June 10, 2024 Summary

Posted byDacia MumfordPosted inSchool Board Meeting Summary, School Board MeetingsTags:, , , ,

KEY TAKEAWAYS: The focus of the discussion of policy C375 on student suspensions and expulsions was about if the board would hear appeals. The JSHS will no longer have an associate principal focused on leading the junior high. The special education director will be a full-time position with responsibility for grades K-12. The school district plans to hire a behavioral interventionist teacher as well as an additional registered behavior technician. There was a discussion about the school start/end times at WLES and WLIS and the difficulty in offering a more balanced schedule. Also, at the end of the summary I included the list of people running for a seat on the school board in this November’s election.

Agenda with links to board documents

TOPIC TIMESTAMPS (Youtube Recording Link)

  • 0:01:18 discussion of policy C375 on student suspension and expulsion
  • 0:59:57 four retirees honored
  • 1:19:49 public comment on concerns with IDOE’s proposed diploma changes
  • 1:23:58 consent agenda
  • 1:25:08 personnel report 
  • 1:35:16 first reading of policy C375 on student suspension and expulsion and discussion of revisions to policy G350 on audio, video, and digital recordings
  • 1:51:19 strategic planning consultant agreement
  • 2:01:13 quantitative reasoning course curricular materials adoption
  • 2:04:05 food service presentation with survey results
  • 2:39:36 food service contracts
  • 2:41:04 agreement and increase fees for financial support for WVEC
  • 2:44:52 finance update
  • 2:46:01 information shared on the special education director, behavioral intervention teacher, and registered behavior technician positions; discussion on difficulty to families with school start/stop times at WLES and WLIS

The following is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions.

The school board held a public work session from 5-5:30pm. Schott did not attend.

1:18 Policy C375 on student suspension and expulsion was discussed. Mumford noted that the school board’s current policy 5610 does not allow families to appeal suspensions and expulsions to the school board. This same rule of not allowing appeals is also in the proposed policy C375. She recommended changing this policy to allow families the right to appeal to the school board. Austin asked Witt to share why the board had not allowed families to appeal. Witt said that her view is that refusing to hear appeals opens less liability to the school corporation and results in better outcomes for the families. She said that there have been confidentiality breaches by board members in the past and so allowing appeals presents a risk of exposure for families. I am not aware of any confidentiality breaches during the time I have served on the board. Austin said that she would prefer not to know personal information about her neighbors’ children being suspended. Wang expressed support for hearing appeals. He said it allows the board to verify that the suspension or expulsion was handled appropriately. We also want to solve these issues within our school corporation because there are costly legal fees when families take this to the county courts. In response, Austin asked Greiner to share the administration’s process for suspensions and expulsions. Greiner said the student is given due process. If a parent challenges the decision, they can appeal to the administration and another school administrator who was not involved in the situation will be assigned as a hearing officer for the appeal. After that appeal to the administration, no other appeals are possible because the board voted previously not to hear appeals. Greiner said that the family could take the decision to the county court. Austin asked if there is an additional cost to the school district to defend a decision in the county court and Greiner said that he did not know. Greiner expressed confidence in the administrators and said that if the school district hearing officer finds that the student was given due process, the school board would likely find the same thing. Witt said that she is concerned that allowing families to appeal to the school board will unnecessarily delay the process. Austin agreed and said that there are already 11 scheduled school board meetings each year and that having to find a time when all can meet and then give notice would be difficult. Witt asked Greiner how common appeals are because she has not heard of very many. Greiner said they had several last year but none appealed to the county court. Witt said that this is a moot point because families don’t want to appeal. Mumford disagreed and said that when Witt was serving as school board president, she informed the board that there were families who had requested to appeal to the board and were told that the board would not hear their appeal. Mumford said that if there are concerns that confidential information is being shared by board members then providing training is the appropriate way to handle that concern rather than setting a policy that doesn’t allow families to appeal to the board. Witt responded that she had invited Mumford to be trained by her and that Mumford had refused. I was given an award by the ISBA this year for having participated in many school board training sessions in my first year as a board member. Witt is not claiming that I did not receive the appropriate training; she is complaining about me not agreeing to attend her mentoring sessions for Wang and myself. I went to one, but didn’t continue because I disagreed with how she, and now Austin, are using the board president position. They have each acted as an information gatekeeper between the administration and other school board members, deciding which board members to selectively provide with information. My view is that all board members should be treated the same and that the board president should always allow the superintendent to communicate directly with all school board members.

