Response from Steve Antolak

[This is the response from Steve Antolak, School Board Member, to my request for clarification. My email is presented prior (below) this post.]

Hello Derek,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond to your concern. I often find that I am so attuned to the presentation before me at the board meeting that I forget that others are essentially "eavesdropping" on a conversation and don't always have the same background and context that I have in speaking in public.

I have several points.

You are right that I don't fear parental involvement. It's very important to me because that is what makes the decisions I face "real" and not just some theoretical exercise in school governance and finance. That's my accountability. That's also the way that I can be sure to hear my constituents' desires from an informed electorate. It's much easier to have a public dialog when parents' are well informed of all the issues and consequences. Most importantly, I am a firm believer in our strategic plan and our commitment to seeking diverse views and working towards consensus. Of course, there is not always a "consensus solution" and it falls on my shoulders to make a decision. (and I am willing to live with the consequences).

I may have erred in saying my line about "not being concerned about the administration overstepping its bounds." (I don't think it's what I said and I think it might be out of context). Recall that the presentation was about the transition activities, and not management of the schools. I expressed my concern that the decision making responsibilities be made clear up front so that parents do not feel misled about their role. I want the roles to be clear. The administrators responded that they understand their roles and responsibilities and will act within their powers/obligations. I tried to change the focus of their concern to the parents and not the administrators. I don't want people to be disappointed by coming into the process thinking that they can do/accomplish a list of things that cannot or will not happen and then perceive their participation as a fraud or farce because they misunderstood their role.

My comment about parents not considering this a "mini school board" was directed to that point. The involved parents will not be voting on bell times, teacher compensation, teacher assignment, etc. Those (among others) are exclusively management responsibilities and will not/cannot be delegated. If we allow involved parents to think they may be deciding these issues, they most assuredly will be disappointed at the end of the process.

That is not to say that parents won't be heard. We just have to remember that parents have absolutely no accountability. The are not held to facts or decisions. They can freely change positions and arguments without consequences. They are advocates in the purest sense and have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own. That's their role, but we need to remember that when making decisions.

In the broader context, I think this is what happened with our recent decisions on the strategic budget. The board's been struggling with the issues since it decided to go for the levy last summer. We've studied ways to cut expenses, examined the effects of cutting programs such as athletics, arts, and looked at what larger classroom sizes would mean. We looked to the experts working directly with children's learning needs, health needs, transportation needs, etc to put together a plan for dealing with the shortfall. Then we turned to the parents for perspective and to understand the "real" consequences of what we were facing. Some parents concluded that their involvement meant that they have a more direct vote in the issues, forgetting that their perspective was from their own child/family/school/neighborhood/community. From that specific perspective, I probably agreed with 99% of the opinions. However, neither I as a board member nor individual members of the administration could take that perspective when making and implementing district wide decisions. Because we didn't explain the roles well enough up front, because we didn't share expectations explicitly enough (and maybe because the consequences of the decisions don't hit everyone's radar at the same time) many parents were hurt and disappointed. I am trying to not make that mistake again.

I put no stock in the smiles and nodding of the administrators. I took their nods as an attempt to show me they intended to address my concerns. We have to work together and the smiles are simply how humans connect. (More realistically, they understand that a vote to compel a specific action by the board would be a command they cannot disobey without serious consequences. I think their nods and smiles were intended to convey an honest attempt to comply with my concerns without having to do that).

You're right about the number of parents on the leadership team being comical on its face. There is always a balance to be struck between workable numbers and public input. My first reaction was the same. However, I was satisfied by the commitment of Nancy Wavron (who has a great deal of respect from me) and the explanation of the whole process. The purpose of the leadership team is to implement the board's decision, not decide things anew. If we consider the role of the two parents as "perspective spotters" at that top level, it makes sense. Their purpose is to assure that the leadership is considering the parents' perspective in planning. The parents
should be asking what about a,b,c from the parent's perspective as proposals are being developed.

The rubber really hits the road at the implementation level and that is where most of the parents will be involved. The leadership team deals at the more policy/theoretical level and the involvement of the parents is most important at the implementation level where the consequences are direct and tangible. I think that if we deal with expectations up front and listen to each other, this process will work. I am keeping an open mind (and ear) on this process and if it is not working, we will have to change what we are doing.

Please recognize these are the thoughts of only one board member and not the school board (which must act as a single body). Until we vote on something, these words are really just the opinion of one parent in the district. I have an obligation to hear out my fellow board members and the public before taking action.

Feel free to share this email with whomever you wish. I will share it with Nancy Wavron (Oakview Principal), Theresa Battle (Asst. Superintendent for Teaching and Learning) Kim Green (board chair) and Superintendent Hintz.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to discuss this.

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 279

Steven E. Antolak
School Board Member