RPS RECAP: August 14, 2023

Happy last weekend of summer break, Board Watchers! I survived Monday night’s fireworks (and the misleading Tuesday morning headlines) to bring you this meeting summary.

Fortunately, it was a short meeting (just over 2 hours!) dominated by a discussion on Care and Safety. Local media covered that - we will too - but first I’m going to hit on a few things the new Boardwatcher might overlook. 

If you’re new to this blog series, Welcome! This is the part where you choose your own adventure, and skip around to read the essays you are most interested in. Apologies in advance for overusing commas and starting so many sentences with prepositions. As an English major, I know better, but I have more fun typing like I talk. Sort of makes it feel like we’re having a convo in your living room (where I monologue and you have your jaw on the floor.)

If you’re a long time reader - you’ll notice that I sprinkled a lot of Board Watching 101 info throughout today’s posts - defining terms like “consent agenda” and “first and second read.” I figure the new school year is an excellent excuse to hit “reset” on building up this core knowledge - so it’s a perfect time to share this series with new or returning RPS parents who want to understand what’s happening, but don’t know where to start. Together we’ll build a more informed electorate in time for the 2024 elections. Thanks in advance!

Here we go:

• Dreams4RPS 2.0

• Staffing Update

• Care & Safety

• Much Ado About Altria 🌶️

• Most Improved

Note to self: charge your 💩 so you don’t have to sit by the outlet in the back of an empty auditorium.

Note to self: charge your 💩 so you don’t have to sit by the outlet in the back of an empty auditorium.

Dreams4RPS 2.0

Dreams4RPS is the division’s 5-year “strategic plan.” It was developed in 2018 with the help of over 3,000 stakeholders (students, parents, teachers, community members). Their feedback - what they value, and where their priorities lie - were meant to shape the future of RPS and guide our leader’s focus on where to use our division’s limited funding and manpower. Initially, we saw huge gains - especially in areas like school attendance.

Then Covid swept in and mucked that all up.

Now the dust has settled, and it’s time for a new strategic plan - Dreams4RPS 2.0 - that better serves the needs of the post-pandemic classroom. Step 1 is to meet with stakeholders to figure out what those needs are.

On Monday night, the administration shared their community engagement plan, which includes an ambitious number of town halls:

• 2 for each school

• 1 for each district

• 2 dedicated meetings with the teacher’s union and RPS alumni

• community walks all across the division; and more. 

The Board’s task was simple: bless this engagement plan, or propose revisions. 

Instead, Rep White immediately strayed off-topic. She asked about the original strategic plan, wondering How badly did the administration fail those goals?

To the new Boardwatcher, this question probably sounds perfectly reasonable; but longtime readers may be asking themselves “hasn’t Mrs. White received hundreds of hours of progress reports on the strategic plan at nearly every Board meeting for the last three years?”

*250* search results for “Update on Dreams4RPS”? Yikes.

She has, indeed. Well done, my protégés!

I won’t speculate as to why she’s really asking these questions - but it is reasonable to assume that she already has the answers. 

Dr. Harris-Muhammed asked “is this going to be in alignment with the new strategic plan that expired?” She can’t be more specific, because she couldn’t find the document online. (She’d emailed the superintendent a couple hours ago to get another copy of the document, but he hadn’t yet responded.) 

As a reminder: last week’s meeting was canceled at the last minute due to threatening weather, so she had a whole extra week to prepare for this discussion.

It’s also the “second read.” That means the Board already talked about this engagement plan at the last meeting (July 10th), asked clarifying questions, and provided necessary feedback. (That’s when she told him he forgot to include those “climate survey” town halls she’d requested for each school, and he was all actually, they’re on page 4.) They’re expected to vote on this plan tonight. 

None of this is productive conversation, so 4th District’s Jonathan Young keeps the meeting moving. He motions to approve the plan. Jones (and Burke) offer a quick 2nd. 

White votes no, Dr. Harris-Muhammed abstains. 

Motion passes.

Staffing Update

For most employees, working for a school division means working on a 10-month contract. This arrangement works for a lot of people - summers off are very popular - but it can mean missing rent or meals for others. That’s why so many folks in low-pay or part-time positions finish out their contracts, then take more consistent, year-round work in other industries. (This is especially true for bus drivers, whose commercial driver’s licenses are in high demand, and can command quite a salary.)

