One Notch Higher for Greeley Colorado District Six Parents

My general opinion of the people living in Greeley Colorado's District 6 Schools jurisdiction just went up a notch last night after watching several adults and teens give the School Board of District 6, and Superintendent Renelle Lang, a common sense check on the true nature of their jobs: education. It is all about education of course. It is not about diminishing education so you can report to the State you've balanced your checkbook. But needless to say, following what was supposed to be organized as a "public hearing" the Board didn't flinch and went ahead with their intended plan to circumvent, anticipated, but as yet unkown, shortfalls in funding.

This Greeley District 6 School Board sat stonefaced last night in the middle of frigid Northern Colorado for about forty-five minutes while they heard brief commentaries from the public concerning the closure and realignment of different schools to help cover the implied 12% shortfall they will be facing in next year's budget. The shortfall may only be about 6% but it looks like the board has already decided and may have already begun spending the funds, according to some sources, to do a full house cleaning and realignment after years of poor decision making complicated by a recession. The budget crisis of course will cover their tracks with the general voter and parents and the new, lowered, graduation requirements will push off some of District 6 duties onto local community colleges and remedial programs thereby lowering District 6's future expenses.

Throughout the meeting, much of the board looked about as interested in what the speaker's had to say as a Kindergartner would be in reading Tolstoy.

One student, called to speak, got up and addressed the board and spoke about the process of her own enlightenment and growing up to overcome earlier mistakes and decisions made. Then she went on to explain, politely, to the Board how she conceived their actions on lowering graduation requirements. "...makes me feel like I'm not good enough."

Another student, Melissa from Central High School, presented the ice-pop board with a petition with 248 signatures on it which endorsed holding the current expectations in place. That is 248 teenagers telling the board "Don't lower the bar" we deserve and need better for our futures and to be competitive in finding jobs.

Board member Hinze looked several times, with his hand on his chin, like he would fall asleep out of having to endure the session.

Ranelle Lang, never having to, nor having had as far as I know, to face public scrutiny, the teacher's union, or general public questions sat on the far end with a strange pasted on smile and took notes once in a while to show she was engaged in what the students were mentioning.

The Face the World Exchange Student program put forth several exchange students currently enrolled who will face the prospect, now, of not being able to graduate. Their instructor/supervisor of the Exchange program was very polite and considerate of the board, as was everyone who spoke, but she pleaded with the board to at least allow the students to walk at graduation.

I kept thinking, in private business, this would be called a substantial breach of contract.

I regret I didn't get the first woman's name who spoke before the Thompson but her summary, polite and eloquent, ripped open the heart of the matter. These cuts are falling on the minority and impoverished populations. There haven't been any serious discussions of educational outcomes in a District already failing in education outcomes. Property values will plummet in the closed school areas. Students will be burdened with a sense of disruption, absent decent literary resources in the Districts that need them the most, and additional staffing aide cuts will likely ensure that new mammoth school with a lot of problem students thrown-in will turn into a cesspool. (Cesspool comment is mine, I am not as generous with the Board's job performance as the speakers were). And especially poignant was the woman's point that the communities being targeted were the least likely to speak out in defense of their own needs.

Another man, older, again I didn't get the name--I apologize, spoke about how the school Cameron had been targeted every time the District made cuts. Appears it isn't the first time the District 6 Board has carved more deeply into the poor and minority communities in Greeley. The speaker also noted that other solutions were available and had not been actively pursued.

But, by far, the best moment of the meeting was the eloquent delivery by the Thompson family coupled with these other adults during this "public hearing". The forty-five minutes designated turned into an actual reality of about 30. There is a wonderful irony here of the work the Board does on numbers--but I'll leave that alone for now.

Mr. Thompson stole the show for me. He spoke sandwiched between his eloquent daughter and wife. I'll paraphrase his words commenting about the changes to these specific neighborhood communities and the breaking up of his daughter's "family", "You, board members, have an ethical duty here to perform your job in a diligent manner and to listen, really listen, to what the public says here tonight and the impacts you are choosing to make on the education of the community--we elected you."

Indeed. Bravo Mr. Thompson. Can we get a member of your family to run for school board next year?

But listen they did not. In the regular school board session immediately following the vote was unanimous to give a green light to Mr. Eads, the ex-janitor turned operations supervisor's plan to consolidate schools. I've worked with many boards, served on many boards, and been in the audience listening to many boards--body language was clear, if polite, during the public session "The decision is done. Do we really have to sit here and listen to the public?" Not even the ill-famed Brett Reese made a peep during the session.

