By JIM BUTLER
Shannon Alford listened and listened and listened. Then she spoke, in no uncertain terms.
After hearing protracted discussion and debate among School Board members (or dickering and delay, depending on perspective) at their May meeting about a proposed realignment, the executive assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction praised the team that put together the plan after months of preparation, saying it’s one of the best.
“It’s disheartening that you come across as not trusting,” the former teacher, principal and director of elementary education said, exasperation evident.
Shortly thereafter the resolution passed, without dissent.
The intent of the change is to better support student learning. It involves some shifting and realigning of job slots, eliminating nine vacant positions, and creating a new director post.
Willard McCall objected to the package coming through the Education Committee rather than Personnel, a seemingly logical point.
Linda Burgess moved to send it to Personnel for further consideration of the staffing impact. Sandra Franklin seconded.
George Johnson disagreed, saying the proposal is more curriculum than personnel.
Alford, responding to a query by Wally Fall, said time is of the essence, noting staff and board have been talking about the proposed changes for some time.
McCall said if time is an issue staff should have started earlier, reiterating he thought the matter should be sent back to committee, this time Personnel.
Alford noted the job descriptions in the proposal had been handed to board members more than two weeks earlier.
Wilton Barrios Jr., chairman of Personnel, said time is critical to the conversion prior to the 24-25 school year. He noted committee assignment oversight has happened before, saying he didn’t want to delay the proposal by going back through committee.
The substitute motion then failed, 3-5 (Mark Dryden was absent).
Franklin offered another substitute – to vote on each job description separately – but was told a second substitute could not be considered under rules of procedure.
Johnson urged members not to second guess the staff. “We pay them to make good choices,” he said.
Franklin and Burgess, before joining the unanimous yes vote, reiterated concerns about staffing and job descriptions.