Part of the Bay Area News Group

MDUSD board to meet Wednesday to discuss district office reorg., restoring funding for athletics, elementary vps and clerical positions

By Theresa Harrington
Monday, May 12th, 2014 at 4:40 pm in Mt. Diablo school district.

The Mt. Diablo school board will meet at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday in the district office board room at 1936 Carlotta Drive in Concord to vote on a district office reorganization that appears to be under discussion in closed session tonight. In addition, the board expects to vote on restoring funding for high school sports, four elementary vice principals and restoring the hours of clerical, secretarial and technical staff that were cut during lean budget years.

Here is the complete agenda:

“1.0 Call to Order
1.1 President will call the meeting to order Info

2.0 Announcements
2.1 In closed session, the Board will consider the items listed on the closed session agenda. Info

3.0 Public Comment
3.1 The public may address the Board concerning items that are scheduled for discussion during closed session only. These presentations are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers or the three minute limit may be shortened. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info

4.0 Adjourn to Closed Session at 6:00 p.m.

5.0 Closed Session Agenda
5.1 Expulsion of Student #6-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
5.2 Expulsion of Student #7-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
5.3 Release of Public Employees Action
5.4 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(b) Significant Exposure to Litigation: 1 case Info/Action
5.5 Existing litigation – Roaldson v. MDUSD Info/Action
5.6 Existing litigation – Jane Doe v. MDUSD Info/Action
5.7 Conference with Negotiators – Unrepresented Employees – Diablo Managers Association. Negotiators: Dr. Nellie Meyer and Larry Schoenke, Interim General Counsel Info/Action
5.8 District Reorganization Action

6.0 Reconvene Open Session
6.1 Reconvene Open Session at 7:30 p.m. Info

7.0 Preliminary Business
7.1 Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call Info

8.0 Report Out Action Taken in Closed Session
8.1 Expulsion of Student #6-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
8.2 Expulsion of Student #7-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
8.3 Release of Public Employees Action
8.4 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(b) Significant Exposure to Litigation: 1 case Info/Action
8.5 Existing litigation – Roaldson v. MDUSD Info/Action
8.6 Existing litigation – Jane Doe v. MDUSD Info/Action
8.7 Conference with Negotiators – Unrepresented Employees – Diablo Managers Association. Negotiators: Dr. Nellie Meyer and Larry Schoenke, Interim General Counsel Info/Action
8.8 District Reorganization Action

9.0 Student Representatives

10.0 Recognitions and Resolutions
10.1 Resolution #13/14-49 Day of the Teacher Action
10.2 Resolution #13/14-50 Classified Employees’ Week Action
10.3 Asian Pacific Heritage Month Action
10.4 Resolution #13/14-51 Brown v. Board of Education Action

11.0 Board Member Reports
11.1 Board Reports Info

12.0 Superintendent’s Report
12.1 Superintendent’s Report Info

13.0 Reports/Information
13.1 Presentaton of AB 1266 Info

14.0 Consent Agenda Action
14.1 (Item #1) Items listed under Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be approved/adopted by a single motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items; however, any item may be removed from the consent agenda upon the request of any member of the Board and acted upon separately. Action
14.2 (Item #2) Recommended Action for Certificated Personnel Action
14.3 (Item #3) Classified Personnel: Request to Increase and Decrease Full Time Equivalent (FTE) for the 2014-15 School Year Action
14.4 (Item #4) Changes in status of the following classified employees. Action
14.5 (Item #5) Classified Personnel: Resolution of Reduction or Discontinuance of Classified Employees (Classified Layoff) Resolution No. 14/15-43 Action
14.6 (Item #6) Fiscal Transactions for the month of April 2014. Action
14.7 (Item #7) Adoption of “Pre-Calculus” Course of Study Action
14.8 (Item #8) Approve Independent Services Contract with Pivot Learning Partners Action
14.9 (Item #9) Contract addendum; Additional counseling services provided by John F. Kennedy University Action
14.10 (Item #10) Staff requests authorization for Meadow Homes Elementary to serve as a CREATE CA Turnaround Arts Program School. Action
14.11 (Item #11) Pine Hollow Middle School Trip to Odyssey of the Mind World Finals in Iowa Action
14.12 (Item #12) Award of Bid for RFQ #1679: Fire System Testing Action
14.13 (Item #13) Award of Request for Quotation #1673: Asbestos Abatement Services Action
14.14 (Item #14) Notice of Award for Request For Quotations #1681: Flooring Improvements Action
14.15 (Item #15) Notice of Completion for Lease Leaseback #1615: Campus Core Improvements at College Park High School Action
14.16 (Item #16) Approve Final Deductive Change Order #1615-001 (FCO) associated with Lease-Leaseback Agreement to Robert A. Bothman, Inc. for Campus Core Improvements at College Park High School. Action
14.17 (Item #17) Minutes for the Board of Education Meeting held on September 11, 2013 Action