This creates a summer-surge of job vacancies, and a frenzied season of hiring in school divisions across the country.

In Virginia, all these new employee contracts (plus any existing contracts that are changed or terminated) come before the Board for approval. They’ve got no say in who their superintendent hires (below a certain salary) - but they are required by law to monitor their division’s staffing levels and provide basic oversight. (This is, in part, a built-in safeguard against nepotism.)

Normally, School Boards approve these contracts on a “consent agenda” - a bundle of routine, non-controversial/non-political stuff that simply needs their stamp of approval. 

But things are different here in Richmond. 

Our Board doesn’t use a consent agenda to approve their staffing updates (or anything else). Often, they don’t approve these staffing updates at all. 

Instead, they kick these so-called personnel actions to closed session, where they can privately challenge/change the superintendent's proposals. This creates an opportunity for some Board members to put a heavy thumb on the employment-scale on behalf of their friends, family, and allies.

Like this Spring - when Dr. HM embarked on a passionate crusade to reinstate a recently-fired friend of hers, against the advice of a dozen-or-so employees who had shown up to offer their testimony in-person. (See: Closed Business)

Gibson’s staffing-interference strategy looks quaint by comparison. She usually just abstains from the vote whenever she’s got beef with the people being nominated. (This happens with taskforce nominations, too.)

On Monday, Dr. HM again kicked personnel actions onto the closed session agenda, but first asked the superintendent to explain…

Why were there so many principal vacancies so close to the start of the school year?

A: Because several principals recently quit to take other jobs. They didn’t give RPS much notice.

And,

Why haven’t their replacements been vetted by a community panel, first? (This is the norm.)

A: Because the school year is about to start, and the administration didn’t have much time to fill these leadership vacancies. These interim principals will go before a community panel in the Spring, when they and other candidates will be considered for the official principal position.

Dr. HM is suspicious. 

“But didn’t some candidates go through community interviews?” 

A: Yes. Some principals announced their resignations earlier in the year, leaving plenty of time for the community to interview their replacements.

I wish I could tell you why she’s asking, but the rumor mill has no explanation for why filling principal vacancies is a bad thing. 

Whatever the objective, this staffing delay was short-lived. 

In closed, the Board approved 188 new employee contracts and 133 contract changes.* 

*This includes promotions, like many of these interim principals; but also a bunch of “grow your own” graduates. Those are instructional assistants and substitute teachers who passed their praxis (teacher certification) and are now full-fledged teachers. Hurrah!

Welcome aboard, this public ed advocate appreciates your service!

Care & Safety

Last month, the administration introduced a 15-point safety plan they’d developed using 6+ months worth of Board feedback and their own internal assessment of the division's needs. 

We’ll touch on most of the recommendations below, but first let’s do a quick defining of terms:

• Security - This is infrastructure - the underlying system of training, equipment, and manpower that fortify our schools. 

• Safety - Keeping people free from physical harm; or “effectively responding to threats in the event they arise.”

• Care - Doing all the above “with a loving, restorative approach.”

Our Board members often use these terms interchangeably, which confuses each other and the RPS staff responding to their concerns.

The administration’s plan touches on all of it, though. Here’s a sample:

• More x-ray scanners and metal detector wands (Security)

• Expanding Richmond Alternative School (RAS, “Razz”) and the Amelia Street School to offer alternate placement for students with behavioral concerns who thrive in smaller settings, and with the support of specially trained staff. (Care)

• Increasing our security personnel and training school staff in de-escalation to respond to day-to-day challenges (Safety)

All together, the 15-point plan costs about $2.5M that the division currently does not have. They have applied for several state and federal grants to cover some of these costs, but those grant providers have indicated that RPS is likely to receive less funding than they asked for. (This ticks off Cheryl Burke, who would like to know “what would they suggest we cut out?”)

The administration isn’t wasting any time, though. They’ve already set to work implementing all the “free” recommendations in this plan; things like: creating family-friendly brochures that explain student expectations and the disciplinary process, and clarifying the roles and responsibilities of Care & Safety Associates (CSAs).