Yin asked if hearing these appeals is common practice for school boards in other school districts. Austin said there are several that do not allow appeals like TSC, Carmel, and Southmont, but that LSC does allow appeals and she didn’t know about Zionsville. Mumford said that Zionsville and Wayne do allow appeals. Yin asked how the timing of the appeal process to the board would work. Austin said she didn’t know. Yin asked what a typical cost would be for the family if they had to appeal to the county court. Austin said she would ask our legal counsel. Witt asked if the board’s decision would be binding if the board were to decide to hear appeals, or could families still appeal to the county court afterwards? Marley said his concern is that board members are not experts and not a jury. He said: “Anyone responding to questions that we might have are not testifying under oath. Therefore it’s not legally binding. So we’re putting ourselves in a position where we are being asked to consider an appeal where we don’t have any legal power to act nor do we really understand the realm of this work and what we can or can’t do.” Austin said, “Another concern that I have is the conflict of interest, because if we as the board find that our employees did not follow due process the next logical step for the family would be to sue. We’re being asked to decide between something that is very much not in our best interest as a body versus something that is very much in our best interest as a body. So our objectivity in that situation is easily open to challenge.” State law gives the school board the authority to review suspension and expulsion decisions made by the administration, but this would not prevent the family from going to the court if the board decides not to reverse the administrators’ decision. From Austin’s comment, it seems that she does not understand why families want the option to appeal to the board.

27:17 The public work session ended and the board held a retirement reception from 5:30 to 6:00 pm.

59:57 Regular Meeting begins. Schott did not attend. The WLCSC retirees were honored:

  • Kathy Slauter – Athletics Secretary; worked at WLES as building and principal secretary 1995-2009; worked at JSHS as principal’s secretary, attendance clerk, and athletics department secretary 2009-2024; for 25 years she kept the scorebook for the boys and girls basketball teams; for 20 years she kept stats for the football team. Her most memorable moment was when she was tackled on the sidelines of a WL football game and fractured her tibia and fibula.
  • Robyn Bennett – Assistant to the Food Service Director; worked at WLES as principal secretary for 11 years and then as assistant to the food service director. One of her favorite memories is at WLES during Christmas time when passing the music room and hearing the students sing carols.
  • Denise Deutsch – kindergarten teacher at WLES; worked as a maternity substitute teaching in 1984 and then taught 3rd, 2nd, 1st, and kindergarten 1985-2023; she was the sponsor for Red Ribbon at WLES and assistant coach for girls’ youth softball. Her favorite moment as a teacher was when a student’s eyes would glisten with glee when the brain connected information and learning. 
  • Ron Shriner – JSHS Principal; worked for 16 years teaching mostly junior high English and Social Studies; JSHS assistant principal 2001-2008; junior high principal 2008; JSHS principal 2009-2024; for 10 years he coached the girl’s golf team and was a junior high athletic supervisor. Back when he was starting out as a teacher, he remembers being terrified about teaching 7th and 8th grade, but they became his favorite age group. 