15.0 Consent Items Pulled for Discussion

16.0 Public Comment
16.1 The public may address the Board regarding any item within the jurisdiction of the Board of Education of the Mt. Diablo Unified School District that is not on this agenda. These presentation are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers, or the three minute limit may be shortened. If there are multiple speakers on any one subject, the public comment period may be moved to the end of the meeting. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info

17.0 Communications
17.1 District Organizations – At regular Board meetings, a single spokesperson of each recognized district organization may make a brief presentation following the Consent Agenda. Items are limited to those which are informational. Info

18.0 Business/Action Items
18.1 Revision of BP 5141.33 Head Lice Info

18.2 Creation of AR 5141.33 Head Lice to compliment BP 5141.33 Info

18.3 Revision of BP 5141.31 Immunizations and AR 5141.31 Immunizations Info

18.4 Revision of BP 5141.32 Child Health and Disability Prevention Program Info

18.5 Restoration of High School Athletics Info/Action

18.6 Restore Four (4) Elementary Vice Principal Positions Action

18.7 Restoration of hours and days for CST positions that were reduced during the budget cuts of 2010-11. Action

18.8 Salary Increase for all Classified and Certificated Employees not Represented by a Bargaining Unit Action

18.9 Reclassify eligible Coordinator, Student Services 6-8 to Vice Principal, Middle School and eligible Coordinator, Student/Community Services 9-12 positions to Vice Principal, High School Action

18.10 Reclassification of Classified Position in the Local One, Clerical, Secretarial, Technical (CST) Unit Action

18.11 Opportunity for public response to the Sunshine Reopener from Local One, Clerical, Secretarial & Technical (CST) Unit. Action

18.12 Approve 3D Modeling Course of Study Action

18.13 Presentation of new text for Economics course, “Economics: Concepts and Choices”, Holt McDougal Info

18.14 Revision of Board Policy 0410 (Nondiscrimination in District Programs and Activities). Action

18.15 Creation of Administrative Regulation 5145.3 (Nondiscrimination/Harassment & Transgender Regulation). Action

18.16 Revision of Administrative Regulation 6145.2 (Nondiscrimination and Equivalent Opportunities in the Athletic Program) Action

18.17 Revision of Board Policy 5145.3(Nondiscrimination/Harassment) Action

18.18 Authorization to Make Year-End Intra-Budget Transfers Action

18.19 YVHS’s Contract with Martha Pollock Increase Info/Action

18.20 Award lease/leaseback contract to EF Brett & Company, Inc. for construction of the CVCHS Athletic Facility Improvements Project for a guaranteed maximum cost of $2,716,886.64. Action

18.21 Minutes for the Special Board of Education Meeting held on March 24, 2014 Action

18.22 Minutes for the Board of Education Meeting held on April 30, 2014 Action

18.23 District Reorganization Action

19.0 Future Agenda Items
19.1 Future Agenda Items Info

20.0 Closed Session
20.1 Items not completed during the first Closed Session will be carried over to this closed session. Action

21.0 Reconvene Open Session
21.1 Reconvene Open Session Info

22.0 Adjournment
22.1 Adjourn Meeting Info”

It is interesting that the board is voting on the expensive restoration of programs and positions BEFORE presenting its draft Local Control Accountability Plan. These items are likely part of the plan. But by voting on them before showing the public the entire plan, it’s difficult for the public to know how these ideas fit into the bigger picture.