In total, several students of District 6 along with parents and one, brave, educator faced the board and each were allotted three whole minutes to speak about the effects of this change on the entire lives of the students the District serves. I declined to submit to the sign-up intimidation sheet to make my comments as I knew I could express my thoughts through this blog and with only thirty minutes allotted I thought it appropriate to give that time to the other community members and teachers present. They did a much better job.

About forty adults and teens filled the room. Two reporters were present. I handed the reporters a question about funding and had a short conversation with them. I am awaiting a formal response from the State on that same question but it hasn't come through yet. I'll publish when it does.

This is the first time, outside a regular board meeting, which I am aware of that the full board and Ms. Lang were in front of the public. But comments were restricted to those that had signed up. I learned of the meeting just a short time before it started and was told by a teacher that comments had been restricted to written ones presubmitted. That was not exactly the case. And when asked whether, considering it was a "public hearing", if the general public could comment at the meeting, a dour faced Board President said, "No" and held up the written comments shifting them around to put them in his proscribed order.

It was a pleasure to note that there were at least some more professional activity in the room. I was offered the opportunity to sign up to comment by, I am assuming, a staff member or assistant, who located me in the audience after my question. Also Ms. Trimberger came up to me at break and offered a kind and willing ear.

The humorous moment in the room came when the President of the Board, Bruce, fumbled the name of a District employee--the educator/librarian who lectured the board on depriving specific communities of very critical literacy sources. The woman eloquently and politely, with heavy undertones, reminded the Board President that she is important enough and been around long enough that he should be able to get her name correct.

The animosity between employee and employer was pretty clear if my take on her undertone was correct. I admire her for saying her peace. I know of other employees who felt too intimidated and are already in fear of losing their jobs through budget cuts to speak. Admittedly, I giggled. But I also felt just a moment of compassion. As someone who has managed hundreds of staff--and is horrible with name recall, I learned the lesson years ago that bobbling employees names is impolite at best.

Practice Bruce, practice. Your charm is loosing its appeal, and effect, rapidly in the outer community as well. It was my assumption, and pretty obvious that the Board was jumping hoops and had already likely made their decisions, if not, already spent funds towards this direction.

However to be fair the rest of the audience didn't seem to mind the time limits or the fact that the Board and Ms. Lang weren't taking questions or replying. This must be a new breed of public hearing. There were earlier sessions where the board broke up the public into four separate meetings spread across the town with one or two board members at each taking questions. I don't believe Ms. Lang has ever openly and professionally addressed the public. This is especially appalling to some given her salary and position that she leaves this responsibility to "others". For teachers, imagine having a "boss", unwilling to address you as a group.

It was an odd meeting for me. I have never seen a public meeting quite so civilized. It was like sitting in church. The audience didn't chat very lively and at first there wasn't any audience interaction after a speaker said their peace. There was only one pro-consolidation speaker. A student spoke positively about the consolidation. Certainly I wasn't looking for a tea party style meeting or town hall debacle but I have never seen anything so demure, controlled, and unconducive to bringing out public commentaries.

But still my respect for Greeley citizens rose a notch tonight. At least some are willing to step up to the plate and speak of the higher responsibilities of the community. Bravo. Kudos to everyone. Now if we can only get these community members on the board.

The Board has a tough job and a huge mess to clean up, mostly of their and previous Board's making. You have to hire the people with the appropriate skills and lose the buddy-buddy-hire-me-I'm-just-like-you system. Education should not be a political and special interest playground for any ideology. I hear, through teachers, the District canned the Human Resources Director. I don't know what the reason was they wrote on paper. Nor should I or the teachers be privy to that information--but good job. I am fairly sure his salary was high enough to tide him and his family over better than some in the community are doing. One ideologue down and a few more to go.

Of course it depends on their choices and process in finding a replacement whether or not this is the beginning of real change in the District or if it is just moving around the pea under new shells.

Lincoln Nebraska School District, Ranelle Lang's home territory, in search of a new public schools administrator, keeps hitting this website looking for Ranelle Lang's contract. Hopefully to make her an offer she can't resist. Personally I think the Greeley Colorado District 6 should send a copy to them with blessings on their new hire.

Is Greeley District Six School Board Going Union Busting?

A little excitement with your prairie coffee? There are disturbing things going on between the Greeley Colorado District 6 School Board and the Teacher's Union--Greeley Education Association. Could the District 6 School Board be working a strategy to bust the Teacher's Union? There are contracts being placed in teacher's school mailboxes and at least some teachers feel they are under pressure to sign or they will be fired. Both Trimberger and Broderius of the Greeley District 6 School Board have their stamped signature on the contract.

