The Hoover School Board met for its monthly work session last Thursday at 5:30 p.m. All members were present.
The board looked over the personnel actions for the month. Mr. Craig indicated that more are being added every day, as staffing is happening all day, every day right now.
I have not seen the personnel report yet, but it appears that there are several positions recommended to be filled at the Freshman Center, including the assistant principal. Mr. Defnall questioned whether there was a committee involved in the interviews. Dr. Spivey was not present at the work session, and Mr. Craig said that he did not know exactly who all interviewed the applicants, except that Mr. Nalls and Dr. Spivey were involved. Mrs. Baker asked whether Mr. Bishop had interviewed the candidate and Mr. Bishop said that he had not. Mr. Bolt said that the board would table the hire until Mr. Bishop had an opportunity to interview the candidate. Mrs. Baker said that she sees Mr. Bishop as "over" Hoover High 9 through 12. Mr. Craig said that this is what the organizational chart reflects.
Mr. Bolt expressed his belief that no administrator should be hired in any of the Hoover schools until the board had a chance to interview applicants. Tom Defnall disagreed, saying that he thought much should be in the hands of the principal at the building level. Bill Veitch said that he though the principal should do the interviews and make a recommendation with the Superintendent. Then the board could meet the person if they felt they needed to before voting on the hire. Suzy Baker said that her concern was that a principal should be involved in hiring an assistant principal. Mr Bolt said that he was concerned about assistant principal hires, because that is the training ground for future principals. He also strongly stated that he is not raising these concerns because of the person being recommended for the position at the Freshman Center (he said that he did not know who it is), but that these are general concerns about hiring practices.
Mr. Veitch said that perhaps the board needs to think about committees, because it is difficult to get everyone together to do everything.
Mr. Craig said that he was hearing a lot of different opinions, and that he would get back to the board with a procedure that will attempt to address their concerns.
While on the subject of personnel, Mr. Defnall asked about the posted positions. Mr. Craig said that it changes daily at this time of year, and that the website is the best place to look to see what is posted. He said that the Human Resources position is posted and their are a number of applicants. He hopes to have a recommendation for the Chief Financial Officer by Monday. The Chief Academic Officer is not posted yet. The job description is still being developed.
The board examined the financials and cash disbursements. The Jefferson County money (approximately $85 million) is in the bank.
Mrs. Baker asked if the artificial turf is completed, and Mr. McBay said that it is, at both Hoover and Spain Park. He was pleased with the work. There were no surprises or significant delays, and no change orders.
Mr. Defnall asked about the warranty on the fields. Mr. McBay said that he would get that information by Monday night.
Mr. Defnall also asked about the correction of a "dead" bell area at one of the schools, and Mr. McBay said that is being fixed today.
The board looked at a proposed policy change dealing with cardiopulmonary resucitation. They did not read it aloud.
A bid for grass cutting at all the schools was examined. This is with an outside company. Mr. Bolt asked if there is any chemical "weed and feed" contract for the lawns. Mr. McBay said that there is not. They priced it five or six years ago, and it was very expensive. Mr. Bolt asked that it be priced again.
The board looked at two change orders regarding replacement flooring. These are routine change orders that allow the system to recover sales taxes paid when the materials are bought. This happens at the end of lots of the system's construction projects.
Ron Dodson presented a proposal to the board for the Secondary Instructional Technology Plan. He showed the board a short video presentation that the teachers will see at professional development meetings. The board will review the proposal and vote on it on Monday. I have not seen the proposal, so I'm not going to attempt to tell everything included. This article from Friday's Birmingham News tells more.
Mr. Defnall asked about the elementary portion of the technology program and when it would get underway. The plan is to add more pilot classrooms to those already in place, for a total of 40 elementary classrooms system-wide next year. Some of the elementary schools are using state technology funds to purchase some of the equipment, such as document camera and iPods, which have been used successfully in the pilot classrooms.
The estimated cost of the secondary technology program is $4.7 million, according to the Birmingham News. The necessary electrical work is planned to be done over the summer. Teacher training will also take place over the summer.
The board reviewed the recommedation for adoption of Spanish textbooks and will vote on that on Monday. They will also vote on a proposal to form an ad hoc textbook committee for the review of business technology textbooks. The normal textbook adoption cycle is six years. This is too long for computer and technology texts, as they get out of date quickly.
The board reviewed a contract with Lawson State to provide instruction to our special education students seeking the Alabama Occupational Diploma. This instruction will be given at Hoover High and Spain Park with no need to transport students to other locations. The contract will serve one class of 10 to 12 high need students.
The board reviewed a amendment to the agreement with RPI regarding monetary compensation to the school system for the "Two-a-Days" television program.
Andy's Craig's contract as Superintendent of Schools was presented to the board for consideration. Mr. Bolt said that the compensation was in line with what was paid to the previous superintendent, and that it was consistent with what Mr. Craig asked for in salary negotiations. Mr. Bolt also said that it was the lowest salary request of the three final applicants for the position. Mrs. Baker and the rest of the board erupted into teasing jeers toward Mr. Craig.
When Mr. Bolt said that Mr. Craig's compensation would be "in line" with that of the previous Superintendent, I thought, "That doesn't sound right." I remember what Dr. Williams' compensation was, and I know what Mr. Craig's was as Interim Superintendent. It turns out, as explained in Erin Stock's article in Saturday's Birmingham News, that Mr. Craig's compensation is not "in line" with Dr. Williams', but is thousands of dollars more.
I have to ask myself why Mr. Bolt would try to underplay the amount of Mr. Craig's compensation.
It is insulting to the people who take time out of their lives to go to board meetings, and insulting to Andy, for Mr. Bolt to pretend that Andy is a bargain-basement hire. The change in superintendents pushed through by our city council is a lot of things, but a bargain for taxpayers it is not. We are still paying Dr. Williams ($164,724 a year), we will be paying Andy $184,000 a year, and a Chief Academic Officer a compensation amount yet to be determined.
Don't pee on our leg and tell us it's raining, Mr. Bolt.
Jon Anderson puts a pretty fine point on the issue in his blog.
The school board will meet Monday at 5:30 p.m. to vote on all the agenda items discussed at the work session.
Comments