A CORA request has revealed that retiring Gateway Elementary superintendent Ashley Lawson was placed on administrative leave (with pay) on June 8th. While no cause was given, the email did say it was NOT disciplinary action. Her access to email and voicemail was suspended, and her access to ‘district or school grounds’ was restricted to ‘by appointment’. She was also prohibited from contacting any students, parents, or personnel involved with the district, via any ‘medium of communication’. Lots to digest there, but at a minimum…does the district really have the right to prohibit an employee from speaking to people like that?
Tag Archives: CORA
How to email your board members and superintendent (how to avoid email censoring)
The WPSD board and superintendent have put limits on freedom of speech for voters in this district. If a voter wants to speak up at a public board meeting, they may or may not get a chance, as total public comment period is limited to 30 minutes max, and names are drawn at random. If someone doesn’t get selected they’re encouraged to email the board instead, but did you know the board applies a filter to incoming emails? If your email contains one of the ‘Blocked Words’, it will be bounced back to you and the board will never see it (same goes for emails to the superintendent.
If you’d like to call Witt a ‘turd’, well, that’s not allowed. Want to call Illingworth a ‘prick’? Not allowed. All sorts of classic mild profanity is included in the list, which thanks to CORA, the public can now peruse…click ‘more’ to see the list at the end of this post (unlike them, I DO believe in freedom of speech).
Read more: How to email your board members and superintendent (how to avoid email censoring) Continue reading →Fact check – Letters to the Editor
Board Director David Illingworth II, up for reelection this fall, submitted this letter to the editor in the Courier…let’s do some fact checking:
Many have complained about not enough space at the May 10 Board of Education meeting (in fact my own wife was unable to get in). These complaints are either misinformed or misleading.
First, the overwhelming majority of our meetings are held in that meeting space, and it is exceptionally rare that there is not enough room for everyone. We can’t know when that will happen, but we do know that there was very heavy attendance at this meeting due to the presence of NBC News and the coordination and organizing by well-known local activists whose goal was to swamp the meeting and get on TV. They were there for the cameras and the attention, not the schools or the students.
Second, we cannot change the fire code or the weather. Everyone who could not get into the meeting room was offered the chance to watch the meeting from the WPHS auditorium, rather than stand in the rain. They all declined and decided, of their own free will, to stay outside and shout where the TV cameras just happened to be.
Finally, everyone was able to sign up for public comment, and many of those who addressed the BOE that night were escorted in from outside, so they had the same opportunities as those who had arrived earlier.
Let’s be clear: anyone who stood in the rain did so of their own choice after refusing staff offers to come inside WPHS where it was warm and dry. No one was denied the opportunity for shelter or to publicly address the BOE.
Dave Illingworth, Woodland Park Board of Education
source
I don’t think we can quantify whether it’s ‘exceptionally rare that there is not enough room for everyone’, but the board commonly opened up an overflow area outside of the main conference room for those occurrences. At other times, they held the board meetings in either the high school auditorium, or the middle school commons area, to accommodate larger crowds.
Both the pro-board side, and the anti-board side, encouraged heavy attendance by their respective followers. The board had no reason to expect that a 90 person room would provide sufficient space for everyone, not when all indications were that turnout at this meeting would be extraordinary.
No one was offered a chance to watch the meeting from the auditorium. Towards the end of the public comment portion, I was offered a chance to take shelter in the commons area (not the auditorium), with no promise of any livestream in there.
The NBC TV camera was inside the conference room, not outside as he claims. A local TV reporter had her camera outside.
He claims ‘no one was denied the opportunity for shelter or to publicly address the BOE.’ That second part is false. The BOE cut public comment off at 30 minutes as has been their custom for a while now. Not everyone who signed up to publicly address the BOE was given that opportunity. Further, they were asked to wait outside in the rain to see if their name would be called (the commons area wasn’t opened up as shelter until public comment was almost over).
