RPS Recap: January 23, 2023
Well, Board Watchers - last night’s Board forecast was bleak, but it was also a bust.
Most of the drama appears to have happened behind closed doors, and we only have a few clues that tell us what exactly happened.
SO, with the caveat that we’ll probably learn more as aggrieved Board members speak to the press and staff circulate whispers around central office, here’s what we know now and what it probably means.
(If you have NO idea what drama I’m talking about, or what was expected to unfold last night, pause here to read yesterday’s blog post. It’s crucial to understanding our discussion below.)
The Agenda
…was super boring. Routine updates, mostly. And a presentation on the budget that the superintendent drafted per Board funding priorities. (Pages 10-14)
We only caught wind of storm clouds brewing because Jonathan Young told RTD “that two School Board members have approached him about the prospect of removing Kamras since first reading the [Monroe Park Shooting] report” - 3rd District’s Kenya Gibson and 6th District’s Dr. Shonda Harris-Muhammed.
There is a whole CVS-length receipt of Gibson’s feelings on the Superintendent, and why she desperately wants him gone, but I think that’s sucked up enough of our bloggy time together in the last week.
We’ll turn instead to Dr. HM. Who I will call Shonda throughout this because I’d like to spend some time considering the person behind the honorific. (It also spares me a ton of extra keystrokes…)
Shonda spoke with CBS6’s Tyler Layne ahead of last night’s meeting, confidently stating that the 3rd-Party Monroe Park Report* proves the Superintendent misled the public.
*A.k.a. - what the public knows better as the Altria Report, but I’m not above a light trolling of Board members who would rather call it the Huguenot Graduation Shooting in an attempt to spin the media portrayal of the event and embarrass the district.
Shonda also has quite a sizable portfolio of public condemnation of the School administration. She is, herself, a school administrator by profession, and draws from that experience a lot. “This is the work [she does] everyday” and she knows better than the superintendent how central office staff should be organized, who should take attendance, even what the Superintendent should put in his weekly newsletter. She also thinks she understands the role of a Board member better than the VDOE - so much so that she rated herself a 10-out-of-10 during their 2022 governance training. She was full of this energy last night when she advocated for canceling the division’s membership to the Virginia School Board Alliance (VSBA) and the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) - the two organizations that provide professional development for our School Board.
This professional development is mandatory per our corrective action plan (a “Memorandum of Understanding” or “MOU”) with the state because of the Board’s 5+ decade long habit of “micromanag[ing]the system rather than sticking to its mandate of setting policy” and it’s devastating impact on student achievement. (Chapter 6; Pgs 133-127)
“All members of the Richmond City School Board and the Division Superintendent will participate at a minimum annually in board and superintendent professional development provided by the VSBA which focuses on their respective roles and responsibilities for school improvement (or for improving student achievement in challenge school).” (Pg 5, #10)
CGCS’s relationship with RPS has generally been one of 3rd party accountability for both the Board and admin. The VSBA relationship has - among other things - been used to build up the Board’s credibility/integrity, and “to dispel the notion of faulty hiring practices.”
But Jonathan Young is a die-hard libertarian (or at least acts like one) who opposes memberships to these organizations for the same reason my 3 year old refuses to wear pants. I do what I want. Big government has no business telling the School Board what to do.
At least Young has attended these professional development sessions - albeit begrudgingly. Kenya “We need to hold people accountable” Gibson won’t because she resents being held accountable and - also like my 3 year old - doesn’t like being told that she shouldn't be doing what she’s doing. In her time on the Board, she’s attended one professional development session, and did so via zoom.
Shonda, on the other hand, appeared to have a very positive relationship with CGCS. She has opted into ongoing one-on-one professional development with this organization, and I could really see the improvement in recent months. Last night, though, she echoed a Jonathan-like fiscal conservative rationale for ending the CGCS/VSBA relationships because they’re being underutilized (the “by obstinate Board Members who refuse to even cooperate with Chairwoman Rizzi’s attempts to schedule this mandatory professional development” part was silent.) Besides, Shonda says,
“We’ve got compliance. That’s not an issue for us.”
