Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
(female announcer) This is a production of WKNO-Memphis.
Production funding for "Behind the Headlines" is made possible
in part by..
An update on the merger of the schools with two members of the
unified school board tonight on "Behind the Headlines."
♪♪♪
of the Memphis Daily News.
Thanks for joining us.
Kenneth T Whalum Junior of the
unified school board.
(Barnes) Thank you for being here.
Thank you.
(Barnes) Also, Bill Dries, senior reporter with The Memphis Daily
News.
And Kevin Woods also with the unified school board.
Thank you.
So as always, many things to talk about and they change even
as we come up close to the show.
There was a report Friday in the Commercial Appeal that John
Aitken, the superintendant from the Shelby County school side,
is talking about a buy-out, that it could be up before the board
this Tuesday.
I guess first, have you heard that that may be happening this
week and what are your thoughts?
Is that a good idea, a bad idea?
Let me start with you, Kenneth.
happening and I won't judge
whether it's good or bad.
I'll say that I don't blame him.
I'll say that I don't blame him.
(Barnes) And why is that?
Well, I've been saying for months now that Shelby County
Schools has a superintendant.
And I didn't see the wisdom and still don't see the wisdom in
doing a search at all let alone a national search.
And sometimes we sit and discuss superintendancy as though Doctor
Aitken is not even in the room.
That's got to be very frustrating for him.
He's established a track record, very great success.
And I just wouldn't blame him if he decided to try to opt out.
I don't know that that's the case.
Okay, and I think- Kevin Woods, your thoughts on that.
talked with John as of today.
article indicating that the
buy-out maybe on the table.
But at the end of the day, I think where we are right now,
I think John has done a good job.
I think he should continue to serve as the superintendant.
And I think if the board had voted for a search,
it would probably be in our best interest to continue that
process yet, and still I see no other candidate as of right now
that could rise to the top and prove that they're ready to do
the work like John has.
So, I do think that he's in a position to be selected if the
search is to continue.
So, I haven't spoken with John yet.
So as of right now, I'll reserve judgement until I speak with
him.
Okay, Bill?
What is your impression of when he would leave if this buy-out
always in all of this is very
crucial.
If we're talking about after September 1,
that's one thing.
If we're talking about as it was with Doctor Cash,
here's the deal.
He's going to be out at the end of the month.
Then, it seems to me that that has implications for the merger.
What's your understanding of the timing of this?
Well, I'll start there.
First of all, you know, when you look at Cash's deal when the
buy-out was taken and it was eminent and the decision was to
start at that point, I think at that point John became the
defacto superintendant for the merger.
He was charged with making the transition takes place.
And I think he had a leadership role there.
So, there will be a void that would happen if John- Again,
this is all speculative because this is just developing today.
But I think there would be a huge void if John was to make
that decision and it became effective immediately.
John Aitken has demonstrated if nothing else,
demonstrated great integrity and I would be overwhelmingly
surprised even if we were bought out.
I'd be surprised if he left at a point that would leave the
system teetering anymore than it is.
So, I would think he'd stay on.
Is there anything you all can do?
I guess, you're two board members of a big board.
But anything you all can do to try and,
you know, change his mind?
I mean, you're both speaking very,
you know, passionately that he is good for the job and you'd
like to see him stay.
And you're surprised by this.
Is there anything you can do?
Well, we can do what I suggested that we do months ago and that
is just say, "Hey, thanks John!
"We want to keep you as superintendant."
But the board chose not to do that.
But of course, there's something we can do.
We can say stop the search or we can say our search ends at
Doctor Aitken.
And I think I read that the search process really is kind of
in early stages.
I mean, there are community meetings coming up over the next
few weeks.
And I don't think, you know, any narrowing down of candidates.
So, that process is an ongoing one which gets us in to the
special master which is in part what we thought we'd be speaking
about more today which is the appointment of a special master
in part because Hardy Mays, a federal judge,
was frustrated with, you know, things not moving fast enough.
And I think one of the things he really highlighted was the
inability to appoint the superintendant.
So, how does this fit in that mix of the special master?