Please say it isn't so District 6.

The School Board has stated at its most recent meeting that it has adopted it's last contract offer to the Teacher's Union. Ninety percent of the GEA turned that contract offer down prior to this meeting. There is a statement posted to the District 6 School Board's website on the topic. The release is dated October 26, 2009. In it the school board cites that other staff will need to be laid off if the board honors what its previous promises and also grants current cost of living increases.

At its regular business meeting Monday evening, the District 6 Board of Education voted to render a final decision on the financial compensation items of the teachers union contract for the 2009-10 school year.
The Board approved the following compensation package for teachers for the 2009-10 school year:
• The district will pay the increased cost of contributions to the state retirement system (PERA)
• The district will pay the increased cost of health, dental and vision insurance
• The district will pay for educational advancement on the salary schedule for teachers (often
referred to as “lane” raises or “horizontal movement” raises)
• The district will increase the per-hour pay rate for teachers’ non-contract work to $25 per hour
(currently is $18)
The master agreement contract between District 6 and the Greeley Education Association calls for the Board of Education to make the final determination on matters that have not been resolved through the regular negotiations process or through meditation (Article 5-e-3). Mediation between the district and the union was held on Sept. 25, with the assistance of a federal mediator, but ended without an
agreement on salaries and benefits.
“This was a difficult decision to make, because we do care deeply about our teachers and hold them in high regard. But these are very difficult financial times for the district and also for our local communities and our state,” said Board President Bruce Broderius. “Financially, this is the best we can do. As disappointing as it is for all of us to be in the situation that we are, I truly hope we can still develop a partnership with the union to preserve jobs, to avoid layoffs, and to do what we can to lessen the fiscal crisis that will strike at the heart of our district in 2010.”
Salaries and wages for all of the district’s administrative and support staff employees were frozen at the beginning of the 2009-10 school year, remaining at last year’s levels.

The above statement tries to place the Board's decision into the context that it is acting under the current contract to make the final decision. I have not seen that current contract. It makes sense that some formal resolution in the case of an impasse to keep every one operating could be contained in the contract. And I certainly do not have the legal background to constructively comment that what the Board is doing is legally questionable. I think though from a humane perspective, from a public relations perspective they, the Board, just put the bus in a ditch.

However, currently, there is a contract being dispersed throughout the school district in teacher's mailboxes and some teachers are under the belief that if they do not sign this contract they will be fired. This document is dated October 19, 2009. Other teachers, I hear, are packing their bags, if not now, then at the end of this year.

Here is a link to the contract teachers found in their mailboxes this week. I've posted a photo copy of a contract with personal information removed.

If the Board is continuing to operate underneath the old contract then what is this "other" contract all about? Why does it come without clear instructions on intent to the teachers? It has at-will employment law clauses in the new contract and it labels a long-standing teacher as a non-probationary employee. This would be, my assumption, bad faith actions if it was handled while active mediation was ongoing. That is at a minimum. If negotiations have now formally ended, and if the current contract is null and void because there wasn't any consensus reached, then is the Board indicating that it will fire any teacher unwilling to sign this new document or is the Board just trying to edge out the Union by breaking off chunks of the membership and getting them to sign independent of the Union while things are in transition? Certainly newbie young teachers without anything to gain in experience ratings or salary increases might be tempted to sign this contract under the duress of losing their job.

Where is the District's highly-paid Superintendent in all these matters? Why hasn't the Superintendent addressed her staff and the public?

My hope is that the Union is seeking to call a meeting ASAP for the teachers. That meeting needs to give teachers the ability to ask Union lawyers some good questions. For example, what does it mean if I sign this contract with the School District (union teachers say they have not been asked to personally sign a contract in years--the Union negotiates their contracts for them). Does this mean I am bound to a contract without representation of my union? How can I be forced under duress of losing my job into signing a contract? Those are just beginners.

It seems a wonderful coincidence that the Board has danced this long with this Union until right up before the election cycle. Perhaps the Board has confidence that the Greeley public will not be supportive of the teachers considering the voters may turn away the Mill Levy Override. Even if the Mill Levy Override passes the District Board will be sitting pretty because they have strongly emphasized through out the Mill Levy Campaign that certified staff (teachers) will not receive any pay benefits from Measure 3A. So the District won't be needing to go back and revisit their current decision to abort negotiations and render a nonconsensual contract on their teachers.

A nice pickle to put the Union in. A nice pickle for the Union to get itself into.

