ICISD Board Meeting December 2023

The Mertzon I grew up in had mostly dirt roads that were rutted like this year round. Why were our leaders so willing to go back to those days in exchange for a new gym and cafeteria kitchen? I am troubled by the lack of community pride and unwillingness to address the destruction of public property.

---

Here is the agenda for the December 11, 2023 board meeting, with my comments on the agenda below and my comments on the meeting below that.

Agenda comments:

1. Agenda item 8, Further facility project discussion, is notable on this agenda. Supt. Moore attended the Mertzon City Counsel meeting last week and announced there would be a bond called in 2024 (in Feb.), so all discussions about the school facility now are important.

2. I could write pages on this agenda addressing the TASB policy update at item 7. I covered this issue on an earlier blog post at bullet two. For more on existing ICISD policies, go here. Board members, both governmental and nonprofit, are largely present to help the superintendent or executive director create and manage the policies of the organization. Their main role is not to be a "do-er", as in mechanically perform some task (like voluteer at a ball game or class function), but rather to be a "reader" and "thinker" and to communicate advice and direction to the superintendent or ED. They are executive level managers but without day to day control over the organization. Boards go through various stages of growth and re-growth depending on the executive level management skills of the board members and their superintendent/executive director. Failing to wrestle over policy during meetings, however, is a sure sign of a poorly functioning board. This agenda accomplishes so much more on a policy level than previous agendas. Appendix A to item 7 is great way to communicate policy changes. First, it tells the board members to come prepared to think and discuss particular policy changes. (To have a good policy discussion you need to read the proposed policy first!) It tells stakeholders, like teachers, to pay attention because they are discussing employment practices. It tells students that changes to their student records are being considered. It tells parents that standards for safety and security could be changed. And, importantly, it serves as advanced notice to the community that it can speak up during open forum before these changes are passed. (Yes, the community at large is a stakeholder in a public school's policies!) Appendix A is a treasure trove of information, even though it only generally identifies the topics. Even if the Board ultimately approves TASB's policy update verbatim, giving it more air time on the agenda presents greater opportunity for discussion by the Board and Superintendent Moore. I frankly used to cringe when Superintendent DeSpain and former President Flores passed these updates without discussion. ("We have to do what TASB tells us" was Flores' position. No they don't. TASB does not regulate school districts by law. They may be the only game in town, but that doesn't mean they are free from questioning.) The Board members don't all have to become policy wonks, but they also shouldn't lifelessly adopt what TASB feeds it. Agenda item 7 with its appendix are refreshing changes made by President Carlile and Superintendent Moore.

3. As to the closed session, recently I raised in an open records request the sharp rise in hires at the District during DeSpain's tenure, so I am interested in the Personnel issue at 11 (b). Did you know that during the last 3 years the District grew from 52 to 72 employees? That's significant. Why such growth? I am still trying to find out. Otherwise, I suspect the Community Committee mentioned at 11 (d) is related to forming the bond related community committee responsible for selling the bond project to voters. If you were to look back in history at the 2019 bond you might not call what was used then a "committee". Maybe they should be called a...family and some close knit principals, coaches and board members? Maybe a superintendent and architect were also members? (An architect who had a with a previous relationship building a gym with the superintendent!) More on all that later. In any event, a committee of this type is supposed to be the tool used by the District to obtain buy in from the community on the bond. In another light, it is the group of people the District can persuade to make an objective ask to the community for the funds; the District uses this committee to make the ask for the District. What happens if the District doesn't get community buy in, because, say, the committee was not legitimately formed and is really just a group of networked insiders who are intent on using bond funds as they see fit? Well, web sites like Government in the Sun pop up in protest!
   

Meeting comments:

1. Public Forum. School Counselor LeAnn Rutherford spoke during Open Forum in defense of Athletic Director Jacob Conner. It is exceptionally rare to see an employee of a governmental body speak during open forum. It is generally a risky proposition because one never knows where all of their bosses are on whatever issue it is they speak on. Moreover, the open forum is generally reserved for the public, and for an employee to speak during that time leaves an appearance that the employee is saying something that is not approved by all. Ms. Rutherford appeard to be trying to say, enough with the rumor and conjecture, I know this man to be a good man and something good needs to be said. Of course, the context was entirely missing and one would have to be an insider to know what wildfire she was trying to control. I'm no insider, and I strive to avoid conjecture when I can. However, I have been openly critical of Mr. Conner on this website for a number of reasons. Principally, he failed to forthrightly testify to the Mertzon City Council that the proposed new gym (which was largely his brainchild) would flood city streets, private residences and, yes, even the football field that he manages, even though such was known at the time. (Reminder to all ICISD employees: you are public servants first. You serve the public, not just those who are the beneficiaries of your departmental budget!) Second, his department required a $98,000 budget amendment for athletic equipment at the football field during a year of a fiscal crisis. I have recently received this budget amendment in response to one of my open records request and will post it in time.

2. Flash in the pan advocacy. A number of folks attended the board meeting who had never attended before, presumably to support Mr. Conner or support the statements by Ms. Rutherford. No one else spoke during open forum. Mr. Conner was not present at the meeting, and there was no substitute or mention of his report to the Board. I can't say what the purpose of their advocacy was at the meeting, and these folks left after shortly after the board entered executive session. Read my note 3 about how to avoid flash in the pan advocacy.

3. TASB Update 122. There was at least an incremental change in that Superintendent Moore provided a bullet point summary of the changes in the legal policies in Update 122. There was no discussion of those changes by the Board, and no mention of Appendix A, local policies. Update 122 was approved. In time, perhaps the Board will reconsider whether to allow the folks in Austin to dictate local policy and at least begin to question policy matters. Say what they will about the meaning of the law in their legal policies, TASB is not the final authority on local policy. Local policy is the Board's purview.

4. Budget. CFO Helms was not present. There was so little stated about the budget that another open records request is going to be necessary. The District should be more transparent about its finances and start posting financial data on its website. The District is undergoing/has just undergone a financial audit, so there is reason for our community to pay attention. Remember, a 2024 bond is almost certain to be called and these are our tax dollars at work.

5. Superintendent Moore's report: She mentioned in her report that Ener-Tel was in the process of deploying the new security cameras. I recently received a copy of the the District's contract with Ener-Tel pursuant to the Public Information Act. I was mainly curious about whether they were using Aritificial Intelligence as part of their software. Indeed they are. This verifies, as I stated in my post AI and School Security, that there is reason to be concerned about how AI is being used...and who is using it.

6. Action items after closed session. There were none, and I was the only member of the public present. This board's marathon meetings are 3 to 4 hours, but this one was wrapped up in about an hour. Coincidentally, another reason to stay until the end if at all possible is to show the governmental body your respect of them and respect of the procedures they have to observe to serve the public. The open meeting procedures to close a meeting, in a legal sense, are just as important as the symbolism of publicly reciting the pledges to the flags at the opening of a meeting.

7. Update: After I initially posted this page I learned that the District is now posting some of its financial data on the web like it used to. See this post, The Sun Shines on the Check Register. Also, to put this meeting in its historical context, this week the City closed Fleming Ave for flood cleanup, thus putting the District in an awkward bind as it considers another street closure for a 2024 bond election.

Copyright 2023 G Noelke