…Mmmk. The VDOE’s Office of School Quality and I have a different recollection…
“The board has seemingly worked to establish and maintain order (creating/revising the Governance Manual, Robert's Rule of Order, attending/participating in [Virginia School Boards Association] training), and when things are allowed into motion without being on the agenda as an action item, it undermines the processes you all are attempting to institutionalize”
So anyway. Shonda’s very public stance is that she can do the superintendent’s job better than he can (and it sure looks like she’s getting her superintendent certification to do just that.) She allegedly asked the VDOE if she could serve as Board Chairwoman and Superintendent at the same time - which is unverified, but also.. you know. Tracks.
These three amigos - Young, Gibson, Harris-Muhammed - came to last night's meeting ready to rock the boat.
They immediately motioned to change the meeting’s agenda to add a discussion about the Monroe Park Shooting report that was released last week and has been making explosive headlines (and my most-read blog post. Wowzers. Thanks, ya’ll!).
Their Board colleagues unanimously approved adding this agenda item - a subtle F-U to everyone saying they refuse to be transparent. They put this discussion at the top of the list, right after public comment.
But then something strange happened.
Liz Doerr - 1st District, now Vice Chair - made another motion to amend the agenda. This time, she wanted to add a closed session to the agenda… before public comment.
The Board rarely takes closed session in the middle of an open meeting. Usually it’s tacked on to the end of the meeting so that everyone in the audience can go home knowing they won’t miss any other public discussion.
This is also why they put public comment at the top of the agenda - so that constituents can voice their opinions and concerns without waiting through 4 and 5 hours (or 6, if you’re the CEO of Peter Paul) of Board discussion.
Doerr is breaking with tradition now, and tells her colleagues it’s to discuss “potential litigation.”
Young and Gibson vote no.
Shonda doesn’t know what’s going on. She is having problems participating by zoom, and criticizes the service offered by the RPS tech team (aka their legislative liaison to the General Assembly - Matthew Stanley - who moonlights as the RPS tech team to setup Board meetings and provide streaming video on youtube.) She is especially concerned that the world cannot see her. Her camera is off. We’ll just have to close our eyes and envision the leprechaun green blazer and Barbie pink lipstick for ourselves. (Always repping that AKA!)
Both agenda additions are passed. A student choir sings. And the Board marches off the stage and into closed session.
Potential Litigation
“Potential litigation” is our first clue.
If the Board were meeting to fire Jason Kamras, the reason for going into closed session would have been “Personnel” matters. Also, Gibson would have voted yes.
“Potential litigation” is still super broad though. It could mean the Board is being sued for releasing 1,100 pages of confidential staff transcripts related to the Altria event. A former judge and prosecutor had advised them these records were exempt from FOIA under attorney client privilege. But a Richmond Judge said “bump that, release it all!” - then stood atop the John Marshall Court Building to toss hundreds of pages of explosive content into the air and into the hands of hungry journalists (and me.)
RPS staff had been candid in their interviews with investigators, assured this information would stay private. Now, their retelling of RPS internal workings has gone public, incriminating some colleagues, embarrassing and infuriating others. Morale is low.
Everyone feels betrayed. Perhaps enough to inspire a lawsuit.
But there’s another likely scenario. And it involves Clue #2.
Jason Kamras’ Lawyer
The superintendent’s lawyer is present. He is - depressingly - a regular at RPS Board meetings. Ready and waiting to jump into closed session to represent his client against whatever “gotcha!” accusation the Board hurls at him this time.
Kamras’ accusers hate this. They want the superintendent vulnerable, and generally don’t tolerate being told they’re wrong or have no legal argument. (Even when it’s their own lawyers. Especially when it’s their own lawyers.)
