Board of Education Meeting, February 24, 2022

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0sb8MPhX30

Note: The meeting is held in person and therefore some votes and comments are not audible.

After the board prayer and pledge of allegiance (led by Alvaro Ceron-Ruiz), roll is taken and the amended agenda is passed. The legislative update was added as an agenda item after the agenda was posted. The board unanimously approves the draft meeting minutes.

 

Next, Dr. Miller presents Item 2.7, “The Unsung Partner!”. This month’s recognition goes to Vanessa Parrish, a licensed cosmetologist, business owner, and educator/mentor. She has partnered with PGCPS cosmetology students and classes and serves on the Career and Technical Advisory Board. The board takes photographs with Ms. Parrish.

Dr. Miller then attempts to present the Report of the Chair but can’t find her report in her papers. She moves on to reading the names of people for the moment of silence and announces the resignation of Raaheelah Ahmed and upcoming BOE meetings. Miller notes that with the resignation of Ahmed, she is making the recommendation that Judy Mickens-Murray be the chair of the Policy and Governance Committee with Pamela Boozer-Strother as vice chair. Williams moves the recommendation, and it passes.

Dr. Goldson presents the Report of the Chief Executive Officer, announcing that PGCPS has won a silver award from the National School Board Association’s 2022 Magna Awards Program for equity in language immersion programs. February 27 will be the last date for voluntary at-home COVID testing, and Goldson urges people to continue to take advantage of the COVID-19 vaccination clinics. Free online tutoring is available to all students through the online program TutorMe. She thanks the more than 10,000 stakeholders who shared feedback on the draft school calendars, and she will be presenting the calendar on March 10.

Miller states the board did not hold its planned executive session prior to this meeting because of the absence of five elected members. In the spirit of transparency, she wants to provide an update on the board’s efforts to procure legal services. She introduces Donna Parks from the PGCPS Purchasing Department to provide an update on board legal services procurement. Ms. Parks explains that in 2021 an RFP was advertised for legal services and the county received four proposals, all of which were rejected prior to award. This RFP was canceled in November 2021, in conformance with state regulations, and all respondents were notified and encouraged to apply for the rebid. A new draft RFP is currently in the final approval process with a tentative release date of February 28. The four previous applicants will be notified the day it is posted.

Shayla Adams-Stafford then presents the progress report of the Academic Achievement Committee (available on BoardDocs).

Adams-Stafford then asks if the Board was supposed to vote on the legal services RFP. Miller replies no but that the board had some business to conduct in the executive session but “you weren’t there.”

Belinda Queen arrives late to the meeting and cannot present the recommendations from the Operations, Budget & Fiscal Affairs Committee regarding the FY2023 Proposed Operating Budget because she has been locked out of her email and the network. She asks her vice-chair, Kenneth Harris, to do the presentation. Miller explains that Queen had announced her retirement from the board but that change in plans was not relayed to the IT department. Queen corrects her that she had announced her intent and that she was going to make a formal announcement at the last budget meeting, but she has not officially resign. Queen is quite perturbed about the situation and deems it “tacky” that IT shut off her email.

Harris goes on to provide the recommendations (available on BoardDocs). There is some discussion on the need for a vote to accept the recommendations. Valentine asks for clarification on whether this is for accepting the report or for the actual recommendations. Adams-Stafford asks why there is a vote when no vote was taken on accepting her Academic Achievement Committee report. Miller seems to be wanting the board to take a vote to accept the report (which is unanimously approved by the board) and then discuss and vote on each proposed budget amendment. Harris reads the first one, which was proposed by Adams-Stafford and Ahmed. The amendment requests technical assistance for staff in implementing multi-tiered systems of support to ensure fidelity. Goldson responds that the current negotiated contract provides five substitute days for special education teachers that can be taken to input the required data. Only 50 people have taken advantage of this offer.

Murray stops the discussion and asks if these amendments can be considered during the budget discussion.

Miller responds affirmatively. There is some confusion as to where they are in the agenda as Miller announces public comment. However, the next agenda item is the Policy & Governance Committee Leadership and Legislative Update. Judy Mickens-Murray presents the report with additional updates provided by Valerie Ervin from the PGCPS administration. The system is currently tracking more than 100 bills in Annapolis, and she highlights a few of interest.

Next is Public Comment. Those present speak about saving the alternative schools and community based classroom program in their current form. Members of PGCEA and its president, Dr. Donna Christy, speak on  the budget.