Now they need Board approval to do everything else. Kamras says so loud-and-clear:

“We are respectfully requesting approval of the 15 point plan so that we can fully begin to implement its elements in earnest.” 

*record scratch*

Ok, so that elevated language is actually pretty dizzying. Clear would be… 

“pass this plan so I can get to work!” or

“If you don’t pass this, I can’t do anything else to improve school security,” or

“I’m waiting on you people - the 9 of you are slowing me down now,”

Or even a snappy slogan like:

Vote “no” for the Status Quo

Maybe then the Board wouldn’t get so hung up on the one or two parts of the plan they object to.

Like Dr. HM, who didn’t budget for 24 additional mental health professionals back in January, but is “disappointed” to learn that the administration doesn’t have money to hire this staff now. She is “trying to remain calm,” but gets worked up thinking about all the things the administration has funded instead:

“If we can find funding to provide additional vans and cars and other stuff for the engagement office - the mental health piece should have been a priority for our students.”

This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of her role in shaping the division’s spending. It’s also super dismissive of the district's modest fleet of vans, which family liaisons use to find and assist housing-or-transportation-unstable students who would otherwise miss school or access to school-provided resources. 

White hones in on some “wasteful” spending, too. She doesn’t know why the administration is buying more uniforms for CSAs. 

“They already have uniforms!” 

The new CSAs don’t, though. They’re Recommendation #4, on page 12 of the document she probably didn’t read. Or if she did - she didn’t fully understand it. This is most obvious when she accuses the Chief Academic Officer (CAO) of Secondary Instruction of trying to close the alternative school in her district. Nobody’s quite sure why she thinks this. Especially since Recommendation #9 of the security plan is: Expanding, Modifying & In-Housing RAS. 

White also thinks RAS doesn’t have a full-time counselor or instructional coach. Except, they do. (That funding was in the final budget she passed a few months ago.)

We quickly see that White is not alone in her confusion and/or unpreparedness. 

Gibson doesn’t understand why the Board is being asked to approve this plan in the first place. 

“I’d like to remind my Board colleagues that our work is to adopt policy. Not bullets in a powerpoint. Um. To be truthful, this does not require a Board vote, most of it. The administration has full authority to move forward with these things.”

She goes on to criticize it anyway:

“We have heard time and time again that our side doors are points of weakness. You have many of the Board’s questions on here [pages 3 and 4] - I don’t see mine.”

I’ve made it very clear. I’ve said it on the news. I’ve said it again and again. What are we doing about the side doors?

…this is not a rhetorical question. I would like an answer.” (Watch 1 / 2)

She says this with such conviction and frustration that I nearly died of second-hand embarrassment because… 

Side door security is addressed in this plan. Repeatedly.

• The division invested in and installed Intruder Alarm Systems “which will notify personnel in the main office if someone has entered through an unauthorized door.” (Pg 44) 

• They’re also in the process of installing a passcard entry system on doors across the division so that “doors are not propped open for recess or other activities” - creating obvious security vulnerabilities. 

• They’re seeking Board approval for new security staff to monitor halls and all points of entry. This suggestion was “borne out of our experience at RHSA (Wythe) where students would at times leave the building unnoticed given the large number of exits and limited monitoring personnel.” (Pg 12)

• They have revamped training and job responsibilities for existing security staff, with an emphasis on door security and continuous monitoring of exits. (Pg 42)

• The cellphone ban is also door security. Beyond their association with fights and bullying, students consistently use cell phones to help their friends evade metal detectors at main entrances - coordinating to let them in through a side door instead.

Gibson’s lie is so outrageous that it hits a nerve with the superintendent:

“I would caution Board members to not put into the public assertions which are not founded in evidence, and are only causing further concern and - frankly - trauma for people…

While we certainly have more to do, continuing to bash and belittle and berate the team that works so hard to ensure the safety of our students is not going to make any progress. We take this extremely seriously, and a great deal of work has been done this summer to ensure safety. 

If there are any additional, concrete recommendations that this body has, we would welcome that. But we have yet to hear anything this body supports that we can add to this plan.”

The best Gibson can come up with in response is essentially: Yea, but… what about the side doors at the Altria theater? With this, the security plan conversation is entirely derailed. We’ll move onto that separately - it’s a doozie - but let’s put a pin in the 15-point-plan first.