What about the claims that fire code meant they couldn’t open up the overflow area? We have not found any evidence to support that claim. Yes, the main conference room has a 90 person capacity limit sign posted, and that seems reasonable for that size of a space. However, our inspection of the overflow area revealed no posted capacity signs. A CORA request (#446) requested the fire department documents listing the maximum occupancy for those rooms:
I am requesting the official Fire Department documents listing the maximum occupancy for the WPSD District Office, the Distric Office Large Conference room and the two district office rooms that have traditionally been used to accommodate overflow for the WPSD BOE meetings.
This was met with the district’s response of, “There are no responsive documents to this request.”
Not only did the BOE recruit Charis students to pack the conference room, but they encouraged those students to show up early – an hour ahead of time, the line was already long enough that those showing up after did not get in to the building. As evidenced by audience reactions during the meeting, the room was clearly packed with BOE supporters. The BOE knew there would be a large crowd, did not choose to move the meeting to a larger space, and took steps to actually reduce the number of people that would be allowed to attend the meeting (when compared to previous meetings).
Teacher residency program in WPSD
Our district intends to establish a teacher residency program in partnership with Public Education and Business Coalition (PEBC), as outline in this MOU. This would bring in student teachers to the district, working along side mentor teachers for their first year, before transitioning to classroom teachers for a subsequent two year commitment to the district. PEBC provides some training to the student teachers for two days a week. It’s not clear whether mentor teachers receive any additional compensation for this work. Student teachers will be with their mentors four days a week; Thursdays will be in-person training with PEBC.
Cost is $2,500 per student teacher, with an additional $6,000 once that student teacher completes their third year (one year training plus two years classroom). Sounds like an interesting program. I’m not thrilled with the classrooms being live-streamed to the PEBC and their subcontractors, though COVID kinda shattered that privacy expectation already.
A quote from the MOU:
In order to increase retention of excellent teachers in schools and elevate the teaching profession, PEBC has created a teacher residency program, in which each participant (a “Resident”) receives training and education while he or she completes a residency year and two subsequent years of teaching within the Resident’s hiring school district
Witt uses district money to frame his personal flag
The latest incident of fiscal recklessness in our district comes via a recent Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) request. We’ve learned that superintendent Ken Witt spent $593.76 from the district Facilities Account to frame a flag that he owns personally (click here for the source). The plaque on this frame says, “On Loan From Ken Witt”.
The cost of PACE membership
As previously reported here, next year the district will auto-enroll staff into the Professional Association of Colorado Educators (PACE). PACE is a state chapter of the Association of American Educators (AAE); referred to by some as the ‘anti-union union’.
New details obtained via the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) shed some more light on this topic. This will be costing our district approximately $40,000. The discussions with PACE took place before contracts were sent out to staff, but the announcement was made after those contacts were sent. It’s possible (likely?) that contracts may have been signed and returned before the announcement was made.
Yet another large expenditure of taxpayer money made behind closed doors and without stakeholder input.
4/30/2023 Weekly Update
Last Week:
- Staff received their contracts for ’23-24 late last week, and have ten days to sign and return them. There was no talk of a performance-based pay scale, no changes there.
- Amy Ryan started work in the newly-created CFO position; longtime Business Manager Mona Larsen submitted her resignation.
- HB23-1065, a Colorado bill to create ethics oversight of government bodies like school boards, made it out of committee and is advancing.
- We published the latest email obtained under CORA of Illingworth belittling a parent.
- We published a resignation letter obtained under CORA, baseball coach and HS teacher Kyle Crawford signing out the board’s actions as his reasons for resigning.
- We published an anonymous letter from another WPSD teacher.
Here’s what’s coming up this week:
- No board meetings are currently scheduled for this week.
- The board is expected to review the preliminary ’23-24 budget in its May 10th board meeting.
