The SLPS Consent Agenda: May 2024
School board meetings have a lot going on. There are a bunch of presentations, seemingly endless questions, a rotating cast of characters, and a public comment section that often feels more like an audition for a new reality show than a component of democracy. Yet, these meetings are critical for the overall health of our school district, our City, and our society in general.
School board members are prolific policy makers whose decisions influence curriculum, real estate, employment practices, community partnerships, and more. They also lead the way during times of crisis or uncertainty. Integration, desegregation, child meals, immunizations, and the Covid-19 all serve as historical examples. The actions (and inactions) of the school board extend far beyond students and classrooms reaching nearly everyone in the community.
If the local school board serves a critical purpose in a democratic society, then school board meetings are where we see that mission carried out. These meetings are the only place where board members conduct official business AND the only place where the public can see that official business in action. School board members, including the president, do not have individual authority or autonomy in the way other elected officials, such as the Board of Aldermen or state representatives, do. Therefore, a school board member’s most important job is to attend, prepare for, and fully-participate in school board meetings.
But school board meetings are still government meetings, meaning they operate according to Robert’s Rules of Order which can seem pretentious and inaccessible to the average viewer. Board members may also reference documents or agenda items by number without referencing the topic making the discussion and votes hard to follow. However, when the administration is functioning well much of the information board members receive is readily available to the public. The purpose of this post is to demystify the process of accessing and understanding SLPS school board meeting documents to allow for more public awareness of the decision-making process. I will walk you through the May consent agenda calling attention to specific contracts/MOUs that may be of public interest.
For background information on SLPS school board meetings and how to access Board of Education documents, please read SLPS Board Meetings 101.
The May Consent Agenda can be found in BoardDocs as part of the April work session which can be viewed in its entirety on YouTube. The April work session also included internal board officer elections where Toni Cousins and Matt Davis were re-elected as President and Vice President of the Board. By board policy, these internal elections happen every April to provide an opportunity for the Board to consider its leadership and direction. The President’s official duties include presiding over meetings, preserving order, enforcing rules, signing legal documents as ordered by a vote of the board, and making committee appointments. The Vice President’s only responsibility is to perform the duties of President when she is absent or if the office becomes vacant.
The consent agenda includes all the contracts, memorandums of understanding (MOU), policies, and other agreements the board will be voting on. In general, contracts are agreements SLPS pays for (e.g., food service, transportation, consulting) while MOUs are at no cost (e.g., community wrap-around services). Both contracts and MOUs outline the responsibilities and requirements of SLPS and the vendor/partner. All agreements should be initiated by district administrators and/or the superintendent with final approval given by the Board of Education (except for items under the superintendent’s threshold — $5,000 for goods/products and $50,000 for services). District policies and procedure outline the current procurement process and are intended to ensure transparency about how public tax dollars are allocated and to reduce potential conflicts of interest. The district may issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) when it cannot fully describe the scope of work required to fill a district need. Ideally, these result in multiple vendors/partners submitting a scope of work and associated budget which are then scored by administrators. The district also outlines a process for sole source purchases which are goods or services where only one vendor exists.
The May consent agenda items are not numbered yet. I would anticipate that they will receive numbers prior to the May board meeting when the items are up for a vote. There are more than seventy items on this agenda, so I will only highlight those that are most relevant and/or need the most public scrutiny. For reference, the district’s 2023-24 budget exceeded $400 million. However, the April 2024 Financial Update indicates the administration is considering “planned deficit spending” due at least in part to the end of pandemic relief funds.
Zspace ($5 million, new) - Zspace is a company which provides virtual and augmented reality devices. Representatives from the company presented at the work session and demoed devices to board members. The consent agenda item states that “some students are not eager to learn science in traditional setting and because this generation is a technology-driven generation, these devices . . . have the potential to help engage students develop a love for science.”
The RFP shows that that only two companies (Zspace and Perma-Bound Books/Hertzberg-New Method) responded. Perma-Bound stated “Thank you for this opportunity, but this is not in our product line. Please consider us for future opportunities.”
From the pricing quote:
The contract will create 4 mobile middle school labs each with 25 devices (~$500,000) and 29 high school labs each with 25 devices (~$4 million).
Annual software renewals are estimated at $64,220 for middle school and $976,000 for high school.
Comprehensive technical and professional learning services will cost $425,500 for one year and upon renewal.
