|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In the wake of substantial controversy over district spending, the Mountain View Whisman school board earlier this month approved revised procedures for entering into contracts and passed updated restrictions on when district officials have the authority to award contracts.
The board took unanimous votes at a Nov. 7 meeting to approve the new contract process, as well as to adopt an updated resolution on the delegation of contracting authority.
The decisions come as the board has faced heated backlash in recent months over various six-figure contracts that Mountain View Whisman entered into, including for someone who describes herself as a “certified master energy healer” to offer meditation sessions for district officials.
The district had also been paying for the services of an external public relations firm, as well as for Superintendent Ayindé Rudolph, who recently resigned, to get coaching from his former boss in a prior district. Many of these contracts have subsequently been canceled.
Parents and community members have criticized the school board for not exercising more control over district spending decisions, and for approving these and other contracts. The state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team has announced that it will conduct an audit of Mountain View Whisman meant to investigate potential fraud, misappropriation of funds or other illegal fiscal activity.
At the Nov. 7 meeting, district parent Mohan Gurunathan told the board that he had repeatedly asked why these contracts were approved in the first place and hadn’t gotten a response.
“Why did the board vote these through without oversight or scrutiny?” Gurunathan asked. “We deserve an explanation. We deserve accountability.”
Delegated authority
The board voted 4-0 to adopt a resolution outlining when it will delegate authority to the superintendent and other top district administrators to enter into contracts. It replaces a prior delegation of authority from 2015.
When the board delegates contracting authority, district officials have the power to award certain contracts without first seeking board approval, but they still have to subsequently come back to the board for ratification.
Specifically, the resolution gives the superintendent, chief business officer, associate superintendents and assistant superintendents the power to award contracts up to certain amounts, which differ based on the type of contract:
- Construction, repairs or maintenance: Up to $220,000
- Other services: Up to $50,000, per vendor per year
- Equipment, materials and supplies: Up to the current state bid limit, which is now $114,500
The board delegated authority for “student services” contracts, without setting a monetary limit. These include classroom-based services for individual students and special education services. Phil Henderson, Mountain View Whisman’s attorney, has previously told the board that these types of contracts often need to be done more quickly, rather than waiting for a board meeting.
Contract approval process
The board also voted on Nov. 7 to institute specific processes for reviewing and selecting vendors with which to contract. The guidelines in some cases match existing practices and in other cases add new rules, district officials have said.
The processes are broken down by the type of contract and the amount of money being spent.
For instance, the board voted that for any contract for professional or “special” services that exceeds $50,000, staff should seek prices from multiple vendors; review and evaluate vendors’ websites, references and qualifications; and select the qualified vendor who provides the best value at a “reasonable price.”
A draft of the procedures listed a $75,000 threshold for these contracts, but the board decided to lower it to $50,000. Board president Devon Conley pushed for a $25,000 limit, but the other board members preferred $50,000.
The district has also created a checklist document, where staff can confirm that they followed the outlined steps for a given type of contract.
Update on canceled contracts
At the Oct. 7 meeting, Chief Business Officer Rebecca Westover also provided an update on various contracts that the district opted to cancel after facing backlash.
Among them, the district canceled a $189,000 contract with Alycia Diggs-Chavis to provide 160 guided meditation sessions for district leaders. According to Westover, the district has recouped $94,500. The other half was due upon contract initiation and is under review by the district’s attorney, Westover said.
The district also canceled a $180,000 contract with Woodberry Associates for public relations work and has recouped $150,000, Westover said.
Another canceled contract was with ALULA to provide coaching and other services. The district recouped the full $270,450, Westover said.
There was also a $326,584 contract with ILO for leadership development and executive coaching, which the district canceled. According to Westover, the district has recouped half the money. The other half hasn’t been paid and the district’s attorney is reviewing the matter, she said.
The district also recouped $32,000 out of a $48,000 contract with Peter Gorman, Westover said. The contract was to provide “executive support and organizational development” for the superintendent and district leadership team.
“Why did the board vote these through without oversight or scrutiny?” Gurunathan asked. “We deserve an explanation. We deserve accountability.”
Lol, those questions are the funniest rhetorical questions. This guy must watch the youtube replays on repeat to hear himself speak.
Zoe loves to quote him because she can’t find anyone else talking in those meetings.
Ultimately, you get accountability at the ballot box, son. And you don’t deserve an explanation when you ask dumb questions or seek answers to questions that aren’t productive.