Natasha’s Notes on the 06/05/2023 BOE Meeting

There is a lot to digest after the 06/05/2023 BOE meeting and much of it is not sitting well.

Teacher of the Year Awards

Congratulations to all the teachers for this recognition, and a huge thank you for all you do. 

As a community member pointed out, was the cafeteria setting the best the administration could do for the presentation? There is a perfectly good theater at GL that would have been a more appropriate setting- the same theater used last year for this very presentation. Were the cookies in the back, next to chairs on tables an attempt at a reception? There was no festive atmosphere. It was just a sad display. BOE’s and SI’s words rang hollow based on the lack of effort put forth to celebrate these outstanding teachers and retirees.

Frances, the board attorney, had a good night – making $412.50 (2.5 hrs * $165) for the entire public session (including the teacher and retirement awards) without uttering a word. Our tax dollars were wasted once again.

OPRA Custodian and OPRA requests

There was a beautifully choreographed conversation between Ms. Bradford and Ms. Kot regarding the need for the OPRA custodian function. Since Mr. Hopkins started in that role mid-February, Ms. Kot stated that there have been 44 OPRA requests. Prompted by Ms. Bradford, Ms. Kot spoke about looking at other districts in Union County to gauge our volume. 

In this bit of theatre, Ms. Kot also talked about how email log requests take a very long time to complete even though there have been no such requests since Mr. Hopkins took over. Why bring it up?

According to Ms. Kot, Mr. Hopkins attempts to complete three requests per week. At this pace, based on the volume quoted by Ms. Kot, he will never catch-up. Ms. Kot also stated that Mr. Hopkins is now being EXTRA careful, given that he made three recent errors in revealing what should have been redacted information.

The public can only know the actual volume of OPRA requests if we submit an OPRA! That’s because Mr. Hopkins is no longer publishing the requests. Based on previous analysis, we found many requests were duplicates (multiple requests for the same information). So while each request needs a response, the amount of work is minimal for the multiples. Also, the public has no way of evaluating the kind of requests being submitted – for meeting minutes or BOE Correspondence that could easily made public on the District website.

Given his other responsibilities, Ms. Khanna asked if Mr. Hopkins was the right person for the role. Ms. Kot responded that he applied and was the best applicant. This does NOT mean he is the right person. Who else applied? How was this advertised? I spoke to the fact that Mr. Hopkins, Director of World Languages, has done nothing to support the language program constantly under attack. That’s where he needs to focus, not OPRA requests.

Ms. Khanna also asked if there was anything the administration could do to minimize the number of OPRA requests such as preemptively publishing information that might be requested. Ms. Kot said there is nothing the administration could do. Again, that’s not true. After the first budget meeting this year, Ms. Kot said she would publish the line item budget, but she failed to do so. Members of the public had to OPRA the budget.  Another example of multiple OPRA requests generated by the lack of transparency from this administration. 

DEI and the Climate Survey

In response to a parent questioning the DEI survey, the SI stated that while some people don’t care about what the kids think, she cares about all kids and their feelings.  If the SI truly cared about all kids’ feelings, then she and Mr. Hopkins would have had an independent third party create and administer the survey. 

Responses on the Google form feed into a data sheet. The SI stated that she and Mr. Hopkins are the ones who have access to the data submitted. As owners of the form, they can do whatever they want with the data. Rows can be added to pad the response rate. Answers can be changed.  How can we trust that what will be presented is truly representative kids’ responses?

Does anyone doubt that the survey created and administered by Mr. Hopkins and the SI will show the schools’ climate in a favorable light?  Does anyone doubt that this survey will be used as part of the SI’s evaluation to demonstrate that the SI is progressing on the DEI strategic plan?

I also asked the SI (again) what she learned at the DEI conference she and Mr. Hopkins attended in Texas and how it would benefit the district. I also requested that she publish the materials she presented. She said she would.

Rankings and Proficiencies

On her resume posted on the Sarasota County schools site (no longer accessible), the SI lists that she increased HS rankings by 10 points while working in the Sparta district. At the previous Board meeting, Dr. Foregger had asked that the SI speak to the decline in our rankings (HS declined 52 points) and the plan to address the root cause(s). The BOE majority quickly closed ranks around the SI, questioning Dr. Foregger about which rankings and what methodology he was referencing. I asked the BOE members who had previously rushed to renew her contract if they grilled her on which rankings she cited on her resume. Obviously, the SI is very familiar with rankings and deems them important enough to include on her resume. So why did Dr. Foregger’s request go to a committee?  Why wouldn’t the BOE want to hear the SI speak to the severe decline in rankings and what’s driving the decline?  The curriculum committee doing their analysis should not replace the SI doing her job. I gather that rankings are only important when they show improvement, even if it’s modest.

Ms. Stanley stated the analysis done in committee will be shared with the BOE on June 6th. I hope the public will have access to this report.

Mr. Migues had sent quite a few emails to the BOE with data-driven analysis as to possible factors impacting declines in ranks and proficiencies. Only two members acknowledged receipt of those emails.

Conclusion

The BOE is broken. The majority are there to protect the SI. There is no transparency and no collaboration with the community. The BOE majority has given the SI power and are happy to be her servants. Even in the face of a TAP article about the SI’s job application for a position in Sarasota, the BOE president naively believes that SI is not looking to leave. 

It is time for the community to make their voices heard at the meetings and, more importantly, at the polls. 

Related Articles:

06/05/2023 BOE Meeting: John’s Notes

06/05/2023 BOE Agenda : Laura’s Notes