1:19:49 Communication from the audience (those who had signed up before the meeting began):

●      Randy Studt (JSHS German teacher) expressed concerns with the state board of education on the proposed changes to the Indiana high school diploma: lower standards from the current academic honors diploma that put our students at a disadvantaged in admission and successful completion at college; students moving into and out of Indiana from other states or countries may experience difficulty with the different standards; work experience will be required which will present a need for oversight of the job environments and safety standards as well as to ensure they meet the standards; requiring 7th graders to make decisions on their career track restricts flexibility; the record keeping and multiple tracks possible is going to increase the workload of our already overloaded counselors and parents will not have resources to handle it themselves; making world languages and history optional will cause students to be less connected with the world and give them less flexibility in their career choices. These requirements will begin with the class of 2029 (students beginning 8th grade). He encouraged community members to give input through the feedback form or to email the state board members directly.

1:23:58 The board was asked to approve the consent agenda items: 

Wang motioned to remove the personnel report from the consent agenda so he could share comments on a concern. Yin seconded it. The consent agenda was voted on without the personnel report.

Voted 6 out of 6

1:25:08 The board was asked to approve the Personnel Report. Wang shared his concern with the removal of board members from the interviewing committee for the search for the equity and engagement (EE) position. He acknowledged Austin’s recent communication about no longer assigning board members to participate on hiring committees. Wang’s view is that it is appropriate at times to involve board members in searches to get stakeholder input. He said the administration should determine if board members will be invited to participate, rather than Austin making the decision unilaterally. He also shared a concern that not all board members were informed about the removal of the board members from this search until after it had taken place. Wang said that he would like all seven members of the board to work together to make decisions, rather than Austin making decisions alone and would like to see the decision-making process be transparent, accountable, and more inclusive. Austin responded by confirming that she had previously assigned board members to the interviewing committee for the EE position. But, after the search for the JSHS principal, she sought advice from Indiana School Board Association (ISBA) about board member participation in search committees in our district and they recommended against it (other than for a superintendent search) because it blurs the lines of school board authority. In my interactions with individuals at the ISBA, I’ve found many (primarily former superintendents) who view the role of the school board as a rubber stamp. I’m not surprised that Austin found individuals there who told her to make changes to limit input from board members. Austin said that she then spoke with Greiner and the board officers and determined that board members would be removed from the interviewing committee. She acknowledged that she did not inform board members of the decision and apologized to Witt and Wang, who had been appointed to the interview committee, for not having informed them of this decision. She said, “there was no malice in that oversight, obviously because Rachel was one of the people I forgot to tell.” Austin told Wang that board assignments do not need to be a collective decision because it is the job of the board officers to make those decisions. Austin concluded: “Sure, it would be really nice if we could all be the president, but right now that is me.” Austin could have taken an inclusive leadership approach when she was elected president in a 4 to 3 vote earlier this year. Instead, she excluded Yin, Wang, and myself from the officer roles and missed an opportunity to demonstrate a real desire to work together. In her 6 months as president, Austin’s actions have demonstrated little interest in collaborating or building consensus. My view is that the board president should make sure all board members have access to the same information and should schedule work sessions to allow for the type of discussion that leads to compromise and unified decisions. For example, under Austin’s leadership, we have often had no way of knowing which policies we would be asked to discuss or vote on until after the meeting begins. This limits input from board members, but especially limits input from community members who have no way to know that an issue they care about is going to be voted on.

Yin noted that Dan Walbaum resigned as JSHS associate principal and that the new principal, Chad Rodgers, selected Shelby Johnson to fill that position. She noted that Johnson’s title would be assistant principal rather than associate principal and asked if there would be a difference in responsibilities. Greiner said that Rodgers chose to change the position title. Previously, the associate principal position had responsibility for the junior high, acting as principal. Rodgers decided that he will be principal of both the junior and senior high and will have assistant principals.

