[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6627885,"mediaKeyId","2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627","parentId",2723114,"title","LRSD board debates grievance-appeal guidance and public-comment rules; proposed resolution to be revised","audioSeconds",2220,"startMs",8676000,"endMs",10896000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627&start=8676&end=10896","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627/thumbnail_8676000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6627885/Arkansas/LRSD-board-debates-grievance-appeal-guidance-and-public-comment-rules-proposed-resolution-to-be-revised","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6627885-df3c83b2579ed8d151bc5576cefa64e9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157142&Signature=bsBZ-II3BjBo2AS3ZAdP0b3cHD-WHy0ClHrbisvH5BjFnKYmKpYoBclXmGbrcW0rZhCCBh1pO922k3~cMTuIL4zRYdGt2fgFfvdgkJ8p~Fvq6ZeoI4ZFdX15a-8FV23Eaea3hKRqJ1EkUvztHTPSTA0U6BYAjMLsyd0mngpNo~cspLydUlEz9xXW7RCXII9e-6tRZsRpVYsX2g5LYjGTRGXrgWiFKUH3vcr99tl5-EmQs5IVJWbBRdyiEqGTX4BLpeUx6j6scpdmJDyp1Nc2Il66myPA8MJ1Uy~laAZdSIL0nZisZ-jpRMbUzMdWLd1NAo6KfVkAnqjMiTyglNab8A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT","date","2025-03-21T02:43:54.863Z","article","The Little Rock School District Board of Directors devoted a lengthy portion of Thursday's meeting to two related governance topics: a draft, nonbinding resolution proposed by Director Strong that seeks to clarify which employee grievances the board will hear, and a broader conversation about limits, timing and decorum for public comment at board meetings.

Director Strong said the draft resolution is intended to give employees clearer guidance about when the board will accept grievance appeals for discharge or nonrenewal decisions. In the draft, the board would hear grievances that concern \"specific factual allegations of consequential procedural failings in the hiring or dismissal processes\" or \"substantive allegations of illegal discrimination.\" The draft also says grievances limited to a change of placement (rather than loss of a district position) would be deferred to the superintendent's administrative authority and would not be heard by the board.

Board Attorney Chris Kazei explained that state statutes and board policy govern grievance procedures and cautioned against adopting a rule that the board could not legally follow. \"Typically, policies and statutes govern what the board does,\" Kazei said. He told members the board retains authority to set how it conducts business, but asked that the proposed language be reviewed carefully for legal effect.

Several board members said they supported giving employees clearer guidance, but others warned the proposed text was rushed into the agenda and requested more time for the policy and for input from the certified and classified personnel policy committees (PPCs). Director Strong said she would send a revised draft to legal counsel and the board and encouraged members to send comments so the resolution could be discussed at a work session.

Separately, a long round of comments and debate focused on public-comment rules. Directors disagreed about time limits and whether to cap total public-comment time each meeting. Some argued that three minutes per speaker with an allowance to finish an interrupted sentence has worked well; others said imposing tight overall time caps could chill public participation. Board members discussed signage at the sign-up desk, civility standards (no threats, no incitement) and consistent enforcement. No policy changes were adopted at the meeting.

Why it matters: The resolution would not create a new statute but would provide public guidance about when the board is prepared to hear employment-related appeals. Clarity affects employees' rights and the board's ability to manage large numbers of grievances in a timely way.

What's next: Director Strong said she will send revisions suggested during the meeting to counsel and reconvene the discussion at an upcoming work session; staff and PPC representatives expressed interest in participating in that process.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board Meeting - Mar 20 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Board members spent significant time reviewing a draft nonbinding resolution that would limit board hearing of grievances to appeals alleging procedural failings in nonrenewal decisions or illegal discrimination, and engaged in a separate, extended discussion about public-comment time limits and decorum.","taxTitle","LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, School Districts, Arkansas","taxId",13594,"location","Arkansas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6627889,"LRSD declares former MediCliff building at 25 Sheraton Drive excess, approves listing for sale",213,5963000,6176000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627&start=5963&end=6176","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627/thumbnail_5963000.jpg","/articles/6627889/Arkansas/LRSD-declares-former-MediCliff-building-at-25-Sheraton-Drive-excess-approves-listing-for-sale","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6627889-2f3d84f73e0ec9d1fbd5ef413da8d0fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157142&Signature=juCuEKIrCwUJ9pbzla3UFpwF0J~JNGoIBGenCvZITlyx6hy7WGfeR2GHNBUbkMZ3Sx3rQoXHMXBa6sWd7HGagaN5ypElC8oE4HYbB6lFdD9WjwnCB8OTF9Deded~SZq2QuTsoajtp1efHF7IJ3jjmDOmc~EBWHU9wu64FsBATHN7SVeBtjcPrwtafP67QaiR5sRQIVaFlw-HsGF1P5GCsaK9esIe7mu9vLp8bG0bF0E2TtMwwW~yBy5t4zksy-ed7QwcUe4edNq42ct0GOnPAKEeWAbR6F51njBC47wDT5yuXsBB6eqFBn8yTn98rmOXFlYwvqMxz7puWHlyNnfFZw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock School District Board of Directors on Thursday declared as excess the district-owned property at 25 Sheraton Drive (often referred to in the meeting as the former MediCliff site) and approved listing the parcel for sale.

