The Wake County Taxpayers Association announced today that it had filed a complaint with AdvancED asking the accreditation organization to investigate the actions of the Wake County school board majority.
The complaint hits on a variety of things, including the private meeting the new board members had with Michael Alves, the post-midnight vote on the student assignment directive and board member Jim Martin trying to arrange an assignment provision for parents going on sabbaticals,
Several of the allegations deal with the Great Schools in Wake Coalition, from the behavior of some members in the audience of board meetings to charges they've unduly influenced the board majority.
Some of the charges made by the WCTA are incorrect or subject to interpretation. For instance, the meeting between Alves, Hill and the new board members wasn't a quorum.
If AdvancED does act on the complaint, it's not going to help Wake's efforts this year to get its high school accreditation upgraded from accreditation advised status.
Here's the press release:
WCTA Files Complaint Against WCPSS BOE
Wake County, NC, (September 20, 2012) - The Wake County Taxpayers Association has filed a formal complaint with AdvancED/SACS against the Wake County Board of Education. The positive improvements acknowledged by AdvancED in their last report are slowly being eroded away by the continuous mismanagement and lack of governance by the new Board majority. More importantly, the hasty decisions, actions, and 5-4 votes have resulted in unnecessary fear and uncertainty with parents and disenfranchised stakeholders.
“The Taxpayers of Wake County are disturbed by the dysfunction of the Wake County School Board,” said Russell Capps, President of WCTA. “We have witnessed too much damage from certain Board members this year; and we, as well as citizens all over Wake County, are now fearful of the impetuous actions of this Board and its effect on the education of thousands of students,”
The Board is clearly being unduly influenced by a partisan group (see Compliant # 4), resulting in many areas of our school system having their needs and concerns ignored. The documents filed today with the accrediting organization specifically cite 15 complaints which are fully documented by accompanying attachments cited by date and source of each complaint. In addition, I and other members of WCTA were personal witnesses to many of the actions cited in the complaints.
A partial list of the complaints include:
Complaint # 1
While the Resolution Approving Student Assignment which was approved by a 6 -2 vote on October 18, 2011, included an agreement that the plan would remain in effect for a minimum of three years, allowing continuity for students and families, the new majority set about immediately to bash the plan and direct staff to create a new plan. (As of this date they are now considering still another student assignment plan).
Complaint # 3
Action by Board Member Susan Evans publicly rejecting the concerns and involvement of community advocacy groups, Wake Education Partnership, and the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce, who were intimately involved and consulted during the seven months of creating the new assignment plan. The complaint quotes Evans arrogantly arguing, “While I acknowledge that, first of all, the Raleigh Chamber and the Wake Partnership are valuable partners in our community … I just wanted to remind Ms. Prickett (School Board Member) and the Board that we are the elected officials charged with making these important decisions on behalf of the school system”.
Complaint # 5
Ethical violations. Discussion by Board Member Jim Martin, an NC State University Professor, seeking to create special benefits for other NCSU professors not available to others.
Complaint # 7
News & Observer report: Racist remarks by Board Member Susan Evans expressing concern that the plan would create too large of a percentage of "white kindergartners".
There are many other concerns documented in our listed 15 complaints filed with the Accreditation Agency. We are asking AdvancEd to investigate and report its findings in regard to the 15 Complaints outlined and documented in our filing.
Here's info from the attachment:
From the AdvancED Monitoring Visit Report, November 29-30, 2011:
Required Action 2:
Analyze and revise the “node” system of assigning students to schools to ensure objectivity, transparency and consistency. Action: Completed
COMPLAINT:
1. The Resolution Approving Student Assignment Plan, adopted with a 6-2 vote on October 18, 2011, which supported the new Choice Assignment Plan, directed “..that the student assignment plan will remain in effect for a minimum of three years, allowing continuity for students and families.” This directive was communicated to stakeholders over the months of public engagement. On June 19, 2012, the new Board majority subverted that promise and directed staff to create a new plan for the 2013-14 school year. The expectations and agreement with the stakeholders on the promises of the new plan were immediately discarded.
