan that allows our school to continue to thrive financially.
The school board next approved a new stipend pay schedule for teachers and staff who perform extra work.
An extra $20K
The board next discussed the best way to do the board’s professional development which they agreed to do in their working document with Dr. Wright. There were two options for the board to consider. The first was from the Council of Great City Schools, an organization that we are a member of and that has worked closely with school districts like ours. There’s an unusual catch: the price for this program is $40,000 for two years with unanimous board approval of the contract, but the cost goes to $60,000 if board approval for the contract is not unanimous.
The second option was from the Howard University Board Member Academy. If all board members participated in this option, the cost would be $45,000 plus travel to Washington, D.C., to attend in-person sessions.
Anna Strong made the motion to work with the Council of Great City Schools, and Johnson seconded. Directors Wesley and Morning both were concerned about the extra charge to be added if the board did not support it unanimously.
And they were right to be, because the vote was not unanimous. Hatter voted no without explanation. This means the cost goes up $20,000 since the vote was not unanimous.
Hatter censured
The board then voted to go into executive session to possibly discipline an elected official. At this point, Hatter accused Michael Mason of assaulting her in a previous executive session and wanted that added to the motion so the board could consider possible discipline. The board agreed that would also be discussed.
When the board came out of executive session, however, only Hatter was mentioned. A motion was made to censure Hatter for violating board policy 1.23 for persistently violating the code of conduct.
The censure specifically cited paragraph 5, which states, “Board members should praise employees when it is appropriate to do so, but criticism must be handled through the office of the superintendent.” It also cited paragraph 6, which states, “Interaction between the superintendent and Board members will be constructive, open, productive and mutually respectful.” And finally, they cited paragraph 17, which states, “A Board member will avoid not only actual conflicts of interest but the appearance of a conflict of interest.” It then went on to say that the board member code of conduct states that board members “shall adhere to the highest ethical standards.”
Included in the motion to censure Hatter was a complaint that she had not followed board policy on visiting schools. The motion also said that she took a cash advance for board member training in Florida in 2023, but when the training was canceled she did not repay the advance until July 2024, despite requests by staff. It also states that she “has been repeatedly disrespectful to the superintendent in board meetings and has criticized district personnel in public instead of through the office of the superintendent.”
Hatter said she has done nothing wrong, and that while she would take the punishment, she would have more to say in the future.
Morning argued they all board members had been rude and she encouraged the board to focus on kids and stop the fighting.
The motion to censure Hatter passed, despite “no” votes from Hatter and Morning.
Source
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