It’s possible that his lawyer is here to announce a defamation lawsuit on behalf of his client. Kamras has (privately) threatened to do so before, and he almost certainly has merit to do so now that his aggressors are trying to pin him as responsible for the death of a student.
But his lawyer doesn’t join the Board in closed session. He sits in the audience like everyone else. Waiting.
30 minutes later, Young and Gibson are described as “storming out” and “irritated AF.” They all take their places back on stage.
Gibson scowls at her laptop.
Jonathan “sleeps” on stage during public comment. This is very unlike him. He, Kamras, and Rizzi always look public comment-ers in the eye as they express their concerns while the rest of the Board more-or-less tunes us out. I suspect he was actually texting, absorbed in a time-sensitive discussion with someone - on or off stage. Perhaps planning what comes next.
Plan B
This is our last clue.
Shonda, Gibson, Young, have all indicated their interest in a candid, public discussion about the findings of the 3rd party investigation. It’s why they moved to add it to the agenda.
But when they finally get their chance… they don’t.
Gibson says, “this has been quite a time for the body.” Thanks folks who advocated to make the report public, and vaguely - painfully vague - refers to all the parts of the report she’d wanted to discuss as “the subject matter” and “a range of issues” before doing a thing she is *not* known for doing.
She moves on. (…kinda)
She doesn’t discuss the report.
But she does revisit 2 years worth of “emergent issues” that have “escalated in terms of severity.” Each of which she’d tried to pin on Kamras, too:
Fox Fire
Bus Depot Fire
“Bloody Halls”
Shooting incidents
The Board needs more oversight of the division in order to turn things around.
She motions (again) for a safety auditor. “A staff member who would be focused on safety.” “Someone internal who would audit our activities [like Sands Anderson did] to see that things are not falling through the cracks.”
PAUSE to state what might not be obvious to folks outside the school system.
Fox was a facilities failure.
Bus depot was a freak accident.
The Bloody Halls was from a break-in, followed by a custodial failure.
The Shooting incidents she’s referring to - they were either school-adjacent (kid at a bus stop, 3rd party graduation venue), or were a lapse in school-based management (failing to patrol known side doors students use to skip school; school administrators (allegedly) failing to communicate expectations with staff.)
When mistakes happen, there are real risks.
But the only thing these issues had in common was the finger-pointing that followed.
The affected departments include: Safety & Security, Facilities, Custodial, Academics - each of which have different operating structures and chains of command.
Gibson’s asking for a safety auditor is Gibson asking for a way to micromanage the day to day operations of the entire school division. And, since this is a position that would report to the School Board, she can both bypass the superintendent and have him investigated directly. Her own Mystery, Inc. Chasing down ghosts and monsters just to rip off their masks and realize there’s no big-scary-monster after all.
Besides. Auditors look into the past. They offer a postmortem and identify the cracks. They do not - as Gibson suggests - “see that things are not falling through the cracks” - prevent tragedy before it happens, and save the day. A safety auditor is not a pro-active safety position. It’s a reactive one.
This isn’t to say that an auditor position isn’t important - there are absolutely benefits to an honest reflection of things gone wrong. That’s why RPS has two auditors already.
Let’s resume.
Mariah White - the self-described “safety guru” - agrees that our division needs improving. But she’s more interested in the Chief Wellness Officer (Parks), Safety Director (Beasley), and school principals working together on solutions. She wants to invest in proactive measures like conducting risk/threat assessments.
Liz Doerr is receptive to the idea initially. She suggests they kick a few questions to committee (avg salary range, where they’d “fit into our organizational structure” and “how our head of safety feels about this”) before holding a vote. But she walks back her support when she learns that this auditor would not be supporting the administration, but a bureaucrat essentially tasked with tattling to the Board.
Young is supportive. A safety auditor will expose weaknesses he already knows about (initiation of and follow-through of threat assessments) - but many of his colleagues fail to see (or downplay).