The consent agenda includes seven proclamations: Read Across America, National World Languages Week, Pi Day, Prince George’s County History Day Competition, Observation of Irish American Heritage Month, National Women’s History Month, and Arts in Our Schools Month. These pass unanimously.

Next is the Budget Consent Agenda.

Item 5.1 and 5.2 are passed. Queen asks for clarification on Item 5.1, which is for the purchase of Edge Routers, and whether it will help close the digital divide. Goldson notes this will improve connectivity within buildings but does not increase the radius of wifi outside the school building. These two items pass unanimously.

Item 5.3 is the FY 2023 Board of Education Requested Annual Operating Budget.

Adams-Stafford asks for clarification on where the budget amendments fit in as they are not on the agenda. Williams explains they moved the amendments to this item per the request of Murray. Queen asks why the board is voting on the budget first if there are things they want to change. Valentine states that as the motion maker to accept the budget, he will accept all amendments.

Harris then moves to amend the motion to include the request for technical support for special education. PGCPS has developed its own tracking system and assistance is requested to ensure fidelity of the multi-tiered systems. The amendment includes paid time for data entry, technical support, and training in high-needs schools. Valentine accepts the amendment. Murray states that as a special education teacher, he is in support of this amendment. Adams-Stafford speaks about her intent in introducing this amendment with Ahmed, citing concerns about teacher burnout. She notes the school system has designed a tracking system to identify students struggling or at risk of failing but now we need educators to have the time to input data.

Thomas is in support but has questions about the process of voting on budget amendments, noting he doesn’t recall the board doing it this way before. He is concerned that as currently proposed, the board would be voting on the motion to approve the budget with just one amendment. Valentine states that for the sake of collegiality, he can rescind his motion. Thomas agrees that is the right way to proceed.

Miller recognizes the board’s Policy Director, Brandon Cooper, who states that according to Robert’s Rules of Orders, 12-3, either Valentine’s or Thomas’ proposals are acceptable. The board determines they will proceed as they are doing.

Conversation continues regarding this amendment with Queen, Adams-Stafford, and Mickens-Murray presenting their viewpoints. During Queen’s second round, she forcefully states that she is tired of the “menu being set” by the CEO. When the board comes with changes, they expect them to be incorporated because they are representing the people. She wants the administration to come to the board and ask if they have adjustments.

Murray thanks for Queen for her comments and then asks for clarification from Dr. Donna Christy, president of PGCEA, regarding Goldson’s assertion that the contract gives special education teachers 5 substitute days/year to input required data. Christy notes it is her understanding this budget amendment is for the “pre-referral process” and is to provide general education teachers with time for data input. Therefore the language in Article 7M of the negotiated contract would not apply to them as it is for special education teachers. Note that this confusion may have arisen because the motion maker and Mr. Murray in his first comments described the need for this amendment for special educators.

Sonya Williams thinks this is a good idea but is wondering what will this amendment actually mean in the budget? She states you cannot alter a budget without a number. It is the responsibility of the board to have a budget with uses and numbers, and she has not heard that from this amendment. It is just we would like more, to give more, so more can be done.

Valentines summarizes the conversation and then asks Goldson that if the county council does give additional funds to the school system, when it comes time to reconciliation in June, would she be willing to consider this amendment and others?

Goldson responds that in the interest of transparency, the budget being submitted already has an $80 million deficit. On February 10, they presented to the board what they were going to do to close that gap. The school system has lost funding due to a decline in enrollment numbers, which impacts student-based budgeting. If they get additional funds, that money needs to get in the schools for students. Once the hole is filled, we could have a conversation around how to use extra money. She also asks that teachers maximize the five days they already have available to them in the contract. If the 5 days were being used and they wanted 10, that would be different. She wants her staff to have the time to do the best they can for every student. Again, she wants to fill the hole of student-based budgeting, which goes directly to the classroom and students.

Adams-Stafford clarifies that the 5 days Goldson is discussing is for special education teachers. This amendment is for general education teachers. It’s for students before they go to special education. There was no note attached to it because she wanted the administration to come up with a figure. She expresses frustration with board members suggesting she gather additional data and budgetary figures and characterizes it as moving the goal post. The board does not meet regularly with administration, and the board was closed down this time last year, so this is her first real budget process.

