Change is on the horizon. On July 11, five new school board directors will be sworn in, signaling the end of an alt-right board who has managed to dismantle a once-vibrant district, causing nearly 200 educators to leave Newberg, as well as numerous families seeking stable schooling for their children elsewhere.
It would be easy to exhale in relief that change is near, knowing that the community’s significant efforts to elect new directors—efforts made with children in mind—had paid off. Indeed, this very blog went dark after the election, because we felt with some certainty that a new day had dawned, and that the school board would soon be acting in ways that truly benefit the district’s children.
In the meantime, the current board has made several decisions that could have significant impact on the district long after the new board is sworn in. The agenda for the June 13 meeting is a wake-up call, a reminder that the current board is still operating, driven by a political agenda that could potentially harm children in our district; and motivated by a desire to fiscally reward district officers without accountability for whether raises are warranted.
We wanted to call attention to several board decisions, encouraging people to show up for the June 13 meeting, make public comments if possible, and hold the current board accountable for their actions—actions that will potentially hamper the newly-elected board directors, and that have the potential to continue harming children and educators in this district.
Here are two notable board decisions:
Parents’ Bill of Rights: Superintendent Steve Phillips and the district office hosted two meetings for those interested in revising parents’ rights policies for the district. Sixty people participated on Zoom for the first meeting in April, and then around 30 people participated in the second meeting on May 1, either in person or on Zoom. The meetings provided robust discussion about how a policy might be shaped to honor all parents’ rights, not just those who already had the board’s attention. The meetings represented a significant investment on the part of adults in our district.
And yet, there’s no evidence that Director Brian Shannon, the main proponent of his Parents’ Bill of Rights, has considered any of the feedback that emerged from these discussions, in part because—as he said at a policy meeting—the discussions hadn’t really gone the way he wanted. Instead, he’s crafted a Parents’ Bill of Rights to his liking, discussed it briefly at a policy meeting on June 6, and established that the Parents’ Bill of Rights Shannon champions will replace Newberg’s already extant policy about parents’ rights.
The new school board can, of course, reverse the policy. Two years ago, Shannon argued that policies should not be changed ahead of a new board being sworn in, but now is eager to take a different tact.
Superintendent Salary: We wrote earlier this year about the lack of transparency in the board’s evaluation of the superintendent. Without providing any kind of transparent review process, nor a sense of the criteria used to evaluate Superintendent Phillips, the board went into an executive session on April 25, emerging a short time later to announce that Philips was providing “outstanding leadership” in the district.
It is possible that Philips is doing a good job with the district, but without any metrics or rubrics to show how he was evaluated, we’re just supposed to believe the board’s affirmations. And, based on those affirmations, Phillips is allegedly receiving a much more lucrative contract—we say allegedly, because no one has seen the specifics of the contract.
That’s not how any of this is supposed to work.
At the meeting on Tuesday, Phillips’ renewed contract is part of the agenda. Sort of. It’s on the consent agenda, meaning that his contract will be coupled with several other decisions (including new hires and resignations and a weird line-item about a new deputy superintendent) and will be voted on en masse. Continuing a superintendent’s contract–a considerable decision impacting the district’s future–should warrant discussion and careful consideration, not a rubber stamp.
The lack of transparency continues: No one has a clear sense of how Phillips was evaluated. No one knows for sure whether he’s doing a good job or not, beyond the glowing reviews of board supporters, who claim he’s turned around a failing district. By all metrics, this is not true: the district has lost educators and students and money since Phillips arrived; an entire district office staff left because of toxic work environments; policies and decisions have been made without any community input.
On Tuesday, Phillips’ newly-crafted contract will be approved. Rumor is, the contract will be extended for three years. Who knows if this is true or not, but in the yawning void of information, people connect the dots. And, given the superintendent’s tight relationship with the current board, it could be that he’ll receive a lucrative salary increase—one that will take more money from the classroom. It could also be that the terms of his contract will make Phillips harder to replace, if future boards use appropriate evaluation tools to see whether his leadership truly is as “outstanding” as Director Dave Brown says.
Again, this is not how any of this is supposed to work. But following protocol, being transparent, and accepting accountability has never been part of the current board’s plan. Thank goodness, this will all change in July, and hopefully, at that point, the new board can begin a new, far better, era in Newberg. Until then, it’s important for us to pay attention, for the sake of Newberg’s children.
Newberg Neighbors for a Better Community 