It is also surprising that the board intends to VOTE on a “District Reorganization” at the very end of the meeting, with NO written staff report explaining what that reorganization entails. This gives the public virtually NO information ahead of time, meaning the board plans to make this important decision with very little public input.

Many other districts, including West Contra Costa and Berkeley, have already released their draft Local Accountability Plans for discussion before major budget decisions are made.

Do you think the board should vote on major district expenditures and changes before discussing its draft Local Accountability Plan?

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Ms. Jean

    I thought #18.7 was up for discussion at this board meeting, and might be voted on at the next board meeting. When did that change?

  • Michael Langley

    My concern is about reorganization without allowing time to get input from the community. I trust that the Superintendent has crafted a plan that she feels will improve the communication at Dent. I believe that she should not be micromanaged in executing the policies of the board. However, the unintended consequences of the last major reorganization, including the reaction of the community that it was blindsided and/or less than truthful in presentation, gives pause. Why not publish the reorganization as an information item and then give the community two weeks before action is taken? If it is a good plan, open and frank discussion will confirm it. Informed questions can be addressed in an open board session and a record will be left for all to see.

  • Michael Langley

    Kudos on restoring some VP positions at the Elementary level, as well as restoring hours to the Classified.

    It is good to redefine the SSC positions to VP, for they were used as such in practice. That does beg the question of who will take the role that the SSC was created to fill? For too long they have been Junior VPs and Administrators-In-Training. They were created to replace the Counselors that were eliminated over twenty years ago. The name Student Services Coordinator describes the intended role of a person
    who could refer (coordinate for) students who required counseling to the appropriate agency in the community, as MDUSD would no longer have qualified people to provide those support services to students. The reality is that much of the counseling unofficially devolved to the classroom teacher, many of whom lacked the training to deal with many of the issues. As qualified Counselors reclassified as SSCs left the district or retired, the concept of counseling skills disappeared as a requirement. Current part time Career Centers are understaffed, underqualified and overwhelmed to handle the workload of sites with over a thousand students.

    What is the Board’s plan to fill the need for academic and nonacademic counseling in Middle and High School?

  • Doctor J

    Based on Dorothy Wiesenberger’s public comment tonight (Monday) it sounds like part of the reorganization is to eliminate the Asst Supt over Special Education and dumb it down to a Director as recommended by FCMAT. As Dorothy pointed out, that would reverse a big chunk of the Federal Consent Decree now expired. In her comment, she advocated for the position to remain, but my impression was that she was resigned that Kerri Mills was departing MDUSD. Kerri Mills, nor any current cabinet member, doesn’t appear on the recently released retirement list for the upcoming Supt’s Retirement reception. My guess at this point is to see two Asst Superintendents, with Special Ed and SASS and Personnel distributed between the two along with other current district functions. The name SASS will melt into Steven Lawrence’s history.

  • Doctor J

    Mike, did I hear you ask about the “Board’s Plan” ? ROTFLOL. Tonight Brian Lawrence had to ask why one teacher’s layoff notice rescission was being withdrawn after the big deal last Board meeting about all layoff notices being rescinded. But of course that was before the Board learned on this blog that Concord High was charging $$$ for certain PE classes in violation of California Constitution and law.

  • g. de la verdad

    “…it’s difficult for the public to know how [ANYBODY'S] ideas fit into the bigger picture.”

  • Doctor J

    SSDD

  • Doctor J

    Since Nellie Meyer has history with only one prior district, since there have been no board authorizations to search for replacements, who might she recruit from San Diego ?

  • Doctor J
  • Doctor J

    Board votes on 6.1 NOT to renew four administrator contracts and “received” information on reorganization.

  • Doctor J

    Not renewing four contracts does NOT mean that these four administrators are gone — it simply could mean musical chairs with new titles and new contracts. Mike Langley’s post cannot be underscored more about public trust lost with the last reorganization –make that the last several reorganizations, all done in secret with no chance of public discussion. Looks like Nellie and Schoenke trying to pull off another secret reorganization with no chance for the public to comment — like Mike says, if it’s a good plan it will stand the test of public scrutiny. The problem is that the delays in putting forward this plan have made it all but impossible to recruit quality leadership from outside the district. Just more in breeding.