Voted 6 out of 6

1:35:16 Policy C375 on suspension and expulsion of students received a first reading. The policy was discussed during the work session with Mumford’s recommendation to revise the policy to allow the board to hear appeals. Austin announced that no proposed board policies were ready for a vote. Witt told Austin that the board is ready to vote on G350 with the recommended revisions by CCHA. Austin said that she was unclear about the revisions that had been recommended by Mumford. Mumford reminded Austin that she had proposed revisions to section III to provide a more supportive tone for parents who want to record meetings with school employees. Mumford said that she was fine with the two adjustments to her revisions that were recommended by the law firm: changing the word should to shall and requiring three instructional days notice rather than three days notice. Austin called for a vote. Mumford asked for clarification about which version of the policy the board was being asked to approve. Witt said that a revised version was shared with board members electronically. Austin again called for a vote. Mumford said that she is not comfortable voting on this policy because the revised version was not posted online for the public to see. Witt agreed that it was not publicly available and recommended not voting now. This was a very confusing discussion because the document that Austin and Witt referenced did not include my recommended revisions even though they claimed that it did. There has to be some behind the scenes effort before a policy can be brought for a vote in a regular meeting. The policy and any revisions should first be discussed in a work session and then the agreed upon version should be posted publicly for a month to allow community input before a final vote. I do not understand why Austin is still unwilling to list on the agenda which policies will be up for a first reading, a discussion, or a final vote so that it is clear to the entire board and community.

1:51:19 Greiner asked for approval of the Strategic Planning Consultation Agreement with Skybound. Mumford expressed appreciation to Greiner for all the information he shared and for the process he followed which allowed for discussion and input prior to this vote. She asked for clarification if the data Skybound plans to collect will be shared and Greiner said yes. Mumford asked if Greiner or the board president will determine who will be invited to meet with Skybound to determine the planning approach. Greiner said that the administrative team will meet with Skybound to discuss a timeline and then the next steps will be shared with the entire board. Mumford asked Greiner to clarify which aspects of the strategic planning would involve the entire board and which would involve just the board officers. Austin said that she didn’t want to speak for Greiner, but said that the process is important to him and that he wants to develop a strategic plan that the entire board can support. Austin said that she has no plans to limit board member involvement in the strategic planning process. Yin asked if Skybound will only share their analysis or if they will also share the raw data they collect and asked if the school district will have ownership of the data. Greiner said he thought we will, but will verify with Skybound.

Voted 6 out of 6

2:01:13 Roth asked for approval of the Quantitative Reasoning Course Curricular Materials for a newly adopted course. Wang asked about the credits and Roth said that it could be 1 or 2 credits and counts as a math credit. Wang asked about enrollment numbers and if there will be sufficient demand. Roth said that they will only run the class if they have enough students.

Voted 6 out of 6

2:04:05 Courtney FitzSimons, food service director, shared a Food Service Presentation. FitzSimons noted that Food Services is a self-supporting department. In May they surveyed parents and students. Overall food satisfaction is higher at the JSHS than at WLIS and WLES. She believes it is most likely due to the JSHS offering several options. She said that the short lunch schedule at WLIS and WLES does not allow for more options. There were more negative comments from parents/students at WLIS and WLES and she feels that there is a need to better communicate about some misconceptions. For example, FitzSimons said that the schools have no fryers and none of the food is fried. She plans to send out some information to families at the beginning of the school year to help address misconceptions. FitzSimons also said that she will use the results from the survey to make improvements. Wang asked if food services did a survey last year for comparison and she said they did not. Wang also asked about the water fountains at the JSHS and said that many students have complained about the water. Cronk said that Larry Daily, director of maintenance and facilities, tested the water and there is nothing wrong with it. The water comes from the city and it is tested. Cronk said that our schools do not have any issues with lead pipes. The JSHS does not have water softeners, so that might make the taste a little different. Wang asked about the cost of installing filters or other options to improve the taste. Cronk said that would cost a lot of money. The food services presentation was very informative. I really appreciate FitzSimons seeking input from students and parents. Last year, I was appointed to serve on the wellness committee and encouraged input from students and parents. I also appreciate that Cronk looked into the complaints about the water at the JSHS. Our current central office staff has done a much better job at listening to and addressing concerns.

2:39:36 Cronk asked for approval of Food Service Contracts.

