|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Mountain View Whisman School District plans to create a budget advisory committee following recent community outcry over district spending on contracts for leadership coaching, staff wellness services and public relations work.
The school board reviewed a proposal at a Thursday, Sept. 5, meeting to create a committee that would examine the district’s budget and make recommendations to the superintendent. The advisory group would be made up of parents, community members, district administrators, union representatives and a board member.
District staff would review the applicants and make a recommendation to the board, which would have final authority over who to appoint to the committee, Superintendent Ayindé Rudolph said at Thursday’s meeting.
The district has received public criticism in recent months for its spending, including multiple six-figure contracts for specialized coaching and meditation sessions for top administrators. Some parents and community members have accused the district of irresponsibly using taxpayer money and demanded more accountability.
District officials and board members have defended the spending as important to support district staff, while also acknowledging that there’s been anger and distrust about district spending decisions dating back to the spring.
“There’s been a demonstrated disconnect between stakeholders and the district over the use of resources,” Rudolph said. “We want to be responsive to that.”
At the meeting, six members of the public addressed the board about plans to create a budget advisory committee. The speakers raised doubts and concerns about the committee’s transparency and effectiveness in creating change.
“Meaningful changes in policy (are) going to speak more than creating some advisory committee that reports to the superintendent,” Karin Dillon said.
Board members signaled support for creating the committee and discussed details including its size, whether meetings would be recorded and when to decide on who to appoint.
“There is clearly a bottleneck here, where the public feels like they aren’t able to participate and don’t even have all the information they need,” board President Devon Conley said. “This is an attempt to try to work on that. It’s not going to solve everything. It isn’t perfect by itself, but it’s a step in that direction.”
Rudolph told the board that the committee wouldn’t be subject to the requirements of the Brown Act or Greene Act, which regulate public meetings, and asked the board whether it wanted to have the meetings recorded and posted online.
Board members were supportive of making the meetings available for members of the public to watch in-person or online, but raised questions about recording them for later viewing. Trustee Laura Blakely said she was concerned recording could chill interest in serving on the committee, while Conley suggested asking applicants about their views on recording.
The board did express support for posting meeting agendas and minutes, as well as materials that the committee reviewed.
Trustee Bill Lambert asked how the group would be led, and whether it would be appropriate to hire a facilitator. Rudolph said district officials had considered the idea, but were hesitant because the district had been receiving criticism for spending money on areas outside of the classroom. Rudolph said that staff were open to a facilitator, but were looking for board direction.
Lambert suggested an alternative would be having the group elect its own leader who would run meetings and work with district staff to establish agendas. Blakely was supportive of this idea.
According to Rudolph, the idea is for the group to meet at least quarterly, although it may meet more often, and for members to commit to attend at least 75% of the meetings.
Applications are available at mvw.sd/BAC. The deadline to apply is Sept. 23, according to district spokesperson Shelly Hausman.
Money should be spent on students, not on backrubs for administrators.
The suggested committee would have a parent, a community member and three others from the existing school people. I would suggest dropping the Administration person as a committee member, and have the Administration person become the Facilitator.
This matter is about “The Tone at the Top”. The cultural environment and corporate values need to change before such a committee can be effective. Bottom line this is a toothless white wash with with no powers to placate the masses!
It is very important for the public wishing “transparency” to note, Trustee Blakely drew up this idea and sent it to President Conley (view the meeting recording). According to the text “definitions” BAC is specifically not a Brown Act or a Green Act covered group. It is a Superintendent Committee, and only ‘reports to the Superintendent’. It is not a Board policy advisory committee. Whatever OPACITY is avoided is at the complete discretion of the Superintendent (look up the Board Policy on that). That Dr. Rudolph – is he just fooling with you? US?
The Superintendent seems to intend that the Board give their blessing to his staff’s choices, by a vote. But no one can see the names of who else applied and was rejected by Rudolph’s staff!
Public, there you see how this is starting to go? Again the CONLEY/Rudolph form of public transparency? Again.
9130 Board Policy, Board Committees
https://www.mvwsd.org/district_business/board_policies/bylaws_of_the_board_9000/9130_b_b_-_board_committees
… Unless otherwise exempted by law, Board-created committees shall provide public notice of their meetings and conduct meetings in accordance with Government Code 54950-54963 (the Brown Act). …
Standing committees of the Board, irrespective of membership, are those that have a continuing subject matter jurisdiction or a meeting schedule established by action of the Board. (Government Code 54952)
Standing committees with a continuing subject matter jurisdiction include, but are not limited to, those responsible for providing advice on BUDGETS, audits, Board policy, contracts, and personnel matters at the Board’s request.
…
Interesting sham. LASD board budget Review Committee has seven or more citizen members. Notices meetings at least. This idea of three staff members and at most two members of the public is a joke.
So a toothless committee is formed and reports directly to the Chakra Superintendent? Amazing!