  • Doctor J

    Last nights vote appears simply to meet 45 day rule of Ed Code 35031. http://www.slotelaw.com/node/243

  • Doctor J

    Schoenke’s contract expires June 30. Might Nellie be looking to recruit his successor in San Diego, Andra Donovan who currently earns $213,000 ? A like salary in MDUSD would have more buying power, but would be a huge jump from Rolen’s $170,000, and she wouldn’t even have to screw up transportation !!

  • tmharrington

    Yes, this is what the public would expect of an open and transparent agency unafraid of accountability. The fact that the board does not appear to want to let the public in on the reorganization before it is a done deal doesn’t engender trust. Has anyone learned from Steven Lawrence’s mistakes?

  • tmharrington

    I didn’t see that version of the agenda. I hope the board is not continuing to change the agendas after they are posted. Again, I ask: Has anyone learned anything from the mistakes of Steven Lawrence? And this time I’ll add Greg Rolen. If an agenda item is changed after it is posted, it must be amended to show that!

  • Doctor J

    Perhaps Theresa it will take a PRA for all agendas and changes posted so you can do a story on it. You saw my post how the Dec 11 approved minutes don’t reflect the actual motion and vote in the Electronic School Board . It’s simply fraud on the public. None of us individuals are big enough to challenge a $1.5 million dollar Schoenke free-for-all spending machine. BANG might be, but I am still patiently waiting for the supplemental papers to be posted on that case.

  • Doctor J

    My comment on the new abuse case at Mt. Diablo High was being held for approval — why ?

  • g. de la verdad

    And this, as they say, is ‘Where the rubber meats the road’!

  • Doctor J

    I think they call that a Freudian slip !

  • Doctor J

    Theresa suddenly disappears off the grid — DeBolt only offers 2011-12 positions at Mount, all who no longer work there — but perhaps other places in the district. Reassure us Nellie. Put some names with these positions: Principal, Vice-Principal, Special Education Administrator, and the Abuser Teacher. Assure us that none of these people still work in the district. Or have they just been shuffled to other positions without regard to the safety of children. When, when will the MDUSD culture of cover-up stop and the safety of children be put first ??

  • Doctor J

    Tonight more time will be spent on lice than prevention of child molestation that is an epidemic in our district. Very poor timing Board when there are over a 100 policies out of date. Please pay the money to have CSBA update ALL the policies, regulations, and forms. Tonight the public should be asking the Board why those administrators that enabled the child molesters are still in the district. Until we get rid of the enablers, the molesters will find a home in MDUSD.

  • tmharrington

    Possibly because it contained a link. I was on jury duty yesterday, but am back today.

  • tmharrington

    FYI, CVCHS governing board meeting originally scheduled tonight has been postponed: http://www.claytonvalley.org/apps/news/show_news.jsp?REC_ID=379840&id=0

    FYI, I am hearing rumors there may be some dissatisfaction with Linzey among the ranks.

  • tmharrington
  • g. de la verdad

    Like Supts, CEOs get into trouble talking out of turn. Trying to placate people on both sides of the fence, they must be careful not to make their ‘boss’ look bad. I’m thinking shared sports fields.

  • tmharrington

    Here is a report by another news agency that names names: http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/05/13/67815.htm

    FYI, I have received an anonymous tip that some students and teachers are unhappy with the change in “culture” at Crossroads HS under the new leadership of McClatchy.
    A caller left a message saying: “Students are not interested in going to school and many staff want to leave.”

    It will be interesting to see if the district’s new reorganization will also extend to school principals.

  • tmharrington

    I’m hearing there is more to it than that.

  • CTJ_Rafiki

    Just to set the record straight about dissatisfaction with Linzey, as a parent it couldn’t be further than the truth. Dave Linzey has turned CV around. If he was the Principal before the “Charter” there would have been no need for a Charter School. He has brought a culture of greatness to the school and the community. The old regime had 20 years of mediocrity, Dave has rallied everyone to amazing success. The only thing we need to eradicate from the school is the old admins and teachers that are just looking for a paycheck, and have their own interests above the kids. I’ve been around this area for 40+ years, Linzey is a Legend! If it weren’t for Linzey my kids would be in private school.