Voted 6 out of 6

2:41:04 Cronk asked for approval of WVEC Agreement and provided a related memo. Cronk said that in our most recent audit, there was a finding (what auditors call an error) in regard to WVEC and federal funding. To correct the issues, she negotiated an agreement that ensures that WVEC will have proper internal accounting controls in place. WVEC will pay our school district $15,000 to provide accounting services for the year. Witt shared appreciation for Cronk’s work on getting this in place and asked if it will be able to be accommodated by existing staff. Cronk said that she and Janelle Wade, deputy treasurer, will provide this service. Cronk noted that they have already been getting things in place and have been training WVEC’s new business person. Mumford asked if WVEC paid our district anything in the past and Cronk said they previously paid $5,000. I continue to be impressed with Cronk. It makes such a difference to have an experienced CFO with a business degree.

Voted 6 out of 6

2:44:52 Cronk shared April Financial Report – Funds, May Financial Report – Funds, Credit Card Statement, and Claims Docket Breakdown.

2:46:01 Board and Superintendent Reports:

  • Greiner said that Shelby Johnson will no longer be the special education director and so the district will post that position. The special education director will become a full-time position serving grades K-12, so the coordinator positions at the elementary schools will not be replaced. Greiner said that he also plans to hire a behavior interventionist teacher who has a special education license who will work directly with students, both those with and without an IEP. This behavior interventionist teacher will also support general education teachers. Greiner also plans to hire an additional registered behavior technician (RBT). Currently we have one that serves WLES and WLIS and there is a need for each school to have their own. Greiner said that we will continue the mental health counselor position for another year. Wang asked about the financial impact of these positions. Greiner said many are a wash with the assistant principal change at the JSHS and not replacing the special education coordinator at the elementary schools. However, hiring an additional RBT is an additional cost to the district. Witt asked what additional support will be given to the administration at WLIS now that the essential skills class has been moved from WLES to WLIS. Greiner said they will have a full-time RBT. Witt asked if there would be an additional administrator provided to WLIS and Greiner said no. He said that the support at WLIS will be similar to the support that was given to WLES when the essential skills class was there previously. Witt asked about the special education director being located at the JSHS and Greiner said that this person will be director for K-12 special education and so will probably not be located at the JSHS.
  • Austin said that she has similar concerns to what Studt shared in his public comment. She said that our state representative, Chris Campbell, recommended that Austin and our administrative team meet with Dr. Jenner, state superintendent of education, which they did via zoom. She then encouraged everyone to send feedback about the changes. She noted that she attended the ISBA law seminar and will be attending the ISBA budget seminar.
  • Marley shared that the redevelopment commission met and discussed the survey on childcare demand in West Lafayette. They shared their evaluation of optional sites and based on the survey, they recommended a site closer to Kalberer Road rather than the Happy Hollow School site. Marley said that he thinks there is enough demand for 2 facilities, even though the survey results did not support that.
  • Yin said that Greater Lafayette Area Special Services (GLASS) does not meet until the fall.
  • Witt said that she was unable to attend the teacher board discussion on May 16th but Austin attended. She said that Austin’s notes say that they discussed open house plans as well as anticipated class sizes. WLIS is watching the incoming 6th grade that had 25 students in some classes last year. They are searching to fill open custodian and food service positions. 
  • Wang said that he attended ISBA’s law seminar and noted that ISBA is working with the superintendent association to update the superintendent evaluation to reduce the number of questions. He shared his concern that it is difficult to provide ratings for several of the evaluation questions because no information is shared with board members on the topic.
  • Wang shared that the park board approved a designing group to develop a master plan for the Celery Bog and Lilly Nature Center.
  • Mumford said that the Public Schools Foundation of Tippecanoe County (PSFTC) has 4 community members who serve on the board. She shared appreciation for the service of Amisha Shah who recently stepped down. Zach Antalis will replace her and will serve with Beau Scott, Brady Kalb, and Melissa Prochnau. The cupcake run fundraiser will be September 22nd. The fall teacher grant cycle will begin August 1st.
  • Mumford asked Greiner about the concerns that parents have shared regarding the start and end times at WLIS and WLES. She asked how many more buses and drivers we would need to provide a more balanced schedule. Greiner said we would need 11 more buses and each bus costs around $180,000. Greiner said this would also create an additional challenge because then our bus drivers would not be full-time employees and may leave for neighboring districts. Mumford said that our start and end times are a serious concern for many families and asked if the strategic plan would address this issue or if a study group could be formed to consider other options. Yin asked if more after-school program options could be offered to help with the challenging schedules. Greiner said that parks and recreation has expanded their after-school care program. Sara Delaney, WLES principal, said that the issue at WLES is that parents start work at 8 and students can’t be dropped off until 8:45. The issue at WLIS is they are done so early in the afternoon that there is a large demand for after-school programs. Greiner said they are continuing discussion with Kevin Noe, wellness center director, about providing more before- and after-school child care opportunities. Yin asked if they would be willing to allow external providers to use the classrooms after school. Greiner said classrooms are not available for use after school. Safe Harbor, the after school program, uses the cafeteria and gym. Delaney said that at WLES, the Large Group Instruction (LGI) room may be available to rent with a building use agreement.
  • Mumford asked if the July 8 school board meeting would be held as scheduled. Austin said that the board typically cancels the July meeting, but changing school board meetings from the first Monday to the second Monday means that the August meeting will be after the first day of school which does not give time to approve the hires before the start of school. Austin said that Mumford objected to giving the superintendent emergency authorization to hire last year and so this isn’t an option this year. Austin said that she discussed this with the administrators and they decided that there will be a short board meeting on July 15 rather than July 8. Austin said that holding the meeting on July 8 would not capture all of the hires as compared to July 15. Mumford asked why Austin did not give board members a heads up about changing the date of the next meeting and asked if a vote is required to change the meeting calendar that the board previously approved. Austin said that the July 8 meeting was listed “as needed” on the approved calendar, so a vote to cancel it is not necessary. Mumford asked why Austin chose July 15 instead of July 22 or July 29. Witt said that she is not comfortable waiting until the end of July to approve the new hires. Greiner said that they considered July 22, but chose July 15 because Roberta Julian, administrative assistant to the superintendent, was not available on July 22. Austin asked the board members if they are all available on July 15. Mumford said that she made her summer plans around the July 8 meeting and was planning to be away on July 15 since none of this was shared with her. Austin is not doing a good job as school board president. We need someone else in this role.