Attachments:
Ø 2-1-1 Board Resolution Approving Student Assignment Plan, October 18, 2011
Ø 2-1-2 Sutton Precis
2. The intent of the Board to subvert the new assignment plan was not communicated to the public nor were any stakeholder meetings held to support the change in direction. The June 19, 2012 Board meeting was held late into the night and the 5-4 vote to drastically alter student assignment was done at 1:00 AM on June 20th. Chair Hill placed this item as #30 on the Board agenda and a 5-4 vote at 10:38 PM extended the meeting past 11:00 PM to accommodate this vote. The Board majority’s complete lack of transparency and exclusion of public input has created uncertainty and discontent among parents about their children’s educational futures.
Attachments:
Ø 2-2-1 June 19, 2012 Board Agenda
Ø 2-2-2 Original Precis for June 19 Board meeting
Ø 2-2-3 Board minutes for June 19 Board meeting, not publically available as of today’s date.
3. During this same June 19, 2012 Board meeting, Board member Susan Evans publicly rejects the concerns and involvement of educational and community advocacy groups, Wake Education Partnership and the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce, who were intimately involved and consulted during the seven months of creating the new assignment plan. Evans states “While I acknowledge that, first of all, the Raleigh Chamber and the Wake Ed Partnership are valuable partners in our community … I just wanted to remind Ms. Prickett and the board that we are the elected officials charged with making these important decisions on behalf of the school system.”
Attachments:
Ø 2-3-1 News & Observer, “Change in Wake student assignment plan draws reaction”, June 20, 2012
Ø 2-3-2 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake Education Partnership "extremely disappointed" in Wake County school board's student assignment decision, June 20, 2012
Ø 2-3-3 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce "disappointed" in Wake County school board's student assignment vote, June 20, 2012
4. Alteration of the Choice Assignment Plan was completed with extreme influence of Great Schools in Wake (GSIW), a partisan political group whose members include at least three of the newly-elected Board members. In an email dated 5/19/2012 from GSIW, its leader updates the members that the group has been “working to get the Board to at least direct the staff for the 2013 assignment plan.” Further, the leader of GSIW indicates, “…the need for New Plan directive for staff to start working on now”. Then, at the June 19, 2012 meeting, the Board majority approved a directive 5-4 that directs staff to create a new 2013 assignment plan immediately, exactly what GSIW dictates in the email. The Board majority violated Policy 1035, B2: Render all decisions based on the available facts and independent judgment and refuse to surrender that judgment to individuals or special interest groups; and Policy 1005: It is important that a Board member is nonpartisan in dealing with school matters and that he/she not subordinate the education of children and youth to any partisan principle, group, interest, or personal ambition.which is to subordinate education to a partisan group.
Attachment:
Ø 2-4-1 GSIW Directive, May 20, 2012
Ø 2-4-2 Indyweekly Article, stating that GSIW critque will be taken seriously, and the reason why, January 2012
Ø 2-4-3 News and Observer post asking – ‘how do they know how to set the stage for the June 5 meeting?’, May 21, 2012
5. Susan Evans and Christine Kushner were and possibly are still active leaders in this group; Jim Martin is a member. In February 2012, Superintendent Tata asserted publically that there was undue influence of the Board by GSIW.
Attachments:
Ø 2-5-1 Indyweekly Article stating Susan Evans member of GSIW, and alignment of Christine Kushner and Jim Martin with group, January 2012
Ø 2-5-2 Indyweekly Article stating Jim Martin is a member of GSIW, June 2011.
Ø 2-5-3 News & Observer post, regarding Susan Evans/Christine Kushner accepting award on behalf of GSIW, February 22, 2012
Required Action 3:
Establish and implement an agenda setting process to ensure that every member of the Board of Education and key system leadership are well-prepared for each Board meeting. Action : Completed
COMPLAINT:
1. Board member Kevin Hill attempted to schedule work sessions thru the superintendent prior to being elected Board chair, circumventing the then-current chairman. Discussions and deliberations were being held amongst the new majority about their votes in electing new Board leadership. Board member Jim Martin acknowledges this in the media.
