Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Training Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees terminate Council of Great City Schools contract after pause in work; only initial invoices paid
Summary
After a pause in the district’s governance training contract, trustees voted 7-0 to terminate the Council of Great City Schools agreement. The council said it had completed a board kickoff and a draft implementation plan; district staff confirmed $60,000 in fees and $4,233.50 in travel expenses had been billed.
The CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Trustees voted 7-0 on Jan. 23 to terminate the district’s contract with the Council of Great City Schools.
Background: The council’s professional services agreement was approved by the former board in fall 2023 with a multi-year engagement and an initial $60,000 fee for governance support. Council coaches conducted a January 2024 kickoff and produced an implementation plan that included community listening as a next step. After leadership turnover at the district and pauses in the board’s engagement, the council’s planned next steps were not executed.
Ben Mackey, a coach with the Council of Great City Schools, told trustees the organization had interviewed trustees and drafted an implementation plan and that the council’s work had not proceeded beyond initial training and planning once the board chose to pause. Mr. Mackey said the council is “happy to answer any questions about that.”
District finance staff confirmed the financial picture. Joe Caruso, deputy/chief counsel for the district, said the council invoiced an initial $60,000 for the professional services agreement; travel expenses for two council staff totaled $4,233.50, bringing the total invoiced so far to $64,233.50. Caruso also said an earlier, separate training that involved a former trustee and a district staff member was arranged independently and was not billed under this contract; staff will follow up with additional records.
Trustee discussion centered on whether the board wants to continue with the council’s governance coaching or instead proceed with internal governance training tied more directly to the board’s adopted policies. Trustee Baron moved to terminate the contract; another trustee seconded. The motion passed 7-0.
What this means: With the termination, the district will not continue the council’s multi-year governance coaching under that agreement; the district has paid the initial invoice and travel costs and staff said there would be no further invoices under the contract. The board may seek alternative governance training or adopt other training and development practices internally.
Ending: Trustees who voted to end the agreement said they favored moving quickly to create a consistent governance training approach that aligns with the district’s needs and the board’s policy choices.