Edusolve, LLC ($69,000, amendment), Education Partners ($45,000, new), SMJ Communications ($62,000, amendment) - These are relatively small dollar consulting contracts. I’m pulling them out because there is no indication in BoardDocs they went out to bid or followed the RFP process. The sole source request form states “SLPS policy requires that competitive bids be obtained by procurement for goods greater than $5,000 and for services greater than $50,000.” Edusolve and SMJ Communications are listed as amendments so likely the contract was initially issued for less than $50,000.
Beable Education, Inc. ($1.7 million, new) - This is a three-year sole source contract for “individualized digital services.” The sole source request form indicates “Beable is the sole source provider of digital resources that use the RIASEC Career Indicator Survey to assess and customize virtual literacy and career building experiences geared toward the scholar’s career choice.” It is to be funded by ESSER.
St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department ($49,500, new) - To the best of my knowledge, this would be the first financial contract between SLPS and SLMPD. It covers approximately 6-weeks (May 15, 2024 to June 30, 2024). Contract scope and sequence indicates “programming will be performed by off-duty officers who will be compensated at their respective overtime rates for the hours they provide services for SLPS schools and students.” Specific programs include Eddie Eagle GunSafe program, Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.), and Students Talking it Over with Police (S.T.O.P.). Lt. Col. Ryan O. Cousins is listed as the contact person for SLMPD.
Scholastic, Inc. ($4.3 million, new) - This contract is tied to the Lit for the Lou initiative the district launched earlier this year. “The purchase includes curated books, bookcases for each classroom, software literacy data management system, professional learning for teachers and other educators, delivery of books to classrooms and labelling of all books.”
Weatherproofing Technology Inc. ($19.1 million, new) - This proposal is funded by Prop S dollars. There are cost proposals for roofing at 11 schools and tuck pointing at three schools. Roofing project costs range from $350,000 at Des Peres to nearly $4 million at Beaumont. “Schools were selected to address safety and infrastructure needs as most of the projects have reached the life expectancy of the roof system.” There is no indication if/how this selection process was connected to the facilities master plan discussed at the Monday April 29 Real Estate Committee Meeting or earlier Prop S Committee meetings (March 14, 2024, December 7, 2023).
Hankins Construction ($2.7 million, new), Bex Construction ($1.7 million, new), A. Eilers ($2.2 million, new), TBD ($500,000, new) - These contracts are for restroom renovation and/or repair at approximately ten schools. These projects are also funded by Prop S dollars. Schools were selected due to having “outdated restrooms that are not ADA compliant,” “current restrooms that are in need of repairs to the ventilation and miscellaneous cosmetic repairs to operate functionally,” or “ outdated restrooms that are in need of repairs.” As with the Weatherproofing Technology, Inc proposal, it is not clear if the selection of these projects was connected to the facilities master plan that is in progress.
TBD (Food Service) and TBD (Transportation Services) - Notably, the district is currently in the middle of an RFP process for both food services and transportation services. While there no company names are included on the consent agenda yet, the presence of these items indicate the Board may discuss or vote on vendors at the May Board Meeting on May 14.
Wright & Associates ($600,000, amended from December 2023) - The original contract with Wright & Associates was for $450,000 to address “several challenges with stakeholders’ experience with procurement from the RFP process to vendor payment.” It did not follow an RFP process and was instead selected as a sole source contract due to “emergency” need with the district stating “work to improve the procurement process must begin immediately to ensure we quickly and effectively remedy our procurement system within the district.” The amendment includes adding additional areas including partner alignment, project management, project oversight, and executive coaching and support for the Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff. The Wright & Associates team presented an update on their initial work at the March work session. The provided team bio indicates Charles Wright, Jr. previously served as Deputy Superintendent of Seattle Public Schools and Chief Strategy Officer for Denver Public Schools in addition to positions at education foundations.
The school district contracts and partners with countless community organizations, companies, non-profits, and consultants. Only a fraction are able to receive a dedicated presentation during a board meeting. This means that monitoring the board’s consent agenda is the most direct way to track where district funds are going, what processes are being followed (or not followed), and what types of work are being done in classrooms and on school buildings. Reading through all the documents can be tedious and time consuming, it’s essentially a scavenger hunt to collect all the details that tell the whole story, but it’s one that I think is vitally important to the overall health of the school district. By explaining this aspect of school board governance to a broad audience, I hope to engage more citizens in the democratic processes of the SLPS school board, clarify the role of school board members, and make school district operations easier to understand. If you have questions about the consent agenda, the process by which it is created, or the role of school board members, the board president, or the superintendent, please contact me at cityreformstl@gmail.com. Thanks for reading!