Attachments:
Ø 3-1-1 News & Observer, “Review of Wake school assignment plan likely”, November 21, 2011
Ø 3-1-2 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Kevin Hill asking for Dec 7 work session on student assignment, November 21, 2011
2. November – December 2011, Board member Kevin Hill inappropriately scheduled a secret meeting of the newly elected Board majority prior to being elected and assuming responsiblities as chair. Further, on December 7, 2011, the newly sworn-in majority secretly attended said meeting to discuss reassignment with educational consultant Mr. Michael Alves. The remaining minority members (4) were not made aware of this meeting nor was the public notified. As a quorom was in attendance, meeting details should have been posted and the meeting should have been made open to the public. This is a violation of Board Policies 1300 and 1320 and again demonstrates the lack of transparency and secrecy of the Board majority.
Attachments:
Ø 3-2-1 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake County GOP school board members complain about not being told of meeting with Michael Alves, January 5, 2012
Ø 3-2-2 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Raising more questions about Michael Alves’ unannounced meeting with new Wake County school board members, January 13, 2012
Ø 3-2-3 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, County school board member Debra Goldman on becoming the board "watchdog" , January, 20, 2012
Ø 3-2-4 News 14, “Tensions between political parties rise on Wake school board”, January 5, 2012
Ø 3-2-5 News & Observer, “Secret meeting riles Wake school Republicans”, January 7, 2012
3. Chairman Hill allowed offensive and intimidating behavior by members of GSIW during public board meetings. This behavior, which was condoned by Chair Hill, created fear and uneasiness among citizens wishing to speak during public comment. Many chose not to attend due to the rude, disruptive and bullying behavior. Chairman Hill allowed this behavior to continue for much of the first and second quarter of 2012, until public outcry regarding the hostile environment was published in the local newspaper. This is a violation of Policies 1323, 1326 and 1330.
Attachments:
Ø 3-3-1 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake County school board members Deborah Prickett and Debra Goldman sound off about GSIW and the public’s behavior, including email sent to Chairman Hill from concerned parent, April 10, 2012
Ø 3-3-2 News & Observer, Letter to the Editor, March 29, 2012, “F is for Courtesy”
Ø 3-3-3 Email to parent from Chair Hill, March 28, 2012
Required Action 5:
Provide on-going cohesive and consistent training to all members of the Board of Education regarding their roles, responsibilities, and the strategic direction of the school system. Action: Completed
COMPLAINT:
1. In March 2012, an email was exposed in which Board member Susan Evans refers to Superintendent Tata in a derogatory manner. Those included in this email were all leaders or members of GSIW. This is a violation of Policy 1035 which is the Code of Ethics.
Attachments:
Ø 5-1-1 News & Observer, “Tata Claims School Board Members Have Potential Ethics Violations”, February 21, 2012
Ø 5-1-2 Email from Board member Susan Evans to members of GSIW, March 7, 2012
2. During the May 15, 2012 public Board meeting, Board member Susan Evans tells Board member Debra Goldman to “just hush”. Minutes later, she tells Board member Deborah Pricket to “get a life”. There seems to be little understanding by Ms. Evans of meeting decorum and job requirements. This is a violation of Policy 1035 which states: “Encourage the free expression of opinion by all Board members and seek systematic communications between the Board and students, staff and all elements of the community.”
Attachment:
Ø 5-2 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake County school board on the level of bus service for preassigned feeders students, May 16, 2012
3. In an email exchange between Board members dated 3/28/2012, Chair Hill requests and encourages off-the-record and private discussions and deliberations between the Board members about school business. In this email, Hill states: “If concerns continue to exist, I believe that professionalism dictates that concerns / questions of this nature be discussed face-to-face and not in the public eye.“
Attachment:
Ø 5-3 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake County school board member Jim Martin alleging political partisanship in bell schedule changes, April 9, 2012
4. Private deliberations were held regarding the placement of WCPSS Leadership academies at Peace University with a majority of Board members. Peace College had initially agreed, and then after the private deliberations with the newly elected majority – at the exclusion of the minority, the President of Peace called the agreement off by stating that ‘due to the division and controversy on the Wake County Public School System board’, the university was removing itself from consideration.