District staff said the property has been vacant for an extended period and has experienced vandalism and damage since it was boarded up. Administrators provided the board with an independent appraisal attached to the meeting packet that valued the property at $530,000.

Board members discussed condition and comps. Facilities and real-estate staff told the board they had not received a serious offer in the two years required by district procedure for first-right-of-refusal notice to charter operators and other public entities, and that the property had not generated firm proposals during that time.

The board approved the motion to declare the property excess and to list it for sale; staff said they would return later with a sales resolution and recommended terms once a buyer is identified and negotiations conclude.

Why it matters: Vacant, boarded district properties create security and maintenance costs; listing the parcel aims to remove the ongoing burden from district operations and return proceeds to district funds.

What's next: Administration will proceed to list the property for sale and will bring a formal resolution and sale terms to the board when a buyer is identified.

","The Little Rock School District board declared a vacant property at 25 Sheraton Drive excess and approved listing it for sale; the district included an independent appraisal of $530,000 in the packet and said the building has been boarded and damaged while vacant.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6627894,"LRSD approves guaranteed maximum prices for Central High baseball field and Parkview auditorium renovations",1590,4291000,5881000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627&start=4291&end=5881","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627/thumbnail_4291000.jpg","/articles/6627894/Arkansas/LRSD-approves-guaranteed-maximum-prices-for-Central-High-baseball-field-and-Parkview-auditorium-renovations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6627894-58d4939b6f0dc8594a5a8b2333232195/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157142&Signature=kUi5~5zuPKPRgJYt-4vtFArgIenD6D7jD7vlS5Ypjog0QYwf6ikNS6I0fvmvU5egTres9rnzU~Itg8nBw80248oLlUFofpWjhujQx3myRecgqa~mdewBM0OQXNyhrPahqANU9WvKJlHqqEhLH-DVKSRPql~way0rUyFpecLDRTHIFqXgj5gPS5ewevIhAP52feVETs10SIBXx6FKJtyQs0Hm0HWD6CkGI3GOZKWSPuGHhxa7qm9FANp2N3Curle2kVGukWX0haarf3AE0cMuwiFjXKNO7pPWGnEWjC5ymEtaigE5hfrM1qKmBWnwh3U2MPXqfRMl2Bsu1CENW6u5bg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock School District Board of Directors approved guaranteed maximum price proposals for two capital projects at Thursday's meeting: the Central High School baseball field and stadium upgrades, and the Parkview Arts & Science Magnet High School auditorium renovation.

Architect Sarah Bennings of Polk Stanley Wilcox, presenting the Central High scope, said the work completes the campus bond program at Central. The project includes replacement of the natural field with artificial turf, refreshed grandstands and press box, new home and visitor dugouts and concession stand, covered batting cages, new field lighting and a scoreboard. Bennings described the baseball field as \"the last phase\" of work on that campus and said the turf and lighting decisions were intended to reduce maintenance and improve scheduling.

The board also approved a guaranteed maximum price for Parkview's auditorium renovation. Lance Wright, senior project manager with Kinko Constructors, said the Parkview work includes a full replacement of the stage rigging, new theatrical and house LED lighting, new audio-visual systems, improved ADA access from the house to the stage, circulation improvements, and lobby and exterior aesthetic upgrades. Wright said the Parkview contract price came in at roughly $6.0 million.

Board members asked about tariffs, international sourcing and allowances for materials amid concerns about cost escalation. A contractor representative said manufacturers had guaranteed prices for ordered materials for a set period and that allowances were included in the GMP. Project staff said the GMP structure funnels savings back to the district and that the schedule calls for construction activity starting over the summer with completion timed to limit disruption to school operations.

Actions: The board voted to authorize administration to proceed with the guaranteed maximum price proposals for the Central High baseball field and stadium upgrades and for the Parkview auditorium renovation.