Location: Happy Hollow Building, LGI Room

Future Meetings (calendar link)

  • Public School Board Regular Meeting – Monday, July 15th at 5:00pm* at Happy Hollow LGI Room (Note change of date and time)
  • Public Policy Work Session – Monday, August 12th at 5:00pm at Happy Hollow LGI Room 
  • Public School Board Regular Meeting – Monday, August 12th at 6:00pm at Happy Hollow LGI Room

This document is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions. Previous agendas, minutes, and audio recordings can be found at the WLCSC website.

School Board Candidates:

Four school board seats (held by Austin, Marley, Schott, and Yin) are up for a vote in the November 5 election. Marley and Schott are not running for re-election. Six candidates filed to run:

  • Maria Koliantz – running for the first time
  • Beau Scott – running for the first time
  • George Lyle – He ran for a seat in the 2022 election and was supported by the PAC. However, he had his own donors and ran his own campaign.
  • David Purpura – He ran for a seat in the 2020 election and was not supported by the PAC.
  • Yue Yin – She was elected in 2020 and was not supported by the PAC. I think she has done a great job as a board member asking questions and keeping the community informed.
  • Amy Austin – She was elected in 2020 and was supported by the PAC. She coordinated her campaign with the PAC which paid for her yard signs. I think she has done a poor job as a school board member and an even worse job as board president.

Leave a comment