March 21 Board Meeting - Q&A

Finally, I have a little time to write about what happened at the March 21 Board meeting. I thank you all for your patience.

The meeting's public comment section had one speaker, Tim Kassel, who spoke about the increased teacher workload, and that this workload increase was due to budget constraints made by the Board. At the same time, Mr. Kassel noted that the Board is continuing with three administrators (one full-time superintendent and two full-time principals), and that the district can't afford and doesn't need three administrators. The Board thanked him without further comment.

Personally, I was very happy that Mr. Kassel came to the meeting and made these comments. I have made similar comments, both in Public Comment and with individual Board members, and I usually got the impression from the Board that they thought that this idea (that District 3 should have strongly considered having two administrators) was mine alone, even though I told them that this was a sentiment that was out in the community. My point then, and is now, that, if the Board did consider having only two administrators, they need to be openly and repeatedly telling the community why the idea wouldn't work; and if they did not consider the idea, they need to be openly and repeatedly telling the community why it was not considered.

I remember, in the days leading up to the referendum vote, a number of people mentioning that one of the budget cuts that would be made was that the district would go from three to two administrators when Supt. Hill left. There was a real disappointment from many in the community when this did not happen. Personally, I heard this from many people in the community, and it was one of the reasons that led to the creation of Partnership for Schools. I am very glad that Mr. Kassel came and shared his comments with the Board, and remind them that the concerns raised are not individual concerns, but concerns throughout the community.