I mean, is this where you hope that Rick Masson,
the special master, you know, supercedes the board?
Well, you know, as I've said many times,
appointing a special master.
special master two years ago and
it's as if I'm the only one who remembers that.
That's why I keep the order with me at all times.
The special master, as I understand it- Bill may have a
different understanding of it.
-is to assist the board.
So, the board still controls the situation.
And the answer to your question though.
Of course Master Masson can provide some clarity and some
closure and really he can streamline the process by virtue
of the sheer authority he's been given by Judge Mays.
Kevin Woods, your thoughts on that?
Well, I think Reverend Whalum had indicated early on that
for a special master.
I came with the idea that maybe
people like Reverend Whalum that
we can get some things done.
Reverend Whalum had called for, on many occasions,
bring the transition planning recomendations to us.
We'll stay here as long as it takes.
We'll make decisions.
We may not always agree but we're willing to make decisions.
As a board, we can only vote on the recomendations that come to
us.
So for those who complain that we're not moving hastily,
fast enough, I think we're voting on the recomendations as
they come.
So, now that we have a special master,
I think what he'll be able to do is nudge the board along and
help those recomendations come down the pipe quicker.
And another thing that critics of the process have said that
the board is rethinking or renegotiating.
And the staff is rethinking and renegotiating every
recomendation from the TPC, the Transition Planning Commission.
Is that your sense of it, too, Doctor Whalum?
You know, it's as if that work wasn't done.
No, I don't think that's the case at all.
I think that with a 23 member anything that is making policy
decisions, the work is in the work itself.
And I would say to those who continue to criticize and
complain about the boards deliberative process,
I would suggest that they're not on a board at all.
And that if they were on a board,
they woud understand more completely the absolute trudging
that we do.
It's very frustrating.
There is no question about it.
And one more thing.
Mike Ritz, head of the County Commission,
mentioned on this show some six weeks ago that,
or that when Kriner Cash, the city superintendant,
left, he was bought out.
We just mentioned that.
When we left some six weeks ago, Ritz said things have started
moving, he has heard, much, much faster.
Is that your experience that since Kriner Cash left that the
process is moving more quickly?
I think the process is moving as it has always and that has been
a deliberative way.
I don't put any creedence at all in what Commissioner Ritz says
though.
Okay, and Kevin Woods, your sense of have things sped up
since Kriner Cash left?
Well, to say that, you seem to point blame that somehow because
Cash was there, not that you persay,
but because he was there that you couldn't get things done.
I think anytime you have a two-headed leader,
you have more deliberation than may be necessary.
So and at the end of the day, the ultimate decision lies with
the board.
And to be fair to Mike Ritz, I don't know that he was saying
that it was getting Cash as a personaility out of the way was
the improvment or getting rid of the two-headed,
you know, difficult situation.
So, I just wanted to be fair to Mike Ritz.
So with that, I think once Cash was gone,
I think John was, in essence, a defacto superintendant.
I think there was always conversation behind the scene
before recomendations were brought to the board.
But again, as Reverand Whalum indicated many times,
bring the recomendation to us.
And it's not a pretty process.
It's 23 members who have a constituency that they feel that
they must advocate for.
So, it's not going to be a short,
quick and pretty process.
(Barnes) Bill?
Have either of you had discussions with the special
master because I believe that he intends to talk to all of the
board members, all 23, as part of his settling in process to
see what he's got on his hands.
(Whalum) I have not.
I have.
I have had a chance to meet with him shortly only to discuss.
And again, he indicated that he planned to speak with every
board member.
had a chance to speak with him.
those very issues,
important of having leadership
in place, the fact that we had a superintendant and would like to
see him stay with us at the very least through this important
process of emerging the district.
And we talked about other issues that we felt that were important
to get the work done.
Is there a need for the special master,
Doctor Whalum, to- Well first of all,
is there a need for the special master?
And second of all, is there a need for that special master to
set some new deadlines for the board that aren't already there?
Let me be very careful in how I respond to that question.
need for a special master in my
ordered that there is going to
be a special master.
No, I don't think that there is a need for it because the board
is supposed to be doing the work.