In response to an inquiry from Williams about whether there is a challenge with data being input, Goldson notes she does not want to diminish all that teachers have been asked to do with COVID. Williams continues asking questions of Goldson regarding needs of teachers and whether survey of staff would be useful. Adams-Stafford explains that this amendment came out of an Academic Achievement Committee meeting where the administration stated technical assistance was needed to ensure these multi-tier systems of support have fidelity. She did not just come up with it.

The vote is called. [Note: Ceron-Ruiz cannot vote on budget items as a student board member]

Yes: Adams-Stafford, Harris, Murray, Queen, Thomas

No: Boozer-Strother, Mickens-Murray, Monteiro, Valentine, Williams, Miller

Motion fails.

The next budget amendment is presented by Queen and overturns the CEO’s proposed consolidation of the alternative schools. Boozer-Strother asks for background from Goldson on the proposed plan. Goldson explains the administration is planning to consolidate the four alternative high school programs into two schools, one serving the northern county and the other southern. A new alternative middle school will also be created with the same supports as the alternative high schools. Additional staffing will be provided. The three remaining students at the Community Based Classroom (co-located at the International High School) will be able to choose which of the alternative schools they want to attend. The alternative schools will continue to offer virtual options, flexible schedules, provide access to CTE, and allow students to take the classes needed to graduate rather than a full schedule. The county’s accountability office will be tracking students at risk of not graduating so they can enroll in these programs. Furthermore, the alternative schools have one-star ratings from 2018-2019 (the last time the ratings were done). This puts them at risk of having state oversight and possible closure. By converting these schools into programs, as other counties have done and as they were under Superintendent Dr. Clark, they will be removed from the state’s targeted report.

Adams-Stafford points out that the testimony has revealed that Community Based Classroom (CBC) should probably be expanded and should serve 1000s of other students. But to date, we have not received a comprehensive report on post-COVID data. We don’t know how students are identified for this program, how many students qualify at this point, a lot of core components about this consolidation plan have not been answered. This can be a “yes, and”….we can keep these schools open and expand the model to accommodate additional students. She presents a flip chart with key information about CBC and the need to retain the current structure. Adams-Stafford notes this is a normal process of requesting funds; if the county does not fully fund the proposed budget, then the BOE and administration will cut the amendments.

Thomas asks Goldson about the public outcry against the proposal and if its misunderstanding or if there is something more. Goldson states everything has been previously presented. People are very passionate, but this is just us making revisions, adding more seats, and removing a star rating that we cannot control from the state level. She acknowledges the excellent graduate rates at CBC but notes the accountability framework measures success under a number of areas, not just graduation rates. Schools that remain open with one-star rating can then be subject to state intervention, and she is trying to avoid that and give students the support they need. Thomas responds that information is helpful but his role on the board is to respond to constituents. This debate stands out among the many polarized debates he has heard over the last 4 years, and the board has heard from over 100 different people. He continues by drawing distinctions between the elected and appointed members and who is responsive to the public.

Boozer-Strother then comments that over the last 2 years the board has trusted Goldson’s decisions and asks her to explain why this is important. Goldson explains that the previous state superintendent understood the concerns of county school system administrators over non-traditional schools being placed on the star rating list and agreed that the structure was probably not the best and would consider removing them. That never happened, and now we have a new state superintendent. While she is not trying to skirt accountability, the supports offered in non-traditional environments are necessary, and the best thing to do is convert them back to programs, as they were more than 20 years ago.

Discussion continues on this amendment. Williams points out the importance of the accountability office and its tracking of data and students. She believes it is the job of the board to explain to their constituents the rationale behind decisions like the alternative school redesign. Mickens-Murray and Valentine also offer their thoughts on the amendment and proposed consolidation. In response to Valentine’s question about additional supports being offered in the consolidation plan, Goldson provides a list of staffing positions.

Shayla Adams-Stafford then asks additional questions of Goldson, including what the criteria are for students going to the alternative schools, how many students are going to qualify, how can we consolidate locations but have more students who need it, why can’t we keep CBC in the central part of the county and expand offerings to every high school? Adams-Stafford says this deserves more time and thought, not that administration has not put a lot of thought into it, but the board needs more time to discuss.

Queen notes that there are one-star ratings for hotels or car dealerships, and they stay open. Motel 6 is still open. We have to be diverse and expand our thinking. Murray believes there are many things in the school system that need fixing but the alternative schools are not one of them. It is inherently wrong and racist to use star ratings to close an alternative high school. These are places of last resort.

Vote is taken.