A scenario: If the District 6 Board pushes teachers into a panic mode and gets several teachers to sign these contracts what does that mean to the Union and their representation of the teachers. Is the Board trying to alienate teachers from their Union with this dog and pony show?

That isn't the only benefit the Board might receive. If teachers get upset and walk off the job they can be replaced with newbies. If teachers sign the contract being shoved under their pen and then leave at the end of the year when public rancor has died down--the Board will get to hire "newbies".

It doesn't get more corporate than the above scenario folks. Public education is not a business for a reason. Making teachers into manipulated widgets does not build the type of experiential investment needed to produce the results necessary for Greeley kids to compete in the big world. All efforts should be made to retain experienced talent and to mix in new and rising talent along the way. It is all part of a good human resources personnel. Teachers are the productive asset in any education system.

With the Tribune trumpeting the Board's position and the District Superintendent Ms. Lang nowhere within the common public reach and Mr. Eads being allowed to be the district spokesperson it is going to be up to the teachers and the public to demand real answers to the budgetary questions. It is a very easy time frame in which to manipulate public opinion against the teachers.

Unfortunately there are a lot of other scenarios that could be at play here. Parties within negotiations and mediation often are tongue-tied for good reason. Contracts can have some funky clauses on "what happens next". Hence stories and rumors coming to the outside world can get very distorted. Both the Board and the GEA will need public support as this gets touchy. It would nice to think that one or the other group will play fair and openly with the community. Public relation manipulation is yesterday's game plan. Today it is all about being honest and transparent. It is only fair that the Board be allowed to clear up their actions by better informing, clearly and meaningfully, the strategic purpose of their plans.

This Board appears to have little credibility based on past performance--perceived or actual. That image problem, in and of itself, regardless of the source which began the problem, has put the Board in a poor position on community leadership. Credibility is essential in your governmental systems and this Board's credibility is on the line. Will the Board obfuscate and make the situation worse? Or will they be forthcoming and transparent with their teachers and begin taking some steps toward healing. Poor press management and poor spokesperson choices is likely just to darken the skies ahead.

Certainly the Board, and the Board's employee Superintendent Lang, would have known for a while that by keeping experienced teachers around there would be step increases and other associated rise in labor costs. The bottleneck is a sign of long term poor planning. It can't all be about the economic downturn.

Previous Articles:

http://greeleyville.blogspot.com/2009/06/parity-and-greeleys-district-6.html

http://greeleyville.blogspot.com/2009/07/greeley-district-6-performance-check.html

http://greeleyville.blogspot.com/2009/09/greeley-school-district-six-mill-levy.html

http://greeleyville.blogspot.com/2009/09/part-ii-greeley-school-district-latino.html

http://greeleyville.blogspot.com/2009/10/part-iii-greeley-school-district-six.html

Greeley District 6 School Board Election: Brave Souls Seeking Hot Seats

It is time for Greeley Colorado's District 6 School Board elections to take place. First out of the dugout are Doug Kershaw and Brett Reese. These are the new kids on the block. Judy Kron, Doug Lidiak, Linda Trimberger are existing members and already serving, whether elected or appointed, and are looking for voter approval.

I am not going to point to profiles for the candidates until I can find a good one for every one. The Tribune has minimalistic values they are using to describe the candidates. The District 6 website has profiles on the existing members. I'd like to give the new "kids" time to get their public relation materials up and out before I link to anything. Incumbents always have an advantage because they have name recognition.

In the meantime I've been trying to sort out whether the new alternative education high school Trademark West that just opened pulled a couple of hundred low performing kids off the progress reports for District 6. That certainly would help give a positive impression of the District. And, if it isn't true and the stats issued to the public are correct then that is a deflation of my argument that the District isn't putting a heck of a lot of focus on low-level performers.

But I will get into a heavier critique the closer to ballot day. Right now I thought it might be prudent to publish what voters need to be looking for as qualities and skills in their educational leadership. Good hair, good teeth, and over six feet tall really doesn't do it. I went to grade school and I know it is a popularity contest when running for a public position in grade school but it would be really nice if we could put bags over every body's head and just vote for the people who can get the job done. District 6 needs the community to do it's job. The kids graduating from District 6 need voters to get beyond the special interest politics and get as much support for effective management on board as possible.

I don't think there are many people around town who will argue that point with me.

So here is my first post in a series on Greeley's District 6 School Board election. this post will concentrate on the qualities suggested for effective school board members.

First a quick view of what the school board's primary responsibilities are all about. (If you have one to add to the list give me an email please).

