Google It, Coin Flip, & Business First

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”

George Santayana Spanish Philosopher

Selecting A New Trustee

With the recent resignation of Rochester Community Schools (RCS)  Board of Education (BOE) Trustee Andrea Walker-Leidy, the BOE will have the opportunity to select a new Trustee.   The process for filling seats outside of an election is not new to the RCS BOE. That is because the board prior to Walker-Leidy’s resignation was made up of five of seven members that were initially appointed/selected to their seats as opposed to being elected.  Which is relevant when put into the context that no incumbent has lost reelection going back to 2009, and when appointed they are an incumbent in the next election.   

One would think, with four of the members having gone through the selection process, that the one in 2019 would be routine or have a well established process at minimum.  However, during the 26 minutes of discussion for this particular appointment, it is hard to tell what criteria each of the trustees are using or if any of them have ever been responsible for making a hiring decision previously. 

Why is the Scott Muska Selection Concerning?

1. Multiple trustees used information they found via Google to base their decision on.  Which excluded the other trustees and the community from having access to the same information.  
2. Multiple trustees made it seem as if the two candidates at the time were very similar, even going as far as saying it was a coin flip decision.  There were very clear differences between the two candidates.     
3. Furthering business relationship development is the priority for the BOE and the Superintendent.   

Google It

In the selection discussion, VP Kevin Beers claims that Scott Muska was called in to moderate between the Milwaukee Police and a Milwaukee Bucks player after he was wrongly identified and treated poorly.  This event is what Beers states is why he is ever so slightly in favor of Muska to fill the vacated seat on the board.   

How did Beers learn about Muska’s involvement in Milwaukee?  It was not asked about during the interview, it was not in the applications packet that Muska filled out, and it cannot be found on google as Bull said she learned about it.

Issues

1. Beers knew this was a questionable topic.  That is why he did not bring it up until he was asked why he was leaning towards Muska.
2. Beers only provided more details once BOE President Bull said “I think that was mentioned in his application packet.”
3. Only it was not in Muska’s application packet and when Trustee Michelle Buetlel asked for more information Bull stated “it could have been found on a quick google search of Scott maybe that is where I found it.”
4. When Scott Muska is googled there is nothing about the incident in Milwaukee.  If Milwaukee is added to Scott Muska and searched there is still nothing related to the incident between the NBA player and the police.
5. If the search is of Milwaukee Bucks player wrong arrested there are many items that come up. None of them mention Scott Muska.

So, how did Beers know about Milwaukee?  Is the Milwaukee story fabricated? If it was an integral part of his selection, why would it not be mentioned in his application packet or discussed during the interview process?

Beers was not the only Trustee to rely on google.  Bull in her explanation for supporting Muska cites his business acumen and spinning off a company from one of the largest in Detroit, which she learned about from Google.  Why again would this have not been asked about during the interview?

Coin Flip

Throughout the meeting the trustees referred to the decision being a coin flip five times. There were five other references to candidates being the same or very similar.  Let’s break down what the real differences were between the candidates based on the comments from the Trustees. 

For the Trustees to pretend that there was not a clear difference between these two candidates is just disingenuous.  The difference was clear and that is why Buetlel and Trustee Barbara Anness were voting for Mark until they gave in to Bull’s need for a unanimous vote.  What difference does 6-0 or 4-2 vote make? Had the vote been 4-2 Muska would still have been selected, and Buetlel and Anness would still have some credibility.  

Business First

Bull made it clear from the start she was in favor of Muska and was clear why when she said “you all know me and know one of my goals is building relationships in the business community, It is so important and something we tasked Dr. Shaner with and I think Scott could help us with that tremendously tremendously. His contacts are super valuable.”   

When did business networking become the primary role of the district’s board of education? While businesses can provide some support for student learning, should their primary focus not be on ensuring that we are providing all students with the best possible education? 

Is the business focus why the district opened a daycare that is struggling to stay out of the red?  

Is this why the district took on building and launching a “full” virtual campus in a few short months during a time in which the resources should have been used to make sound educational decisions for the students the district is entrusted to educate?  

When has the district reached out to the community and expressed the desire to build these business relationships? Did they ask parents and professionals within the community to volunteer their services for the benefit of the students? 

When did the district stop being a “community” school?

What Needs to be Different in 2021?

With the selection of Muska it revealed two essential pieces of knowledge to the community:

The district seemed to be shifting their focus to building business relationships and away from student learning. 

That there is a lack of transparency between the BOE and the larger community alongside inconsistent selection practices- which in combination are concerning. 

For this selection, each Trustee needs to state clearly and cite specific reasons for why they voted for a candidate.  Each of their reasons need to either be in the application or covered in the interview (both are accessible by the community). Trustees need to vote on principle and not worry about a unanimous vote.  Trustees need to judge the candidates based on their character, experience, and the best interest of the families and students which they serve.