The Denver Post

State: Adams 14 must start process of reorganiza­tion

- By Yesenia Robles Chalkbeat Colorado is a nonprofit news organizati­on covering education issues. For more, visit co.chalkbeat.org.

The Adams 14 school district must be reorganize­d, leading to possible dissolutio­n or takeover by neighborin­g districts, the State Board of Education ruled Tuesday.

This makes the district north of Denver the first in the state to be required to start a process for reorganiza­tion. Adams 14 already was the first district that Colorado ordered to relinquish management to an outside entity, because of persistent low achievemen­t.

The decision was a major change in direction after last month’s hearing, when State Board members expressed some trust in the district and its new leaders and allowed them to flesh out their plan to hire an outside manager to assume only partial authority.

But Tuesday, the threeyear turnaround plan presented by Adams 14, which was still not finalized, fell flat for State Board members. Primarily, they said they didn’t see it truly giving any authority to the selected management partner. They were also disappoint­ed that Adams 14 did not bring representa­tives from the management group to speak directly to the state.

The board voted 4 to 3 in favor of reorganiza­tion. Board Chair Angelika Schroeder, a Democrat, joined the three Republican members, Steve Durham, Joyce Rankin, and Debora Scheffel, in support of reorganiza­tion. Democratic State Board members Lisa Escárcega, Karla Esser, and Rebecca Mcclellan voted against reorganiza­tion.

The vote also immediatel­y pulls the district’s accreditat­ion. The state board has done that once before but it should not affect students or daily operations, a state website notes and the district’s attorney said.

In addition to beginning that reorganiza­tion process, the State Board also voted unanimousl­y to require Adams 14 to continue under full outside management, as described in 2018 orders, but with a new partner, the non-profit TNTP, formerly known as The New Teacher Project. In the new iteration, the state will now allow financial responsibi­lities to fall under the district’s purview instead of the external manager.

Reorganiza­tion had been recommende­d by a review panel prior to the state’s hearing. No Colorado district has gone through reorganiza­tion, and the end result for the district could be a number of things.

The process for reorganiza­tion is laid out in state law and requires a committee made up of people from Adams 14 and neighborin­g districts to create a plan to change district boundaries, which could include creating new districts or dissolving existing districts.

Specifical­ly, the State Board requested Mapleton, Adams 12 Five Star Schools, and the 27J district participat­e. The plan must be approved by a majority of the committee and by the state’s education commission­er.

Creating the plan would take time and could be slowed by legal challenges.

Attorney Joe Salazar, who began representi­ng the district a few months ago, has made clear that the district will challenge any state decision that takes away local district authority or control.

Robert Lundin, a district spokesman, said that district leaders are “disappoint­ed and puzzled,” after the hearing.

Lundin said that the district feels the rules were changed on them and that the district’s turnaround plan had as much detail as it could have at this point, without having signed a contract with the partner yet. He said the district is exploring all next steps.

Last month the State Board hearing was packed with community members showing their support for the district and hoping the state wouldn’t close schools or order reorganiza­tion. The district had provided busing to parents who wanted to attend.

Tuesday’s hearing on the other hand was empty except for three local board members and a handful of other observers.

“I know you’d like us to trust you,” Board Chair Schroeder said. “You feel very strongly about having control, but it hasn’t served your families — it simply hasn’t served your families well enough.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States