Once again, Jonathan Young acts to move the meeting along, chiding his colleagues: 

“Is it a perfect plan? Of course not. But if perfect is the enemy of good, we’re gonna be up on this stage a long time.” 

He motions to approve a plan that will “move the needle in a substantive way.” This is a beginning - not an end - to the Board’s safety conversations.

Jones offers a quick second.

The Board passes this sweeping security proposal without the help of chronic contrarians White (“no”) and Gibson (“abstain”). Their votes effectively mean Having NO security plan is better than having THIS security plan. 

This is quite a reversal for Gibson, who - during the Board’s June 20th safety discussion - said:

• “I implore my Board colleagues to consider - what else? I want to support whatever we can do to address this. I am open to suggestions.”

• “Please, please be open, please provide ideas you have”

• “We have to do something” and

• “We must make a hasty decision!”

She says so at this meeting, too. 

“If the administration can come to us with policy recommendations about how we as a district will ensure that the side doors are being secured, I would welcomely support it.”

Then a few minutes later, she did not.

Much Ado About Altria 

The Safety/Security discussion has dragged on too long already, but Dr HM still has one more trick up her sleeve.

Days earlier, she’d announced through the media that she would request a 3rd party investigation into the fatal shooting of a Huguenot graduate at Altria Theater. 

White’s ready for this. She’s been warming up all evening. Her accusations fly fast and loose, starting with:

• The Superintendent didn’t provide an incident report within 5 days of the shooting. (He did. You can read a redacted version, here.)

• The report he provided wasn’t an incident investigation report “with the corrective actions that our security can take.” (He did, those recommendations are on pages 6 & 7)

• He didn’t interview school staff to figure out how this incident began. 

Kamras defends his report, explaining why some details are missing:

“As for the specifics of the actual incident, that is something RPD is the only body that is going to be able to fully investigate. We don’t have access to much of the materials. They’re not even releasing much of this information until this goes to court.”

Then White some word salad about how most of RPS’ security team is RPD before cutting to the chase: “What are we hiding?” (Watch)

By this, of course, she means what is the superintendent hiding? This is the suspicion that plagues the Board. Whether it's’ about facts or fairness, they never believe they’re getting the full story. Disgruntled staff are in their ears 24/7, sharing…

• their complaints (I don’t want to figure out how to use this dyslexia-detecting software, so nobody in the district should have it!)

• their suspicions (Historic Tax Credits will slow down the Fox Rebuild! Also, something incoherent about turning Fox into a charter school!) 

• …and their preferences (Don’t let the superintendent turn the Amelia Street School into a mini-RAS; which Chairwoman Rizzi shares tonight on behalf of that school’s principal) 

They do not consider the motives of these disgruntled employees. Being manipulated is a small price to pay for a chance to expose the superintendent for the fraud they’re convinced he is. 

This is an endless distraction from the real work the Board is meant to do - like actually having regular policy committee meetings, or regularly serving on disciplinary panels.

The Board who kept schools closed for 18 months could have spent the last couple of years finding common ground and supporting expert recommendations to address the resulting learning loss. Instead, they’re endlessly searching for proof of neglect, incompetence, or corruption so they can relitigate this vote from 2021. They’ll bully and harass as many RPS leaders as it takes to do it, too. The stack of resignations keep piling up, and Kamras appears to have hit a breaking point:   

“I want to strongly push back against this assertion that something is being hidden. Nothing is, and I’ve heard that from more than one Board Member. Frankly, I think this is a disservice to all the people who have worked very hard to gather as much information as they possibly can… There are some things that we simply do not have.

I am frankly tired of the defamatory comments that are being made about the many hardworking people who have poured themselves into analyzing the situation, and providing thoughtful recommendations about what we can do to address making graduations - or anything else for that matter - safer.

I would respectfully request that those assertions stop being made.”

He goes another round with White - who calls him insubordinate, and again insists the superintendent has not provided a report - then he does a thing he never does. Kamras asks for help. 

“I would request that other members of this body verify that that is not true.”

They do not. The best he gets is a yes-but-no from Dr. HM.

White wants consequences. “Upon not receiving this investigation report, Mr. Kamras should be suspended from his duties.”