Attachment:
Ø 5-4 Peace University Backs Out – compilation of articles from the News and Observer, WCPSS and Peace.
5. Board member Jim Martin, a professor at North Carolina State University, requested a discussion in the Policy Committee to create a policy that would specifically benefit NCSU professors. Per Dr. Martin, the provost of NCSU requested his assistance in this matter. This is a violation of Policy 1036 and 1035, using the Board positon for personal gain and avoiding impropriety.
Attachment:
Ø 5-5 News & Observer, WakeEd blog, Wake County school board committee debates guaranteeing school spots for families who want to return, May 30, 2012
6. On July 8, 2012, Chair Hill presented a document titled “Possible Seat Allocation for 2012-13” via email to the Board. That document included a draft date of “6/18/12”. The 5-4 vote to alter the new choice plan with these new directives was not taken until June 19, 2012 (actually close to 1:00 AM on June 20th), the day after the document was drafted. This is further proof that the Board majority is deliberating and discussing their votes privately, moving forward assuredly with decisions that have not yet been voted upon. This violates the Open Meeting Law requirement of conducting Board business is an open and public manner.
Attachment:
Ø 5-6 Draft of Possible Seat Allocation
7. During the July 25, 2012 Board work session, the News & Observer reports Board member Susan Evans’ racist comments about the trends of the new choice plan and her concern with the percentage of “white kindergartners”.
Attachment:
Ø 5-7 News & Observer, “Wake school board delays decision on low-income students”, July 25, 2012
After an examination of this overwhelming evidence, we conclude that the actions and behaviors of members of the Wake County Board of Education undermined the efficacy of Required Actions outlined in the 2011 AdvancED monitoring report. Moreover, the actions described here do not adhere to the accreditation standards and policies articulated by AdvancED and administered by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACS/CASI). For these compelling reasons, we ask that your office commence an investigation to determine the validity of the claims and the corrective actions to be taken.
Comments
bond rejection
Fri, 09/21/2012 - 06:22 — stepbystepI wonder if WCTA is using this pitiful portrayal of "he said/she said" and other trivialities to lay the groundwork for "justifying" why they plan to work against the upcoming bond? These folks have WAY too much time on their hands to generate this much minutiae. I wish they'd spend their time trying to HELP in our schools and strengthen our school system.
They don't have to "work against" the bond
Fri, 09/21/2012 - 09:04 — FSandYOUThat's a losing proposition all on its own.
With the current board
Fri, 09/21/2012 - 09:51 — woodstockWith the current highly dysfunctional board leadership and majority, this bond is deader 'n dead. They are a bunch of devout social-engineering ideologues who are not there to help direct a school system, they are there soley for the purpose of institutionalizing the far left-wing fanatical ideology of their Svengali, Yevonne Brannon.
I think that too many people
Fri, 09/21/2012 - 10:36 — shearertwI think that too many people in this county, including 5 members of the BOE and most of the lefties on this blog, significantly underestimate the collateral damage their social-engineering fantasies have cost this county over the years. The lack of trust, lack of confidence, the "war on parents", etc they have perpetrated over the years is the root cause of all the "funding issues" in WCPSS. If WCPSS would work with parents, work with the tax payers, work with our communities, they may actually get support to raise taxes or support a bond for new schools. It won't happen overnight because so much damage has been done and it certainly won't happen with the current crew following in the Gill, Milberg, Clark footsteps. The lack of community support/trust for the school system is the root cause of YR, capped base assignments, all the "temporary" classrooms, busing cut backs, high student teacher ratios, etc. The Dems keep trying to tell us that they have no choice but to implement YR and diversity busing, etc, because they don't have enough funding but they fail to understand the reason they don't have enough funding is they keep pushing this crap down our throats!