Grant info for the ’23-24 school year, compared to previous
I’ve been working to better understand what effect refusing grant money will have on our district (see this story). New data has been received via CORA, all grant applications for the ’23-24 school year as of 4/2/2023 (links to applications are included). I’m not sure if programs like the Title 1A funding would be secured later in the year; it’s possible the actual ’23-24 grant picture will have additional funds added beyond what’s shown here.
WPSD grant applications, ’23-24 School Year:
- School to Work Alliance Program (SWAP): $200,613.83
- Advanced Course Grant Program: $50,739
For comparison, WPSD grants, ’22-23 School Year:
- Newmont CC/V Goldmine Grant – Bldg Level Educational Programs ($ 47,017)
- Summit Elem. NLK Security Grant – Bldg Security ($ 2,019)
- Project Lead The Way HS-Lockheed Martin – HS PLTW ($ 2,200)
- Child Care Relief Grant – Preschool ($ 7,772)
- Colo. Ed. Initiative SERN Grant – Social Emotional Redesign Network ($ 15,413)
- Jadenator Donation Grant – Student Needs-Athletics ($ 2,150)
- CDHS Child Care Oper Stabil Grant – After School Care ($ 60,688)
- Colo. Health Foundation – Student Wellness ($ 11,376)
- CDHS Workforce Sustain – After School Care ($ 13,144)
- Local Donations/some Dist. funds – Auditorium Upgrade ($ 55,000)
- School Counselor Corp Grant – Counseling ($ 489,989)
- State Library Grant – School Libraries ($ 5,000)
- School Health Professionals Grant – Cohort 5 (Elem) – Substance Abuse Prevention ($ 266,618)
- School Health Professionals Grant – Cohort 6 (Sec) – Sustance Abuse Prevention ($ 216,786)
- WPHS Advanced Placement Pilot Program – HS AP ($ 4,558)
- Career Development Incentive Programs – HS Instructional ($ 32,944)
- Kindergarten Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment – Kndg. Fixed Assets ($ 19,485)
- Read Act Grant – Literacy ($ 53,409)
- AP Exam Fee Reimbursement – AP Exams ($ 1,500)
- Concurrent Enrollment – Concurrent Enrollment ($ 10,000)
- WPHS SWAP – School to Work alliance Program ($187,606)
- Suicide Prevention Grant – Suicide Prevention ($ 5,000)
- URHN-Substance Abuse Prevention Grant – Sustance Abuse Prevention ($ 169,999)
- Title IA – Language Arts and Math ($ 401,234)
- Carl Perkins Consorsium – Vocational ($ 11,115)
- Title III ELL flow Through – ELL ($ 4,151)
- Title IIA (combined with Title IV for budgeting) – Instructional Resource ($ 92,846)
- Title IV (combined with Title IIA for budgeting) – Combined with Title IIA ($ 25,133)
- Supply Chain Assistance Grant, School Food Svc. – School Food Service ($ 32,178)
- Summit Elem. Distinctive Schools Award – Title I Educational Program ($ 10,000)
Also in the ’22-23 school year were federal Covid relief funds; these are expiring on their own so I’m separating them out:
- ESSER 3 Grant (Instr Impact) – Covid Pandemic ($ 320,436)
- ESSER 2 Grant – Covid Pandemic ($ 306,592)
- ESSER 3 Grant – Covid Pandemic Loss of Learning ($ 1,173,946)
Regarding those ESSER funds, the district’s Use of Funds Plan for that money can be viewed here (thanks to CORA).
Update on Middle School / 6th grade changes
In the board meeting on Wednesday, April 12th, Ken Witt will be providing an update on the changes to the middle school, moving sixth grade down to the elementary school buildings and reconfiguring the remaining space to give more to Merit Academy.
So, what should the parents be concerned about? The reality is, we don’t know the inner workings of these schools, we’re really in the dark here. We can shed some light on this situation, by looking at the words of someone who is (was…) one of the experts on the impact of this change – Tina Cassens, outgoing Chief Academic Officer. A recent CORA request revealed an email she sent to Witt detailing her concerns about restructuring the grade levels in each school. Read these, and keep them in mind when Witt gives his presentation Wednesday, see if they’re being addressed and how.