The only reason there has been a need is because two years ago,
and I'm not going to let anybody forget it,
Judge Mays ordered in this document right here that he was
going to appoint a special master.
And if anybody has been moving too slowly to this point,
it's been Judge Mays.
Does it create?
Are you saying, and I don't mean to put words in your mouth,
but are you saying it's created a dynamic where the board is
waiting for that special master?
I mean, almost looking over their shoulder?
Absolutely, indubitably.
Because he, I mean, I guess some people would say,
"Well, the board should just ignore that,
just move forward, just move and ignore."
Maybe that's naive but that's what some people are saying.
You shouldn't wait around for that.
Just keep moving, moving, moving and,
you know, with the prospect of starting school in a number of
months.
And once since then, that's damned if you do and damned if
you don't.
You've got a court order that says here's what the board is
supposed to do and here is what I'm going to do to help the
board.
So, the board in waiting for the Judge to fulfuill his own order
is now perceived to be ***-footing around the issue
when what we're really doing is trying to be good soldiers.
At least, that's what I'm trying to do.
Let me go to some of the decisions that still have to be
made, some of the bigger ones.
You know, we've talked about the superintendant and where that
process is.
But another one that's a big hot button issue and it's a real
funding issue and expense issue is school closings.
Where do both of you stand?
The original TPC recommendation was some 20 schools to be
closed.
That number, I don't even know where it stand right now and I
apologize.
But where are you, Kevin Woods, on school closings?
Would you like to see the full 20 or so closed or a smaller
number?
First of all, just picking 20 schools I think is
irresponsible, period.
I think you can't just say we're going to close 20 schools.
But I think prior to the TPC, I think it's important to know
that TPC didn't come up with some grand idea that we should
close schools in order to find savings.
This is a study that Reverand Whalum,
their board, had done long before I was on the board that
we have to look at right-sizing the district.
And how do we deliver education in a matter that's where are the
students and are the schools where the students are?
So, it's no surprise that as population shifts,
that we have to consider how we look at schools.
So to answer that question, I was over the school closing
recently at a school, at an elementary school,
where less than one minute in the car,
it took you to get to that other elementary school.
Schools can hold over 800 kids.
There was about 130 kids at each school.
So, no one is in favor of people losing jobs and kids having to
be shifted from one school to another.
But as a good steward of our tax dollars,
I think we have to be mindful.
I think Reverend Whalum put it perfectly at a previous meeting
is that we just have to be compassionate about the
decisions we make.
But we have to be deliberate that schools closing is a part
of delivering urban education.
Your sense of that?
I am unalterably opposed to closing a single school.
Not one do I believe we should close no matter how close they
are in proximity to one another.
If the city of Memphis- And this is part of what frustrates
people so about the political process in Memphis.
Memphis has $200 million to give,
to spruce up the pyramid area for Bass Pro but Memphis doesn't
have the money to spruce up school buildings for kids.
Of course it's a budgetary matter.
But if there is money to do A, voters have a right to
understand why there's not money to do B.
I am unalterably opposed unless, unless in those same buildings
with small student bodies where you can bring in social services
and wrap around services and have a more direct connection
between teachers and students, open different schools in those
buildings.
Don't close the buildings.
Don't create more blight.
The Transition Planning Commission,
Eric, has somehow latched on to this idea of the bottom line.
It's about the- It's not about the bottom line.
It's about educating the children.
And I've said this to Barbara Prescott and to other members
whom I all know and respect.
It's not about the bottom line.
No to closing any school.
And you see that assumption that the suburbs right now,
parents come and say tax us
more.
taxes which is not necessarily
hear from, you know,
in the media or you hear in a public forum is pay more in
taxes.
And that's suburban parents saying that.
Do you hear that from parents in the city saying,
'Look, if I need to pay more taxes for good schools,
I'll pay more taxes."
Isn't that amazing that you don't hear it in the city?
in the city are any less loving
than the parents in the suburbs.
The issue is clear.
don't have the money.
They're struggling with trying to make it from day-to-day,
Eric.
And it is up to those of us in the elected positions to try to
take care of them the best we can.
