Per Scottsdale Unified School District Superintendent Scott Menzel, planning board meetings has become problematic for his internal leadership team because they “take a lot of time and effort” and remove focus from “implementing the core work of the district.” Menzel’s proposed solution to his team’s time problem: remove five public board meetings from the 2023-2024 school year calendar.
Critics find it ironic that Menzel’s leadership team has ample time to plan Menzel’s pet projects.
For example, SUSD is adding seven special meetings for 40 hand-selected individuals as part of a new “SUSD In-Focus” program. The SUSD website reveals that the leadership team has planned a seven-month agenda that includes taxpayer-funded dinners, campus tours, a graduation celebration, happy hour, Q&As with Menzel, and presentations on topics that range from nutrition to transportation to school finances. Committee applications were accepted through May 5, 2023.
During the May 2, 2023, SUSD governing board meeting, Menzel’s board-meeting-reduction plan was approved in a 3-2 vote, with board members Amy Carney and Carine Werner opposing the board meeting cuts, and Libby Hart-Wells, Zach Lindsay and Julie Cieniawski giving Menzel their support.
During board member discussions, Carney expressed her concerns: “Dr. Menzel you said to me that the staff are too busy and don’t have time to prepare for the board meetings. When we received your committee update, there’s at least 10 superintendent committees going on, and this SUSD In-Focus group. I find it very ironic that this is starting for next school year when we’re talking about taking away board meetings but starting up these monthly meetings with 40 community members that we will be spending money on to pay for dinner and bus tours while we have fewer public board meetings.”
Carney urged other board members to consider that reducing meetings would mean there would no longer be time for association updates, student and staff celebrations, student advisory board updates or superintendent reports which are typically included as board meeting agenda items. “I just want to point out that we’ve been here two and a half hours tonight doing work and listening to important presentations, and according to this presented calendar, this meeting wouldn’t be happening next school year. We’ve got a lot of work to do l can’t understand how we can cut meetings,” Carney stated.
Board member Werner expressed her concern that cutting five board meetings was significant given that the current schedule is not enough to complete all of the work needed to support the district.
“We can’t govern through marketing or through B memos,” said Werner. “I find something very fishy about this entire situation and I will not be voting for it today. Emails are already coming in. This is not something that our community wants.”
“B memos” is a reference to internal documents that Menzel’s leadership team prepares for the board members.
Hart-Wells rebutted Werner’s comments with claims that she knew personally that the community had no concerns about SUSD providing less visibility into the board’s operations, indicating that the community members who shared information with Werner were irrelevant to her. “I too have been in touch with the community, and I’ve heard no such concern. There’s an appreciation for the streamlining efficiency and effectiveness. I appreciate this effort at efficiency and effectiveness and transparency,” stated Hart-Wells.
Cieniawski expressed her opinion that reducing the number of times the governing board meets publicly would increase public trust. “This is not how people learn to trust our district. They learn to trust our district by engaging at the community level, at their local public school, not by watching us govern the district to make decisions. I disagree with you 100% on that,” said Cieniawski to Carney. “So, all these extra things that are being proposed for future work in our district I think are validations of increasing transparency, increasing outreach, increasing communications with our community. Just the opposite of what you’re saying.”
In defense of his board meeting plan, Menzel claimed that “I believe we can address that I’ve heard from governing board members is more advanced information being provided for review,” which appears to be a soft admission of his failure to provide board members Werner and Carney with requested information prior to a planned staff approval vote at the March special session board meeting.
Menzel proposed that additional board meetings be scheduled ad hoc as needed, providing the public with only 24 hours’ notice. However, Werner noted that the board has not yet been able to plan a board retreat as they cannot find a time that is agreeable to all members. Additionally, scheduling ad hoc meetings would require the approval of at least three board members, making it unlikely that Werner and Carney would have their requests approved as Lindsay, Hart-Wells and Cieniawski generally vote as a block to appease Menzel.
A board observer stated, “reducing the opportunity for the public to engage with the board seems the opposite of public transparency. Based on which board members voiced support for this change, it can easily be interpreted as a plan by Menzel, Cieniawski and Hart-Wells to reduce the impact of board member Carney and Vice President Werner who have been very strong on important issues that matter to parents and the community, but that are in opposition to Menzel’s agenda to disrupt and dismantle our education system.”
RELATED ARTICLE: