Linn resident Carol Branson, a six-year Linn R-2 board member and 14-year employee of the district, and Hope Gerdes, a district patron, last Monday used the public forum portion of the school board’s public meeting to question recent decisions by members.

Linn resident Carol Branson, a six-year Linn R-2 board member and 14-year employee of the district, and Hope Gerdes, a district patron, last Monday used the public forum portion of the school board’s public meeting to question recent decisions by members.

Beginning with 2019 board agendas and minutes obtained from the school website, Branson noted that moving the sixth-grade class to the elementary building was not mentioned. Yet, that move was approved at the March 2019 meeting.

“It appears this decision should have been an appropriate agenda item of discussion for at least a couple months before approval,” Branson added.

She also addressed the topic of adding football to the school’s athletic programs, pointing out that football appeared on the agendas in May, June and July 2019 as a discussion item. In August a motion was approved for a survey to be sent to “students, parents and community to see if there is an interest in football.” The motion does not state this survey is to include discussion of a calendar change to a four-day school week. In September of 2019, results from the “athletic” survey were reported by Assistant Principal and Athletic Director Michael Fible. In that same meeting, Superintendent Dena Smith reported results from a four-day school week survey. 

“This is the first time a four-day week survey is specifically mentioned in your minutes,” Branson said. “So, a motion supporting a survey intended to gauge interest in football has now become a general ‘athletic’ survey listing several other sports and activities, tax levy increase support, short and long-range planning, instructional resources and a proposal for a four-day school week. I wonder how accurate this survey actually was in assessing the need or desire of any of the covered items.”

The motion to add football to the school’s athletic programs failed in this meeting. 

In October, at the next meeting of the board, the four-day week beginning with school year 20-21 was approved. 

“One month later! Again, one would think a major school calendar change such as this would require months of discussion, with an intense effort to include all parties involved, including parents and staff at St. George,” Branson said.

Regarding staffing issues, Branson noted that agendas and minutes for December of 2019 and January of this year show nothing regarding the need to create a new administrative position, Director of Student Services.

“And yet, this position was suddenly in place and filled in February,” said Branson. “I find it interesting the establishment of an administrative position, with an upper level salary, was not discussed in more detail. And I’ll remind you according to the Missouri Sunshine Law, only the actual vote to hire an individual for this position is an appropriate closed session topic. Discussion regarding the need and creation of the position, setting the salary and a plan to advertise the position opening are all open session topics. According to your minutes from January 2020, you adopted ‘administrative job descriptions,’ I’m assuming this new position was lumped into that motion with no justification or discussion of the need for the new position or salary rate.”

Branson noted that the reassignment of Elementary Principal Lorie Winslow to the new Director of Student Services position resulted in another survey soliciting what everyone wanted to see in the new elementary principal.

“This survey was distributed to a select group and not all district stakeholders,” Branson said. “Additionally, a new high school principal was hired. I wonder if the same survey was distributed for that position and how the position was advertised.”

Other areas of concern for Branson include bidding processes in which bids are awarded, but only winning bid information is documented in posted minutes. Specifically, an $8,855 lawn mower was not only purchased from a vendor outside the district, but also outside the county, with no other comparison bidding information documented.

“To me, not buying an item costing this much money from a local vendor must be fully explained and justified,” said Branson, adding that another significant bid of $95,765 was awarded for paving services with no comparison bids documented.

“In closing, moving grade levels from one building to another, the omission of comparison bid information, creating new administrative positions and major changes in the school calendar deserves careful and deliberate consideration in an open and transparent setting where all parties involved have opportunities to provide input,” said Branson. “It appears the superintendent’s and board’s commitment to openness, transparency and communication encouraging taxpayer input is severely deficient. These concerns justify scrutiny and examination in all areas of district operation.”

Gerdes, who challenged the superintendent in comments as the board met in closed session Thursday regarding Winslow’s employment, had choice words for board members.

“Your job is to supervise the superintendent, and to do what is best for your students, taking into consideration the parents involved,” she said. “I want you to reconsider the four-day school week for next year. Fourth- and fifth-grade students were surveyed to see if they would like a four-day school week. This is ridiculous. What fourth- or fifth-grader wouldn’t love a four-day school week? But yet, the parents and teachers surveyed, it is my understanding, were overwhelmingly the opposite. In my conversations with the superintendent via email, she stated that the real reason behind it was teacher retention. I asked if teachers were just too lazy to work five days a week, and I think I struck a bone when I got to the point there, with teacher retention. It had nothing to do with how parents or students felt about it.”

Gerdes said if that is the case, there needs to be a discussion about the real cost versus savings versus inconvenience to parents of the district. She asked if the bus company was questioned as to savings with a four-day school week.

“What report was run to show the cost-savings to the district, and is there a designated budget report to show where such cost-savings will be redirected to retain or attract quality teachers?” Gerdes asked. “School board members, I implore you to reconsider this measure. You are making many students stay at home, either alone or possibly in abusive situations where their one escape is the safety of school. You are costing your parents, who do support the school district, time and money, to find sitters, arrange in-home care, or take off of work to make sure their children are safe. We are taxpaying residents who live in this school district. Instead of doing the minimum to save costs, why not attract a better tax base to be able to pay teachers better? Families such as mine are looking for a school district that exceeds, not just does the minimum. This is not a school district I want to be in if we’re just going to look at the laziness and the minimum quality this district can provide.”

Gerdes went on to say that she and her family, and others of a like mind, are looking for better sports programs, curriculum, and a gifted program. She said the school considers students that are in need of help, but not those who are gifted, alluding to an email conversation she said took place between herself and Smith.

In a subsequent interview with Smith, the superintendent said there has never been talk of not having a gifted program, nor is there any plan to cut the gifted program from the curriculum. Funding for the program will be presented as part of the overall budget discussion to be held in June.

Gerdes told board members she wants them to step up and take into consideration the things she said are falling apart, and think about parents and students.

“I don’t live my life doing the absolute minimum just to get by,” she said. “I didn’t come to this school district because I was looking for laziness and a four-day school week. I came because I had heard it was going to be a very good school district, and I’m sadly disappointed. I think you guys need to reconsider your job, which as I said earlier, is to supervise the superintendent, and to do what is best for your students.”

Other business from this meeting is presented in this week’s issue of the U.D.