  • tmharrington

    Thanks.

    Regarding tonight’s MDUSD meeting, the agenda was changed. Reorganization was moved up and changed to an informational item. Why is there no indication on the agenda that these changes were made?

  • tmharrington

    Wow. The reorganization agenda item now has plenty of attachments explaining the proposal. Why wasn’t this all posted with the original agenda?

  • tmharrington

    For those following along at home, it certainly would be nice if the video could show the Powerpoint as it’s being presented.

  • Doctor J

    The methods of amending the agenda employed by the Supt’s office are misleading, giving the false impression that this agenda as it currently stands was the one posted in accordance with the Brown Act 72 hours prior to the meeting.

  • Doctor J

    The Board, afraid of lice infected people in the Board meeting, dropped it from the agenda. what type of lice are we talking about ? Seems like the Board policy is not specific enough. http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/lice/

  • Doctor J

    Those mentioned in the court news article: Kate Mc. Is still a principal in MDUSD, Julie P. Moved onto San Ramon as a Vice-P, Sue P. still works in the Student Services Dept of MDUSD, and the whereabouts of Teacher Kevin J., not to be confused with the Sacramento mayor, are unknown. I will have to check his credential.

  • tmharrington

    Yes. This is a problem, as pointed out by the woman who said she learned a lesson not to print out the agenda two days ahead of time. The agenda as originally posted needs to be clearly amended with addenda if it is altered. This is how the state Board of Education handles changes.
    Luckily, I DID post the version that was online at 4:40 p.m. Monday, which showed district reorganization as the last item, up for “action,” with absolutely NO agenda attachments.

  • tmharrington

    Also, it looks as though the district has discontinued its Board Action Summaries, which were pretty handy when they were posted in a timely manner: http://www.mdusd.org/boe/Pages/boe-sam.aspx
    As it was pointed out last night, there are still many minutes from past meetings that haven’t yet been created.

  • tmharrington

    On closer examination, the final district agenda includes NO LESS THAN EIGHT changes that were made AFTER it was originally posted:
    Items 18.1, 18.2, 18.3 and 18.4 were completely REMOVED.
    Item 18.5 (restoring athletics) was moved down to 18.8.
    Item 18.23 (reorg) was moved up to 18.7, turned into an information item instead of an action item, and suddenly included 11 attachments that weren’t there when the original agenda was posted.
    Item 18.15 (AR 5145.3) was moved BELOW Revision of Board Policy 5145.3 (which actually makes better sense)
    Item 18.19 (YVHS contract) was moved up to 18.15

    The fact that there were this many changes AFTER the agenda was posted – with NO indication on the current agenda that ANY changes were made – is inexcusable. I wonder if the minutes will reflect this.

  • tmharrington

    In looking more closely at the reorg plan, it looks like some current district office admins will have to take significant pay cuts if they want to assume new positions that will replace their positions that are being eliminated: http://esb.mdusd.k12.ca.us/attachments/efbb0b52-4dd5-4b25-aff2-38c6a7d04325.pdf

  • Doctor J

    Admiral Bill has finally showed up — as I predicted from day one of Dr. Nellie’s hire. The flattening of the org chart, the descriptions and titles of the new positions, and even the introduction all have his fingerprints all over them. As you read the reorg plan, think of the M ight Mouse theme song: “Here I come to save the day!” Here are some of the classic Admiral Bill evidences: “This is the structure by which we will see direct, responsive, clear lines of authority and support. All structures rely on strong staff, and the development and training of staff to these new roles will be ongoing. Staff will be required to think creatively, to problem-solve and to focus on our like mission of serving students.” Another: “. As is not uncommon in a large school district, there was a strong perception of a disconnect between the students and schools, and the central office referred to as “DENT”. In addition, former consolidations and former district priorities led to an uneven and unusual distribution of duties and as a result, unclear accountability and support.

