Monthly Archives: March 2023

Merit Contract Amended to Reduce Their Costs

Ken Witt has amended the district’s contract with Merit, to shift some costs from Merit to the district. Section 8.1(I) used to read:

The District will provide charter liaison services by assigning these duties to an
employee or retaining an independent contractor to act as the liaison between
the District and the School. Such employee or independent contractor shall be
mutually agreed upon by the District and the School. The costs of the liaison
services shall be paid by the District’s authorized charter schools, including the
School, as a purchased service from the District.

(see page 37 of the original contract)

In February of 2023, Witt amended the contract to read:

The District will provide charter liaison services by assigning these duties to an
employee or retaining an independent contractor to act as the liaison between
the District and the School. Such employee or independent contractor shall be
mutually agreed upon by the District and the School.

(source)

Note the change – previously, the cost for this liaison was to be paid by the charter schools. Now, the district will shoulder that cost. A relatively minor change but a quiet one that would have gone unnoticed if not for one of our unrelated CORA requests.

Teacher/Faculty Appreciation Project (WPSA)

Those that work in our schools as educators, office & support staff, librarians, IT specialists, custodians, counselors & student support liaisons, and resource officers are some of the most incredible and outstanding individuals in our community. Schools are a safe, supportive place for students of all backgrounds: we are given the opportunity to grow as scholars through the assistance of our experienced and fantastic teachers, we are given the resources needed to explore the complex realm of graduation and higher education and/or careers, and we are offered the support and guidance through difficult situations from our incredible counselors and resource officers. These teachers and faculty members are here for us.

As students, it is heartbreaking and distressing to see the very people who have educated us, taught us kindness and respect, and instilled in us a love for learning be bombarded with harmful rhetorics and accusations. As our Board of Education continues to ignore the needs of students, we are labeled as pawns of our parents and teachers. Our educators 1st Amendment rights have been violated multiple times, and several of these wonderful humans have been fired or reassigned with no regards to the professionalism or ethics a board should employ. Teachers have been demoralized and strongly undervalued through false narratives and fear-mongering, when they should be regarded as one of the most important groups of people in our nation. 

We do not stand for nor tolerate the defamatory and damaging rhetoric that is spread against our teachers and school faculty. As a result, the Woodland Park Student Alliance is launching a campaign to spread positivity and awareness of just how much teachers and faculty support, enrich, and better the lives of their students and community. It is incredibly important to document and relish the positive impact these professionals have on students, their parents, their coworkers, and their communities. 

More info, and the form to fill out, can be found here.

Learn more about the Woodland Park Student Alliance

Witt’s latest – firing staff, and violating CORA

Ken Witt’s latest efforts to destroy the Woodland Park school district include firing two people last Friday (Logan in IT, and Morgan in payroll), and watching on the sidelines as the district is in violation of the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). Specifically, on that last point, the district is not complying with the mandatory three day response period for single-document inquiries, or up to 10 days for others. They’re violating both. Much of the their delays have been due to the board choosing to have Brad Miller’s office review all CORA results for redactions. Miller drags his feet, results get delayed, and the board doesn’t care.

The district is even facing a new lawsuit alleging violation of CORA, refusing to turn over records from December.

Despite having a backlog of overdue CORA requests, Witt decided that the position of the person responsible for managing this process (Logan) was unnecessary, and eliminated that position. No word yet on who will be taking up this role…but the sort of transparency provided by laws such as CORA has never been a priority for this board.

3/12/2023 Weekly Update

Last Week:

  • Not yet published on this website as we’re getting more details:
    • Ken Witt fired Logan (IT) and Morgan (payroll) from district staff, saying their positions were no longer needed.
    • With Logan gone, some CORA requests are already overdue (beyond the max of 10 days); the Woodland Parks school district is in noncompliance with Colorado Open Records law.
    • Also Friday, we received confirmation that a senior staff member of the district admin staff submitted their resignation Friday, we believe in connection to those two firings. We’re under the impression not all staff have been informed of this decision yet, so we’re withholding details for now.
  • Episode 2 of the locally produced podcast ‘Voices of Reason’ is out, check it out here.
  • The board had their regular monthly board meeting on the 8th
    • A summary of the meeting can be read here.
    • The board struggled a bit with policy changes…they were going to do a second reading on GP-5 and approve it, but instead chose to revise it further, necessitating a second reading and vote to be held in the next meeting instead. This policy change is to help remove any focus on non-academic details, removing the emphasis on things like counselors and mental health programs.
    • Video of the public comments from the meeting can be viewed here.
  • We provided an update on the Curriculum Review status in the district driven by adoption of the American Birthright standards.
  • Efforts by the Board and Ken Witt to restrict freedom of speech in the district were summarized in this post.
  • We reviewed the numbers behind Witt’s claim that the Middle School is overcrowded and thus the sixth graders need to move out.

Here’s what’s coming up this week:

  • Wednesday will be a meeting for parents and students about the Career Start program. There’s been concern that the district’s rejection of any grant money will impact that, but what we’ve heard suggests this program is safe as it’s state funds, not grants. We’ll find out more Wednesday.
  • No board meeting is scheduled for this week.

Is the Middle School overcrowded? A look at the numbers.

