County BOE meetings unchanged
“My feeling on the whole thing is that the board, if
we need to meet any time, we can call a meeting and any time we ever
really need anything,” Bobby Johnson Jr., board member, said in a
follow-up interview. “That’s the reason why I didn’t see it being
that big a deal for having it the same night because I stay in touch
with Jason (Vance, director of schools) and he keeps me abreast to
what’s going on. If I need information he’ll always give it to me,
and if we need to have an extra meeting besides the workshop or
anything we could have one if the board needed one.”
The decision should put the matter to rest, Ubben
said, noting meetings a week apart should give the public and board
enough time for review.
“Sometimes the issues are fairly complex and when you
have a meeting at 4:30 (p.m.) and then have to vote on it at 7
o’clock, there’s not much time to do any research or get anybody
else’s opinion,” Ubben said. “Two times a month is something I’ve
always preferred because it gives me more time to study the issue.”
During the meeting, Newman called for an amendment to
the vote that, if passed, would have cut board members’ pay in half.
The amendment failed for lack of a second.
“I thought that was on the right,” Newman said in a
follow-up interview. “... If we were going to cut our duties in half
it’s only fair that we cut our pay in half. Just like if I only work
20 hours a week, I’m only going to get paid for 20 hours a week.”
The board will hold its August workshop and meeting
on the same day, Aug. 9, due to the state and federal primary and
county general election the Thursday before.
Out-of-county students?
A lengthy discussion ensued before board members
denied admitting three out-of-county students into the district.
One situation included grandparents who had power of
attorney because the mother is away most of the year for work.
Director of Schools Jason Vance informed board
members out-of-county students typically aren’t enrolled unless they
meet hardship criteria, whether the parent be deceased, mentally
incapable or incarcerated, or if they experience a natural disaster.
The parent would have to be deemed unfit and a
judge give a court-ordered power of attorney, he said, which wasn’t
the case presented.
“That’s what it all boils down to is the almighty
dollar and they’re putting money into our system and basically
they’ve got custody because they don’t want to go through the courts
and cause a big riggity roar and say their daughter is unfit when
she’s not, she’s working,” Newman said.
Vance said policy 6.203 is vague in its use of power
of attorney. The policy references Tennessee Code Annotated
49-6-3001(c)(6).
“In essence what Section C Section 6 says is a true
hardship on one of those great big four things that I told you,”
Vance said. “If they meet that on a power of attorney, we let them
come on in no questions asked. If they don’t, I expect them to be
court ordered.
In essence the judge says, ‘You got complete custodial guardianship. Parents are removed’.”
Newman asked if Vance didn’t consider the family’s
situation a hardship.
“What I’m saying is that would not meet my litmus
test,” Vance said. “Now with that being said, you guys can supersede
the policy, but I’m governed to abide by this policy.”
Newman and Ridings motioned and seconded, with the
vote failing 7-3. Board members who opposed were Tate, Simon,
Johnson, Jenkins, Brown, Ubben and Best.
Another situation included a parent who owns property
for his business inside Loudon, but recently had to move to Roane
County. Newman said board members passed a similar situation a
couple years ago.
“He’s a taxpayer, guys, I mean there ain’t no other
place to put it,” Newman said. “He owns a house right down here on
Mulberry Street.”
Policy 6.204, which addresses out-of-county students,
mentions residents instead of taxpayers, Ubben said.
Simon asked if it was illegal for the parent to use
his business address to enroll his child. “That’s the way this whole
system gets manipulated all the time,” Brown said.
“I’m trying to help the guy, I don’t know what
else I can do here,” Simon added.
Newman and Ridings motioned and seconded, with
the vote failing 5-5. Opposing votes were Johnson, Brown,
Jenkins, Ubben and Tate.
“That’s what this board wants to do is you want
to handpick when ya’ll want to go by your policies,” Newman
said. “That’s why we’re in a lawsuit right now with a bunch of
bull crap like this.”
The third family, who lives in Blount County,
failed for lack of a motion.
In other news, Loudon County Board of Education:
• Passed budget amendments for Fund 141.
• Moved forward with the first reading for policy
5.110 on compensation guides and contracts, which takes
registered nurses’ contracts from 180 days to 200 days and
brings licensed practical nurses in line with teacher assistants
on the number of days required. A first reading on attendance
policy 6.200 falls in line with Tennessee School Boards
Association recommendations.
• Passed a differentiated pay plan as required by
the state.
• Agreed to surplus five machine lathes, one
horizontal mill and one surface grinder.
• Authorized capital project requests totaling
$87,500 out of Adequate Facilities Tax for carpet, kitchen
plumbing, ceiling tile and awning replacements. An additional
$8,500 was approved for rust remediation on the Loudon High
School football visitor bleachers out of unspecified budget
lines in the 2017-18 fiscal year budget.
• Approved 67 non-faculty coaches for the 2018-19
school year.
|
BACK
6/25/18