Now look. I’m maybe happier than anyone that White said the quiet part out loud. I’ve been Chicken Little (of “the sky is falling!” fame) warning of the Board’s desire to fire this man for years now, and I finally have video evidence to prove it. 

But Kamras isn’t the only victim here. The deceased graduate’s surviving family are, too.

What the Board wants - what they need to prove, once and for all, that the superintendent is unfit - is to air this kid’s dirty laundry for all to see.

Here’s Dr HM’s 3-part motion, and it’s “if we’re being honest” translation.

1. Report all findings of graduation day operations from setup-to-breakdown, specifically security measures for entering students and staff.

1. The Board wants to prove that the deceased brought a gun into the Altria theater.

2. Compile interviews from all associated RPS and Huguenot staff, because “the staff that reached out to me [Dr HM] have indicated they have not been questioned about what happened that day.”

1. They believe the administration is suppressing a history of bullying, and/or threatening staff with retaliation.

3. Audit the homebound program, specifically in regards to how its students earn credits.

1. They do not believe this student had earned enough credits to graduate in the first place.

Apparently, it is not enough that this family lost a father and son. Now the Board has commissioned an investigation that will, by design, publicly embarrass the deceased, and rip his diploma out of the hands of a grieving mother.

(Doerr makes a good point that these mandated interviews will re-traumatize staff, too.)

We, the taxpayers, are paying for this witch-hunt.

Specifically, our kids. Their school system cannot fund 24 new mental health counselors, but the majority of the Board will OK an investigation with no known price, and no way to pay for it. They’ll leave it to Superintendent Punching-Bag to do the boring budget stuff and “find some funding from somewhere.” 

Jones swoops in - as she often does - with the moral of this story.

“We have gone wayyyy over. We have gone from 0-100. We’ve gotten off-focus and I think we need to dial it back and figure out: what is our purpose up here?” 

She passes the baton to the new lawyer for legal advice. Can we even do this?

He promptly drops it, preferring to speak only in closed session. (I miss Ms Lilly already.)

Burke picks it up, reminding us all that this shooting did not take place on RPS property. It was not even in the event space, and RPS did not provide the event security. (They outsourced that, hiring the professionals at RMC - who provide event security for UVA, VCU, JMU, and others.) This investigation, she said, is RPD’s job. 

Nevertheless, Gibson seconds the motion. 

White, Gibson, Young, Rizzi, and HM pass it.

And - In the words of Forrest Gump - that’s all I have to say about that.

Most Improved

It’s not often that I have something encouraging to share about our Board - but I wouldn’t be telling the whole story if I didn’t mention this.

Chairwoman Rizzi is really, really growing in her role.

She’s still learning how to use the tools of Robert’s Rules of Order (a governing playbook) - and that’s OK. 

The most important thing she can do is lead by example. 

On Monday night, her example was calm, gracious, solutions-oriented, and full of gratitude for RPS staff.

I cannot fully express the relief I felt when - at the end of the contentious,  hour-long security discussion - she chimed in with May I see this data, please? And I can see how hard you’ve worked on this. Thank you. (Watch)

I marvel at the dramatic shift in Board dynamics over the past year. Once-reliable anchors of Board stability - Page, Doerr, and Jones - are now absent, checked out, or just unpredictable. In their place is Young, the voice of reason and duty, and Chairwoman Rizzi - maligned by the public, but carrying her Board responsibilities with dignity and seeing her impact on the district with new, clearer eyes.

This is an incredible service to our children - Seriously, the Board’s drama is as needless as it is draining! - and much of this work goes unnoticed and unappreciated. 

So I’m going to take this opportunity to do both: I see you, and I thank you. Keep it up! 

(This is an endorsement of conduct, not necessarily their politics.)

---

For my friends in the RPS family - break a leg on Monday! I hope your year kicks off on a high note. 

If you’ve got the energy - I’d love to see y'all at the Board meeting (Huguenot, 6PM). If you’re totally pooped, you can still follow along with Emily’s live-tweets*, or check back here later in the week for another meeting summary. 

Thanks, as always, for following along with our local public schools, and for recommending this series to your friends. I hope you find it useful!

*They are tweets. Not x’s. “Live-Xs” sounds like a feature on Only Fans… which is a joke I stole from 🛋️ because she’s the funny one. 🙃