Yes: Adams-Stafford, Harris, Murray, Queen, and Thomas

No: Boozer-Strother, Mickens-Murray, Monteiro, Williams

Abstain: Valentine, Miller

Motion fails

The next amendment is for the expansion of restorative practice training. Queen believes there is no point in having discussion because everything is just going to fail so let’s not waste taxpayer money or people’s time. These are amendments we worked hard on in the budget committee, and she is very disappointed.

Boozer-Strother asks Goldson about the five-year training expansion in the budget who replies that it is already included in the budget so there is no need for an amendment. The administration has already planned on expanding restorative practices training over 5 years as well as mental health training over 3 years. Adams-Stafford clarifies this amendment is so educators receive training during their work hours, not after school or weekend. Goldson responds she is more than willing to offer both day and evening/weekend trainings if the budget passes, which will include an increase in substitute pay. That will hopefully make them able to attract more substitutes. Right now, there are not enough substitutes to cover staff if they are out doing training. Queen again reiterates her frustration with the menu being set by the administration. She wants something left on the table so the stakeholders, board members, and others can add to the menu. There is further discussion with comments and clarifying questions from Boozer-Strother and Williams.

Adams-Stafford argues that restorative practice is an ongoing process of training and waiting until there are more substitutes means you may as well not have restorative practice schools. Use the workshop money already allocated to pay substitutes and let the teachers take the training during the day. Williams and Adams-Stafford continue discussion of this amendment. Adams-Stafford ends that this is just a suggestion. This is a logistical issue. Maybe she doesn’t know what she’s talking about but she’s just saying that having a training for a school-wide program on a Saturday is not going to be successful. Goldson responds that everyone is tired and must not be hearing each other. She started this conversation saying she is willing to offer training during the day if she can get more subs. That is her word and commitment. You don’t need an amendment for it. My word is my bond. What I say I am going to do, I am going to do.

The vote is taken.

Yes: Adams-Stafford, Harris, Murray, Queen, Thomas

No: Boozer-Strother, Mickens-Murray, Monteiro, Valentine, Williams, Miller

The motion fails.

The next amendment is the parent to para-professional program with an unknown budget implication. Adams-Stafford explains that for $500,000 the para-professional program could be expanded to fulfill one of the recommendations of the English Language Learner workgroup. Only 4 percent of the PGCPS teaching staff is Latinx while the Latinx student population is rapidly growing. And it’s not just for Latinx parents but for bilingual learners. Parents are a great resource. This program will build on our successful paraprofessional program. This is equity. I know people are falling asleep, but I will not stop talking about equity.

Alvaro Ceron-Ruiz states he does not get to vote on the budget, but as a student, he experiences the effects of this teacher and sub shortage. It is critical to expand the pools of teachers and subs so students are not taken from their education. As a Latino student, he cannot overemphasize the importance of having teachers that look like him. He asks that this amendment be added to the budget for the county council to consider.

Boozer-Strother asks Goldson what can be done within the existing HR department budget. Goldson responds that the ELL work group recommendations have been charted out in the workplan, and only four need to be further discussed. She acknowledges there are vacant paraprofessional positions throughout the school systems and outlines the current ways the school system is engaging to expand the number of Latinx teachers. Valentine asks if this can also be done through existing SBB at the school level, and Goldson responds affirmatively.

Board members present further suggestions.

The vote is taken.

Yes: Adams-Stafford, Harris, Murray, Queen, Thomas

No: Boozer-Strother, Mickens-Murray, Monteiro, Valentine, Williams, Miller

Next is the vote on the CEO’s budget proposal.

Queen says it has been a pleasure serving as chair of the OBAFA Committee. Thomas is thinking back to the board retreat and the discussion around what board members saw as their role. Although he does not think there is any ill intent, it just seems misaligned when ideas and suggestions are brought forward and will serve the public best and we see the votes fall the exact same way every time. It’s disheartening, and he’s leaving disappointed but it wasn’t anything he didn’t expect. Adams-Stafford asked that the administration open the lines of communication to the board so these discussions could happen earlier. Boozer-Strother states that fiscal responsibility is a value of our constituents as well. Williams and Valentine also make comments.

The budget vote is taken, with Murray the only no vote.

Items 6.1 through 6.6 are First Readers of policies. These include: Draft Policy Indigenous Peoples’ Land Acknowledgement; Draft Policy Inclusive Environments for LGBTQIA+ people; and Recission of Policies 5110, 5119.5, 5140, and 6157. All policies are on Board Docs. These pass.

There is no motion to approve actions in executive session since there was no session.