  • Doctor J

    Closer inspection of the reorg plan reveals it’s hasty preparation. Inconsistent titles: eg, is it Exec Director of Instructional Support or Services ? Inconsistent lines of authority as the job descriptions are just first drafts. Org chart lists Director of Spec Ed, but it’s not one of new created positions nor listed as supervised by Ex Director Instructional “S”. Is this a reference to a current position ? Which one ? Not listed in current website. this skeleton of a plan needs all it’s limbs and flesh, along with a professional review by an organizational behavioralist. Will all positions be up for application or have certain jobs been already promised ?

  • tmharrington

    All good questions. Along with: Why was the agenda changed without being clearly labeled as having been modified after it was initially posted?

  • g. de la verdad

    “What’s in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name….” The same can be said for the boiled cabbages and fried fish in the district.

  • g. de la verdad

    And why did everyone on the dais get a chuckle out of the comment about printing an agenda that would end up with many-many changes.
    Not Funny, board members!

  • tmharrington

    I hope that Dr. Meyer and Admiral Bill (if indeed he has shown up) know that the central office is referred to as DENT in honor of James W. Dent, for whom it is named:
    http://www.mdusd.org/Parents/Documents/nclb/ses-parent-notification-english-2012-2013.pdf

  • tmharrington

    I agree. The joke appears to be on the public.

  • Doctor J

    The changes in Salary ranges will even be more pronounced after the 2% one-time raise — I would question the math used by Dr. Nellie since the salary ranges are wrong. I think the 17 administrators will cost the district substantially more than the previous 18 positions disclosed on May 14. Another instance of shell game playing.

  • Doctor J

    The CAC is talking about a new Federal Consent Decree. I say we need a Consent Decree to follow the Brown Act !

  • Doctor J

    The looming thunderhead of the still being written LCAP due on May 22 to be presented for the first time to administrators in the morning and then in the afternoon to the still forming “parents” “committee” handpicked by principals, for the expected ‘RUBBER STAMP’ will cause thunder and lightening amongst more enlightened parents and community members. So who is it that is still writing this LCAP ? Senior administrators just noticed that their positions will be “abolished”, some of whom will be asked to accept less pay for more work. Others, have they been promised some of the new higher paying positions ? Yes, some, but not all — those who have been promised, aren’t talking, and those who have not been promised are asking questions. Not all positions will be put out for application and interview. So while the storm of the LCAP disaster [probably more poorly written than this weeks last minute "reorg" plan] is set to hit next Thursday, many Dent administrators are spending their time on EdJoin looking for positions outside the district. Need an example ? Just ask yourself why Jeff McDaniel left the Board meeting early on Wednesday ? Why did Felicia S-S and Bill Morones have so few answers to basic board questions on Wednesday and make themselves look foolish. I will never forget Felicia in response to a simple question saying: “That is a good question.” She had no answer. How embarassing. Six months and all of a suddent the deadlines are here and Dent is living up to the perception of Admiral Bill — dent means broken. The reorg plan is nothing more than a more expensive version of musical chairs. Remember, one of the 18 positions being abolished has been vacant for a year — so its really 17 old positions being replaced by 17 new positions at a much higher price. I wonder how stupid Nellie thinks the parents are ?

  • g. de la verdad

    The only position made ‘clear’ was elimination of ‘Interim’ for the usurper Tim Cody. The job description says nothing about usurping “Independence” from the CBOC, who after 4 years still allows the district honchos to dictate what they are allowed to see, hear, say, understand, agendize — and tolerates making the public wait for months to see what that hand-picked committee is doing.

  • Doctor J

    Hypocrisy in action “Approved by MDUSD” — What a laugher ! : Last Wed night, Board Member Cheryl Hansen couldn’t have been more animated about “other districts” actually allowing students to drive other students to athletic events. It was almost comical in how critical she was. Well, hot from the Northgate website today: “The Student Athlete Driver and Passenger Form allow student athlete(s) to drive themselves to/from activity/athletic events. This form also includes the student athlete passenger section that would allow another student athlete to be driven by an approved student athlete driver. This form has been approve by MDUSD. ” copy it before it goes dark.
    here is the form: http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/document/0047/8429/MDUSD_Student_Athlete_Driver_s_Form_.pdf