Kevin Woods?
I just want to add a little something else to that.
not only is the suburban parents
have the resources because I
the suburbs and many of them
struggled to make ends meet just like those in the city.
The true difference is that those in Shelby County suburban
believe that they have a superior education.
They believe that they have a product that's worth fighting
for.
So until we can do the same in Memphis where every citizen in
Memphis believe that it is a product worth saving,
that we can deliver a quality education and that we have a
system from day one that prepares kids for a quality
education because that conversations often lost in the
superintendant search and the municipalities having their own
school systems is what are we doing for the majority of our
kids to make sure they have a quality education?
Okay, Bill?
Let's talk about $57 million.
the viwers $57 million is the
amount of money that the city of Memphis was ordered by two
courts to pay to the Memphis City school system.
It's a judgement that transfers in to the merger to the unified
school system.
On this very program last week, Shea Flinn on the Memphis city
council said the city has not paid that because the city has a
counterclaim for what he said is upwards of $140 million in money
that they claim the school system owes it.
But in the course of that explanation,
he also said we would be open to mediation to possibly begin
talks that could lead to the flow of some of this $57 million
in that crucial first fiscal year of the merger.
What do you think?
Are you guys open to mediation?
I'm open to anything that's going to get us paid as soon as
possible.
I think we've indicated time and time again that the court has
made a decision and that moneys are owed to the district.
There's no question that the need is there.
And let's face it.
The majority of the kids that need these resources are in the
city of Memphis.
And if you are fighting for the children of Memphis,
then you should be coming to the table to helping us quickly
resolve this issue.
You know, why pay lawyers when you could be putting this money
in classrooms?
Councilman Flinn's position, same as Mayor Wharton's
position, same as the majority of the city council position.
What Shea has articulated is what I've been calling for a
years a deadbeat dad syndrome, Bill.
There is a supreme court order.
It's not an appellate court order.
It's a supreme court judgement.
There isn't supposed to be mediation of a supreme court
judgment, no.
No, it's a deadbeat dad syndrome.
The city of Memphis is responsible in loco parentis for
all of the children of Memphis, Bill.
You don't get to say, "Well, I know I'm responsible but I got
bills to pay."
Nope, no responsible father is going to say,
"I can't support my kid.
"I've got to pay my clothing bill."
That's what Shea is articulating.
Now, he would never say that.
You know, that's not.
That is what he's saying, a deadbeat dad syndrome.
There is no mediation of a supreme court order,
no.
So my position is no, I'm not for mediation.
I'm for show me the money.
If it means that there will be no city funding of the unified
school system in the first year of the merger,
are you still adamant about that position?
Well, I'm adamant about the position that a supreme court
order is a supreme court order.
If I were a deadbeat dad and I was disobeying a court order to
pay child support, the judge would garnish my wages and put
me in jail.
Come on!
But if that's the case, why hasn't the judge done that?
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
To stay with the analogy of deadbeat dad,
if that dad is incarcerated, the mother of that child is left
with no parent and often with no money.
So, I'm always willing to have a conversation.
To me, I interpret mediation as not more attorneys necessarily
but people, smart people, sitting down around a table
saying, "Hey, listen.
"You know what's owed.
"You know you're responsible for these children.
"Let's make it happen."
Bill, Bill, Kevin, Eric, Mayor Wharton has no intention of
paying the 57 million.
If they intended to pay it, it would be paid.
So lots of people have specualted that what the city
wants is for the city school system to fully disolve a
legalistic kind of timing where when it is fully disolved in the
middle of the summer, then they can pay the money to the new
school board.
You don't give any creedance to that thought?
Let me press that analogy a bit further,
my child support analogy.
and prays for is that he can
the kid to be 18 years old and
for the kid anymore.
That is the thought process.
And let's go a little bit bigger on this whole question.
It was these kind of fights about the funding that in many
ways led to this school merger in a roundabout way because it
was people on the school board and this is a little bit my
editorializing and summarizing a much more complicated situation.
But people on the school board who finally just said,
"I'm sick of fighting, that's it.
"Let's disolve the charter of the city schools and force this
merger."
