Because the most important substance of Wednesday's Shelby County Schools board meeting concerned what was said -- or, more to the point, what wasn't said -- about the federal judge ruling the seven-person board "unconstitutional," we only gave passing mention to Supt. John Aitken pushing back against Memphis City Schools charges of dithering.
The important news regards how SCS will respond to U.S. Dist. Court Judge Samuel 'Hardy' Mays's determination that Memphis representation is required on the now all-suburban Shelby County Board of Education. Whether SCS or MCS could have or should have shown more diligence in sharing information is secondary, at most. Basically, MCS Supt. Kriner Cash said Monday night that once SCS filed its lawsuit in February, the suburban system's initial efforts to cooperate with ironing out consolidation logistics ceased. On Wednesday, Aitken fired back with examples of official information requests from January and into early February that he said yielded no response.
MCS chief legal counsel Dorsey Hopson responded Wednesday with a copy of a response to SCS that stated the system would be unable to meet the comprehensive information requests in seven days. Here's Hopson:
That, of course, will be up to the judge, who has directed all parties to submit proposals to remedy the unconstitutionality of the county board. County Commission seems poised to present their backup plan of a seven-member board of edcuation, where four districts are all Memphis, two are all non-Memphis and one is a mix, but with a majority of Memphis voters -- for a likely 5-2 Memphis majority on the board.
As my story this morning points out, nobody at SCS was giving any hints at what it might propose, with Pickler mostly emphasizing he's still negotiating. SCS is not saying if it's appealing, but it is sure not saying it will NOT appeal.
The important news regards how SCS will respond to U.S. Dist. Court Judge Samuel 'Hardy' Mays's determination that Memphis representation is required on the now all-suburban Shelby County Board of Education. Whether SCS or MCS could have or should have shown more diligence in sharing information is secondary, at most. Basically, MCS Supt. Kriner Cash said Monday night that once SCS filed its lawsuit in February, the suburban system's initial efforts to cooperate with ironing out consolidation logistics ceased. On Wednesday, Aitken fired back with examples of official information requests from January and into early February that he said yielded no response.
MCS chief legal counsel Dorsey Hopson responded Wednesday with a copy of a response to SCS that stated the system would be unable to meet the comprehensive information requests in seven days. Here's Hopson:
"We met with SCS several times and also informed them that we were working on their last request. Several days after notifying them that we were working on the request, they filed suit."At Wednesday's SCS board meeting, chairman David Pickler read into the record a long list of requests for information and access to MCS's inner workings, including a forensic audit. I was sitting near an MCS board member and staff member, and they shared an exchange that was mixed with astonishment and bemusement. Paraphrasing their conclusion: "Do they not realize this is irrelevant? The judge says they are unconstitutional. They don't have the authority."
That, of course, will be up to the judge, who has directed all parties to submit proposals to remedy the unconstitutionality of the county board. County Commission seems poised to present their backup plan of a seven-member board of edcuation, where four districts are all Memphis, two are all non-Memphis and one is a mix, but with a majority of Memphis voters -- for a likely 5-2 Memphis majority on the board.
As my story this morning points out, nobody at SCS was giving any hints at what it might propose, with Pickler mostly emphasizing he's still negotiating. SCS is not saying if it's appealing, but it is sure not saying it will NOT appeal.
Leave a comment