• Set the vision and goals for the district (effective goal setting leads to objective achievement and objective achievement leads to vision achievement in both the short term and into the future. Basically it keeps the ship heading to the right port without wasting a lot of money trying to get to London by going around the Cape Horn, so to speak.)
  
• Adopt policies that give the district direction to set priorities and achieve its goals (In my personal view this is a key quality. A wily administrator can maneuver policies in front of a Board that will meet their personal agenda. While their personal agenda might, or might not, be a set of good ideas it is important that Board members have enough experience with management practices (not necessarily education specific) to watch out for this type of manipulation and truly ensure that the Board is making good policy decisions that work for everybody--management included, but concentrate on strategies that will achieve the best for the students and bring the vision into the right port.)
  
• Adopt and oversee the annual budget (A school budget isn't like your personal checkbook. It is a complex, dynamic, and complicated guide.)
  
• Manage the collective bargaining process for employees of the district (key to quality personnel and key to controlling costs--a double edge sword).
• Hire and evaluate the superintendent (The superintendent is key and the one in District 6 makes nearly $185,000 + perks. That's almost half of the base salary President Obama gets for running the leading nation of the free world. The board needs to expect, demand, and make accountable their employee for returning superior service to the community's education system which reflects the community's investment. The superintendent will set the tone and culture for all District 6 employees--including teachers. Not a small job in and by itself.)

Which leads us to a few statements on what type of skills and qualities will be required for the school board candidates to possess. There are many different regional and state views, recommendations, and discussions on the topic. One of the best resources I have ever used comes from Jossey-Bass. I have used this company's textbooks for other work as well and they produce a high quality product. If you have one, another skill or quality, to add, again, please send me an email or post a comment. Clicking on the top link will take you to one site on the topic. There are several with many ideas.

It takes a lot of work to build an effective school board. Time spent reading, studying, attending board governance lectures, building a good board governance policy, and simply understanding how a good board works together and delegates to its employee. Relating to the community generally comes with trial and error plus a witch-hunt now and again.

Functioning Cohesively as Group

A healthy decision-making process naturally flows from board members working together to fulfill their responsibilities. When school board members gel as a unit, they exhibit many characteristics of other well-functioning groups: a shared respect and trust that recognizes the contribution of each individual, a feeling of cohesiveness, shared goals for the board, able leadership within the board (often the board president), shared values, and agreement on the board's operating rules.

Exercising Appropriate Authority
In discussing their ability to act effectively, board members speak of the need to negotiate the delicate balance between exercising authority and supporting the school district's chief executive. Traditional governance wisdom suggests that you hire the best chief executive and then get out of his or her way. Board interviews indicate that it's not that simple. The superintendent's recommendation may be clearly contrary to the board's sense of what is important or supported by the community, or the superintendent may violate prior understanding of proposed action. In these are other situations, boards feel they must exercise independent authority.

Connecting to the Community
The board serves as a liaison between the district and the community. An effective board understands what the community wants and explains to the community what it believes to be in the best interest of children.

The process works both ways. The long-established tradition of local control of education is based on the value of the community shaping its schools and of the schools "belonging" to the community. This close relationship contributes to greater community participation in the education of its children and interest in how the schools operate. Even in the context of current times, which see a decline in the number of households with school-age children, fewer volunteers, and a diminishing respect for public schools, interest in education is intense.

As communities become more diverse, so do their values. Building understanding and support becomes an increasing challenge. The board's role in explaining actions to the community and ensuring consideration of all points of view becomes increasingly important.

Working Toward Board Improvement
When boards talk about effectiveness, one area they center on is self-improvement. This shouldn't be surprising. Forty percent of board members have three or fewer years of experience. They say in interviews that it takes them two years to understand their board roles well enough to be fully effective. Furthermore, it is through ad hoc, unplanned contact with other board members and the superintendent that they learn much of what they know.

Acting Strategically
Board members discuss and resolve issues that are central to helping children learn. They plan systematically and for the long term, taking into consideration the needs and concerns of internal and external constituents, all the while balancing reality and politics. They match plans against results. They organize responsibilities and authority between superintendent and the board to adjust for strengths and weaknesses. Boards that can accomplish these tasks can deal effectively with crises, especially when they have no choice but to act.

Now all we need to find out is if each candidate can fit this bill. I'll try to find email addresses for the new candidates and see if I can get statements from them. I can get the incumbent email addresses from the District 6 website and I'll forward this posting to each one also in case they would like to respond. I'll have to work for the other two emails. In the meantime if someone has got 'em.... please pass the potatoes via phone or email. Thanks.