Cost of YR schools
Sat, 09/22/2012 - 18:22 — louiselee44I have shared information (put together with data from WCPSS) on the increased costs associated with multi-track YR schools that are not full. At least Tata finally listened, and staff and school board members did some YR school adjustments.
They still need to go back and look at that information carefully, to see if the cost savings that they say comes from YRs justify the increased expenditures, including summer utilities, busing, etc.
If WCPSS would work with
Sat, 09/22/2012 - 01:40 — jeffrey1If WCPSS would work with parents, work with the tax payers, work with our communities, they may actually get support to raise taxes or support a bond for new schools.
Well said! One only has to look at the nearly 20% of Wake County students that opt out of the public school system..20 years ago, this number was less than 10%.
One may think that it'sonly the very wealthy that choose private schools, but that is clearly not the case in Wake. Many parents, fed up with how they have been treated, felt they had no choice but to do whatever it takes (scrimp and save, take an additional job, etc) in order to send their kids to a school that would value both the students and their parents. In many cases, those that left were the moms and dads who volunteered in the classroom, donated supplies to the school, served on the PTA, and supported bond referendums. And the thanks that WCPSS showed them was years and years of reassignment, mandatory YR schools, families split between two calendars, etc.
And when families opt out of the public school system, the last thing they want to do is support a bond and pay higher taxes for something that they no longer use. And then those that decide the bond amount have to take that into consideration, and ask for less than they really need (e.g. the 2006 bond).
I can't help but wonder how much things would be different if WCPSS looked at parents as valuable assets, instead of a liabilities.
So well stated
Fri, 09/21/2012 - 10:49 — FSandYOUMy position for years. The collateral damage the previous boards, prior to the last, caused will take decades to clean up and in the process there will be huge issues for this school system.
Starting with a 3rd assignment plan in as many years. Capped schools are going to leave a lot of people with their jaws on the ground when they see what their assignment will end up being.
In the meantime, this board's approval rating is lower than the outgoing Governor.
Did you hear? Almost 10% unemployment as of today. NC now ranks 5th with the highest "U" and we can thank the outgoing Governor, and her sidekick little Dalton, for the bulk of it. But I digress.
I'm no fan of WCTA, and I
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 22:28 — ApexterI'm no fan of WCTA, and I don't think that this move is helpful to any Wake County families. I particularly don't like begging AdvancEd to continue to overstep its bounds.
However, if you were among those who supported the earlier appeal to AdvanceEd, agreed with AdvanceEd's finding that WCPSS's board was dysfunctional and that the party in the majority was abusing power, then it seems a bit hypocritical to oppose this filing. We've still got the same degree of dysfunctionality; only the direction of the party in power has changed.
We can thank GSIW and their
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 19:29 — DrActualFactualWe can thank Rev. Barber, GSIW and their parent entity WakeUp Wake County for leading by example and showing WCTA and all other opposition organizations how to fight dirty--it appears that WCTA has replicated the tactics used by the opposition.
And proving...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 20:04 — bpuli9999that they were never any better. After the all the name calling.
Bingo!
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 19:40 — jenmanBingo!
If the Wake County Taxpayers Association
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 17:34 — realisticIf the Wake County Taxpayers Association gave a dang about the school system, they'd be advocating for MORE money, MORE seats, and everyone in the community to come together. But they would rather spend their time tearing it down. What a waste. Russell Capps was overheard two+ years ago at a school board meeting talking to Phil Matthews (before he won his WCC seat) saying he had "no problem with 40 kids in a classroom. That's how it was when WE were in school, and WE turned out just fine". Phil, slapping Capps on the back, agreeably laughed. Debate, anyone?
It's Pay back Time
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 20:04 — stansburyIt's called pay back. Now I'm not saying that I agree with it, but come on, what did you expect now that the tables are turned and all these incidences with the new board have occurred? You certainly can't call the behaviour of the new Board Members stellar or respectful of opposing views. I learned a few thing here. Ms. Evans told Goldman to "just hush" and Pickett to "get a life"! LOL You just can't make this stuff up! I'd get disciplinary action at work if I said that in a hostile tone to a co-worker.