Cheryl Burke celebrates the growth in our safety measures in the last 6 months. These include: cell phone restrictions, metal detectors, misc security equipment, additional security staff in schools. She’d rather the $120k salary go towards supporting school staff with targeted professional development, and rally to the general assembly for mental health funding. (Virginia is ranked 48 out of 50 states in mental health funding.)
She also makes an interesting point about the impact of an auditor on school culture. Staff will be terrified of making even honest mistakes, knowing that it will bring upon them the wrath of the Board-turned-RPS-tribunal, who will enforce a sort of “justice” that favors people share their sorority sisterhood or who leak them the best information.
Her instincts are spot on. Research indicates that kind of environment doesn’t lead to fewer mistakes, it just drives them underground: either unreported or covered-up.
Gibson’s safety-auditor reasoning is valid - you can’t learn from mistakes that aren’t reported; but the McCarthyism-climate her auditor would create could actually make all things safety… worse.
We didn’t get to consider that long, though, before an impatient voice boomed from the ether.
“Yes, can you hear me ok? Hello, can you hear me ok?”
Shonda’s zoom attendance is it’s own circus.
“We can no longer do the same thing the same way.”
She says her colleagues under-appreciate the Policy Committee (her). She wishes the Board would focus on operational management, instructional practices, and student outcomes; but,
”Sometimes we let our personalities get in the way.”
This would have been an impressive feat of self-reflection, except, in context, it seems to be how she explains her colleague’s rejection of Gibson’s safety auditor request. As though this is a good idea they’re turning down because of the firecracker suggesting it - or it’s a good idea they’re turning down because they’re prideful. Unclear.
They vote: NNYYNYNN. Motion Fails, 5:3.
Gibson begs for table scraps. Moves to put a school safety auditor discussion on the agenda of an upcoming Finance & Audit committee meeting. Doerr seconds.
Chairwoman Rizzi wonders aloud:
”The Board has just voted not to proceed with [hiring a safety auditor.]… What would the audit committee… what would the committee actually do? Please help me, Ms. Gibson?”
This would just be busywork for the Board. Only Doerr suggested doing this “homework” could win her support, but Gibson’s motion failed by two votes, not just the one.
Gibson pauses and fumbles.
“I mean, Madam Chair you’re the chair of the Board so I defer - I’m not sure -“
R: “It’s your motion, I’m just asking you a question.”
Silence.
R: ”Ok. I think we’ll move on a vote on this.”
Motion fails, 4:4.
Gibson’s Safety Auditor dream is dead unless she can convince someone to change their mind and make a “motion to reconsider.”
Robert’s Rules will not allow a minority of any governing body to waste everyone’s time by repeatedly holding discussions for motions that will not pass.
Robert’s Rules *also* says a tie vote fails. I totally got that wrong in yesterday’s post. I thought ties broke in the favor of the motion. It does not. I already corrected the blog post, but figured I’d also point it out here for good measure.
Isn’t this fun? We’re learning all of Robert’s Rules together!
This was not the discussion or the vote that was expected. It was civil-ish, well-considered by all on stage, and it failed.
Whatever happened in closed session had successfully neutralized the heavily-publicized ambush we’d all been expecting.
Ordinarily we wouldn’t find out what they discussed. Buuuut Leaky McLeakerson told CBS6, so now I get to tell you:
“Sources said the attorney advised members to keep the dialogue centered around moving forward and next steps – and not to introduce new facts during the discussion.“
Some board members obviously didn’t like this, but at least they complied.
This was the best case scenario for RPS.
No screaming matches shown on the evening news.
No inflammatory quotes in the newspaper.
No votes to fire the superintendent (that we know of).
The Board is clawing back a reputation of order and student focus, one thwarted hurricane at a time. They’re not quite “leading with love” yet - but most of them are leading with respect. It’s a huge improvement, and we have the service of a determined Chairwoman and an assertive Vice-Chair to thank for that.
And that’s why - as a tribute to Ms. Gibson - I’m calling this night “the hurricane-which-wasn’t.