When discussing his decision to move sixth grade out of the Middle School, Ken Witt has consistently referred to overcrowding in that school. So let’s visit that point, and see what the facts say about space in the Middle School.

Last year, the board used a study from Cooperative Strategies to justify partitioning the Middle School into two schools, making room for Merit Academy. According to that report, the Merit Academy side of the school has capacity for 471 students, while the Middle School side has capacity for 432 students. These numbers do not take into account present or potential future modular buildings on the north side of the school build (Merit’s side).

The Colorado Department of Education (CDE) has data available on their website for attendance in all schools in the state. Merit Academy has 331 students, of which only 292 are onsite (the rest are homeschool enrichment); the Middle School has 391. The data shows Merit is at only 70% capacity; the Middle School is at 91% capacity (which is a bit below the 94% capacity the board predicted it would be at when it made the decision to split the building for Merit). The data does not show overcrowding at present.

Enrollment numbers for the ’23-24 school year are unknown, so nothing to base any decisions upon. However, we’ll look at what we know. Merit shows 27-41 students per grade. They are new to high school, and really only have a 9th grade this year. Assuming all their kids ‘bubble up’ into higher grades, they’d potentially be adding around 40 kids. Maybe they’d flush out some of the other grades closer to that 41 number. I consistently read that 90% facility usage is a nice target to shoot for, so let’s assume that (and ignore that our board wanted to put the Middle School at 94% capacity). Merit has a capacity of 423 students at 90% capacity, or an increase of 131 students (not counting the homeschool enrichment enrollment) – an increase of 45%! Perhaps they’ll hit that number, we just don’t know at this point.

I know the board is applauding Merit for ‘growth’ in the school district, but as page 17 of this presentation shows, 293 district students chose to go to ERBOCES (which Merit Academy was a part of at that time) in the ’21-22 school year – part an increase of 352 students opting out of the district compared to the previous school year. It’s clear, Merit pulled students from the district when they opened, then brought them ‘back’ into the district once the district absorbed Merit. This was not some radical growth in the district, it was just shuffling kids around, and to assume that Merit can now find 131 new students? Perhaps they’ll draw some from the Public Schools, but considering they’ve already been around for two years now, I question how many there left to get that haven’t already made that switch.

How does enrollment look for the Middle School? If we assume all current fifth graders move on to the Middle School, that’s 113 students being added, while 121 eighth graders leave for the High School. This bumps Middle School capacity down to 89%.

Actual attendance numbers for next year are unknown. What IS known is that the ‘overcrowding’ argument is based on very ambitious recruitment goals for Merit Academy; whether they’ll succeed is a bit question. If they needed more capacity, they do have existing modular structures on the north side, with space to add more. Perhaps they’ll need more space in the Middle School in the future, but for the ’23-24 school year, the data does not support any radical changes to the makeup of that building.

What this analysis is lacking – firsthand reports, that boots on the ground perspective that only the staff at the school can provide. Given the hostility Witt has shown towards them, I felt it best to not approach staff with questions and to just lay out the facts here instead. I also realize this doesn’t not take into account things like classroom size or number of rooms per grade, though when it comes to analyzing Merit, since they have control over those factors (they can limit enrollment, unlike the Middle School) I felt it OK to leave that part out.

Proposed change to policy GP-5

Our board has traditionally ignored and violated their own governing policies, but seems intent now on instead of violating policy, changing it to align with what they’re going to do anyway. The latest policy under examination is GP-5. Proposed changes are to the first sentence of the policy, which currently reads:

Board members must represent the interests of the citizens of the entire school District.

In the last board meeting on 2/8/23, Witt did a first reading of the proposed change, which he suggested should read:

Board members must represent the educational interests of the students and families as first priority, as well as the citizens of the entire school District.

We expected the board to do their second reading, and vote, on this policy change in the 3/8/23 meeting (as stated in the agenda). Instead, David Illingworth offered forth a different proposal for GP-5:

Board members must represent the interests of the citizens of the entire school District, while always recognizing that the district exists solely to educate children and that parents retain a fundamental constitutional right to direct their children’s education.

Anyone reading the posted agenda would have expected a second reading of the policy change proposed by Witt in the last meeting. The fact that no board members appeared surprised (there was zero discussion on it when prompted by President Rusterholtz) by this change of plans does further suggest more discussion is happening outside of the public eye.

This policy change furthers the stated focus of the board to be academics only. The board is intent on cutting all Social Emotional Learning (SEL) programs and denying any grants (and thus calling into question continuance of any programs/classes funded by those grants). It remains to be seen how the board will view art, music, and athletic programs.

Does Woodland Park have a bullying problem?

Do the Woodland Park schools have a bullying problem? Let’s take a look at district policy JICDE, which states in part:

Bullying is the use of coercion or intimidation to obtain control over another person or to cause physical, mental, or emotional harm to another person.  Bullying can occur through written, verbal, or electronically transmitted expressions (i.e., cyberbullying) or by means of a physical act or gesture. 

https://z2.ctspublish.com/casb/browse/woodland-casb/woodland/z20000296

Given that definition, how would you characterize this email, from a manager to his employees?

This is coming from a guy that fired an educator at the Middle School, and eliminated the position of the high school librarian in retaliation for the protest her students organized in December.

Would you consider this bullying? Is our interim superintendent setting a good example for students?