The previous debacle with other Advance ED "investigation" was nothing short of a political witch hunt. Other side was mad b/c their bussing policy was thrown out and anybody who opposed it was a racist. So now I guess the Dems will get a dose of their own medicine and we'll continue to have more dysfunction on the school board. I would think that it will take a lot of time and effort for the board to deal with all these charges. That is, IF Advance ED opens an investigation.....
Bingo Too
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 22:28 — FSandYOUand pay back is a bitch sometimes.
Not just about accreditation...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 11:46 — openmindIt's not just about the accreditation. We need to start thinking about how this makes us as a county look. If we continue to pick at anything someone says and go running telling on them, how will this impact us as a county. Won't attract business! Won't help with the county growth and prosperity! What will it help with because it will be just an endless cycle. Not saying this is just WCTA, it is all the bickering that is going on. And that is exactly what it is. Let's all puff our chests once and move on.
Oh good grief...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 11:34 — Bob_SconceSo, I admit that I took some instant schadenfreude in the idea of the tables being turned -- both on the new board majority and, in a way, on AdvanceEd (If they don't investigate this, then doesn't that mean that they're really taking sides?)
But, come on, people. This is just pot-stirring and doesn't do any good at all.
Can't we all just get along...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 11:20 — openmindDo some of these groups realize how they are making Wake County as a whole look with complaints such as these. I think at some point people need to step back and take a look at the big picture. Complaints such as these do not bode well for the entire school system. If accreditation is impacted who have we hurt. Not the board, our students. Time to stop thinking along party lines and start thinking about the greater good of Wake County and WCPSS.
So...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 11:37 — Bob_SconceAccreditation is virtually meaningless. The best school in the state -- Raleigh Charter -- is unaccredited, but seems to have no problem in placing its students in top schools.
It is needed...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 16:32 — bpuli9999for other not-so-good schools in the county.
Ehh...
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 16:40 — Bob_SconceI looked into it when this whole mess started. Between charter, home schools and private schools (nearly all of which are unaccredited), colleges have really stopped paying attention. On top of that, Wake County is the 12th biggest district in the nation -- we are already well known. In addition, recall that this is the same organization that accredits the worst hell-holes in Detroit. It's a farce to assert that accreditation says anything about a school's quality, and every college admissions office knows it.
Dropping accreditation is bad only from a public relations point of view, since people THINK it has value.
Hmmm.....
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 18:53 — Dove314Have one in a private university who earned a very generous scholarship. The scholarship award did require a degree from an accredited high school. Just sayin.
Really?
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 20:46 — Bob_SconceWhich scholarship? I looked at that, too. There are a few scholarships out there that require that you have graduated from an accredited high school. But, the very large majority don't.
Meaning no offense
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 21:39 — Dove314Meaning no offense but, having seen how personal information is handled here, I do not feel comfortable to share and have you looking up the scholarship specifics as my "near adult" is at a smaller school, out of state, with only around 5,000 students. For this one, you will just have to accept my word or not as you see fit. For us, that scholarship was the difference between being able to afford to send my "child" to this school (which is #1 in the country for the particular major of interest) as it brought tuition levels closer to that of in-state tuition at a one of the big state universities in NC (which are all far from #1 in this particular major). As a result, I do believe there is a benefit to accreditation, a very big financial one in our specific case.
Understand
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 22:39 — Bob_SconceI don't fault you for not sharing that.
One question: Is it a scholarship specific to this college or a scholarship available to students to any college? When I looked at this, I only looked at the ones that were not tied to a specific college -- it was common for them to require the student GO to an accredited college, but very uncommon for them to require the student to COME from an accredited high school. I know, for example, that the scholarship that helped put me through school only required that I go to an accredited college.
I think scholarships are a bit fungible in the financial aid office -- if they were looking to give your student some $$ to help them go to the school, they might have picked a different scholarship that didn't have that particular requirement.
College specific
Thu, 09/20/2012 - 23:44 — Dove314This was an award direct from the university in question to my budding professional based on the information provided in the application packet we submitted.