At the Elementary level:
- Classes at the elementary are sitting at 30 – 45 students per grade level. Financially, staffing models would call for 1.5 teachers per grade level, which is not logistically possible. We have been watching this for years and discussing building primary (PK-2) and intermediate schools (3-5). The alternative will be multi-age classrooms across the board, i.e. a 1st/2nd grade combo, 3rd/4th grade combo, 5th/6th grade combo. Another alternative is hiring above staff formulas, which would greatly impact the district.
- SPED center-based programs are currently sitting at capacity. Sending 6th graders back into the programs will send them over staffing allocations, requiring the hiring of additional part-time special education teachers, which are hard to find.
At the Middle School level:
- Running a middle school with less than 300 students will essentially strip the enrichment opportunities. Under the current staffing model they would have less than 3 full time enrichment teachers. Finding part-time enrichment teachers is tough.
- Most of the 6th grade teachers are not certified for elementary, thus the middle school would need to enact our reduction in force policy, which affects both middle and high school.
- SPED center-based programs will run under capacity with 6th graders moved down.
- Shifting Merit down in the building will result in displacing specially designed classrooms that serve our SPED center-based programs. This adds costs again to the District. One of these areas includes a specially designed bathroom/changing room and kitchen. I am not sure how these would be redesigned.
- Shifting Merit down would also remove the family and consumer studies room, which then eliminates this program for the Middle School.
- Redesigning the building for a 2nd year would result in additional expenses for the District. This includes redesigning the bells and announcement system which took over 9 months to reconfigure and adding/relocating separation doors which were extremely expensive.
Listen in Wednesday, her experience with this district is extensive and we should take these concerns seriously.
Merit Academy not paying for transportation services
UPDATE – it’s been pointed out to me that there may yet be an agreement written to split costs (a Merit board member says there will be one at some point).
——————-
The district made a big deal about expansion of transportation services to Merit Academy students, and emphasized that it would not add any cost to the district. What they failed to mention is that Merit Academy isn’t paying anything themselves for this service (apart from, presumably, the $50 per kid per year fee parents pay for this service) – the money is coming out of funds used to educate the children of the transitional public schools alone. This was evident in a CORA request I just received results for. The actual text of the CORA request was:
Please provide the district’s contract with Durham bus services for the following school years: 2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024. Please also provide the contract, amendment, or other agreement(s) with Merit Academy covering their use of transportation services through Durham Bus Services.
source
I did receive the contract with Durham, and one amendment to that contract. But that’s it, no written agreement between the district and Merit. When I inquired as to whether that was omitted in error, this was the reply:
All documents responsive to this request were provided.
The relevant section from the Merit Academy charter contract is section 5.2, as follows:
5.2. Transportation. The District and the School acknowledge and agree that transportation will not be provided by the District to students attending the School unless otherwise mutually agreed in writing. Any transportation of students to the School shall be the sole responsibility of the School, with all costs borne by the School. The School and the District agree to meet on an annual basis to discuss how the Parties might collaborate to provide transportation options for students of the School.
source
So, Merit kids get a free ride…the public school kids pay for the busses, leaving Merit kids with more money per pupil to be used for educational purposes. Let’s hope the board decides to instead enact an agreement that fairly splits costs…a board director has told me that no written agreement is needed for this transportation issue, but I’m hoping that’s not the final word.
I’ve asked for recent invoices from Durham so we can put some exact numbers on this…but with the Durham costs being fixed, the fewer the kids paying for it, the more each kid pays. For example, if you and three friends eat out and need to split a $100 bill, that’s $25 per person. But if one of those people doesn’t contribute, each of the remaining people have to pay $33.33. That’s the situation here…the bus bill is not being split equally amongst all the students covered by it. Parents do pay $50 per child to participate in this service, but that only covers a small fraction of the actual costs.