Why it matters: Both projects are part of ongoing campus improvements tied to the district's bond program and are intended to modernize facilities used for athletics and the performing arts. Directors said the Parkview work supports fine arts instruction and gives students real-world technical experience.

What's next: Administration will issue notices to proceed and begin contractor mobilization. Staff said the Central baseball field is scheduled to be ready for the 2026 season; Parkview work was scheduled to start over summer break with an estimated multi-month construction period and a GMP reported in the meeting at about $6,000,008.

","The school board authorized administration to proceed with guaranteed maximum price proposals for a new artificial-turf baseball field and stadium upgrades at Central High School and a multi-million-dollar renovation of Parkview Arts & Science Magnet High School's auditorium.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6627899,"LRSD board tables $709,650 vendor contract after members raise termination and exclusivity concerns",1106,2858000,3964000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627&start=2858&end=3964","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2723114-c9e80e4863c1e19e5b21842455d59627/thumbnail_2858000.jpg","/articles/6627899/Arkansas/LRSD-board-tables-709650-vendor-contract-after-members-raise-termination-and-exclusivity-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6627899-b8c344f57c23bf3f63a9212c61edf58b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157142&Signature=UuRfDNIXByPVsz9NFI4qtQ46fYuFsJ6IV4HOqk9Kef99tzP1tXCVX9KTNv8Jx3HcEFQZEM~Mr6wbUQFUuN1WAcyt2cEcPu35M9WULxliVRxO9A5i4Uw3-1aApBrM9MH2SMnUYCpvp0nTPB6EaDynLRUR2mMy1SjFRLNhHlhj19lcNDvfeLtOZKshTXWlHLjAYSf4u00SV1QZFMPFQXpWYPVzmTb1eaPKnM0C9kY0Ib0bsPRNsvP6XjugEruoAgdvmllCoi157PsruPp9nVjZKcn5zCYE6il7Fv4DJ7h2mWoekoFITW6jJgEqWH6~-NAGn~TaX5~4mLm8r2H8y3wWCw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock School District Board of Directors on Thursday tabled a proposed three-year vendor agreement — described on the agenda as the IRA partnership proposal with Aubrey (agenda item 5.7) — after members raised concerns about contract language that would limit the district's ability to replace the service and about the process used to present the item.

Board members pressed administration for more detail on the price and termination terms. A board member said the contract cost was $236,550 annually, for a three-year total of $709,650, and noted the agreement would be billed annually. Board members also said the draft contract included a clause that prohibited the district from acquiring \"replacement software or services that are the same or similar\" if the district terminated for budget reasons.

The concern prompted the board to pull the item from the consent agenda for discussion and then move to table action until the district receives a revised contract. A motion to table the item passed by voice vote.

Board members said the lack of clear, written language on those points made them uncomfortable approving the agreement immediately. One director said the termination clause'which the board discussed in detail'read, in part, that \"neither party may terminate this agreement without cause,\" a limitation some directors said would be risky for the district if finances worsened.

Board Attorney Chris Kazei, speaking during the discussion, described the vendor-supplied terms as firm. \"Those terms and conditions are what they are,\" Kazei said, adding the district had negotiated procurement participation through ESC 19 to validate the purchase process. The board's procurement and legal staff also told directors that state procurement laws apply to the purchase.

During the meeting a staff member reported that the vendor had agreed to remove the clause that would prevent the district from buying another similar program in the event the district sought to terminate for budgetary reasons; directors asked that any such change be provided in writing before they consider final approval.

Outcome: After extended discussion, the board voted to table item 5.7. Members asked administration to return with a revised contract showing the agreed changes, full cost breakout and clarified termination language before board reconsideration.

Why it matters: The contract would have been a multi-year commitment of taxpayer dollars at a time district leaders said they are closely monitoring expenditures. Directors said they wanted written assurances that the district could exit for legitimate budget reasons without being blocked from procuring alternatives.

What's next: Administration said it will return a revised agreement and that the vendor had indicated willingness to remove the disputed \"cannot purchase similar software\" language. The board did not set a date for reconsideration.

","Little Rock School District board on Thursday voted to table a proposed three-year agreement (item 5.7) for a new vendor service after members questioned a termination-for-budget clause and a provision that would bar the district from buying a replacement product if it ended the contract for budget reasons.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

LRSD board debates grievance-appeal guidance and public-comment rules; proposed resolution to be revised

LRSD declares former MediCliff building at 25 Sheraton Drive excess, approves listing for sale

LRSD approves guaranteed maximum prices for Central High baseball field and Parkview auditorium renovations

LRSD board tables $709,650 vendor contract after members raise termination and exclusivity concerns