And Tomeka Hart was on it.
And she was in the middle of that school board member,
unified school board member.
She was on the show some weeks ago and I asked her,
I mean, do you regret doing that?
Are you glad you did that?
And with the prospect and this gets complicated but the
prospect of the suburban schools breaking off again through
legislation thats moving through the legislature in Nashville,
do you regret doing it?
She said no because we've secured funding.
We've secured a broader base of funding across the county even
if in other words the city schools are the same group of
schools under the unified school board label.
The funding from her point of view was it's been secured and
it's not just the city of Memphis.
It's the whole county.
Does that make it worth it to you,
Kenneth Whalum?
No, let me point out a symmatic distinction that I think is very
important and that has been overlooked particularly by
mostly media.
Daily News has done an excellent job at balanced reporting,
at least the appearance of balanced.
What your major competitor, the Commercial Appeal did was
unfortunately they took a position in favor of merger
through all of the editorialziing.
Through all of their coverage they've for some reason decided
that it would be a good thing.
But the fiscal crisis led to surrender,
not to merger, Eric.
And it's a symmatic distinction.
It led to surrender.
Once we surrender, merger became impossible because merger is
only possible with two existing entities.
That's why there's been such a problem with this process
because we gave up our existance and then now we talk in terms of
merger.
It's impossible.
If we had wanted a merger or consolidation of systems,
the charter that we surrendered, Bill knows this,
the charter that we surrendered had provisions for a merger and
consolidation.
We could have negotiated this.
Kevin Woods, your take on that?
I mean, I don't know where you stood a couple of years ago when
this whole merger-consolidation-surrender
came up.
And has it been a good idea?
Has it been a terrible idea?
Well, you have to look at the prism in which you saw the
the media in which you saw a
be coming together.
with friends that work both in
the city and the county, you couldn't help but see that as
the positive opportunities when you say a county commssion
indicating that yeah, you'll be losing resources from the city
but you'll be gaining those same resources from the county.
Where now, you are talking about only a $5 million replacement of
a $60 million loss.
So when you start looking in hindsight,
I ran for a merged school system.
I was appointed to a merged board.
So, obviously I was hopeful and I remain hopeful because that
train has left the building.
But at the end of the day when you start seeing the political
nuiances and all the problems that come with this,
when if you just had adults in the room sitting down having a
conversation, what could you have accomplished for kids
through conversation instead of through the courts?
Bill?
So, if the County Commission had not chosen to pursue trying to
do you think we would be in a
now than where we are today?
I think if the County Commission wasn't involved in the lawsuit
would we be in a different place?
I mean, there's so many things that are out of our control as a
board.
I think that, you know, we were with merging the district.
I think the County Commission has gotten involved legally.
You have everything that's going on in Nashville.
I think all of that muddies the water as far as what our focus
should be on.
I think it's not a day that I don't have a conversation with a
constituent base asking me what's going on with the
municipal district or what's going on in the courts.
And there are 70 percent of our kids are being neglected through
that conversation because where are we academically?
What are the report card scores that came from the state?
What are we doing from that standpoint?
How are we performing in the classroom?
And that's really where I think our conversation should be
focused on.
If the County Commission hadn't got involved,
Bill, eventually adults would have controlled the outcome.
It was very unfortunate for the County Commission to involve
themselves as they did particularly with the voting
balance on the commission with the city representatives
controlling basically the outcome of the votes.
And it became obviously if you listen even to the conversation
on the commission, it became us versus them.
It became pay back.
It became petty.
And unfortunately, it has become very,
very unproductive.
We are almost at the end of the show.
Just 30 seconds left.
A real quick answer.
The County Commissions talking about a 13 member school board,
I believe, at this point.
Is that about the number that seems right?
Both of you talked about too big a board.
Is 13 minutes, 13 members the right size?
Whether it seems right to me is really inconsequential.
fulfillment of previously
on the County Commission said,
"Look, I'll appoint you."
to leave it there.
I'm not going to get you in.
I apologize.
thank you for joining us.
Thank you.
Thank you for joining us.
Join us again next week.
Goodnight.
♪♪♪