Superintendent outlines reorganization of district offices; board asks for details and phased rollout

Superintendent Dr. Grant presented a district reorganization proposal on Jan. 21 that would reorganize several central-office functions to align supports more directly with principals and classroom instruction. The board discussed the proposal and asked for clarifying job descriptions, implementation phases and more community and staff input before final approval.

Dr. Grant said the reorganization is intended to increase coherence and ensure that accountability and support are linked for school leaders. Major elements in the plan included moving the office of educational equity and access, student services and counseling (including nursing and McKinney-Vento supports), and multi-tiered systems of support/social-emotional learning into a re-titled School Leadership and Support department; moving special education and 504 services into the Teaching and Learning department; and creating a chief-of-staff position (reclassifying an open associate-superintendent slot) to focus on implementation and project management.

Dr. Grant said the changes were meant to reduce silos, bring equity work directly into the principal-support structure, and provide clearer lines for school-based supports such as counselors, attendance teams and behavior specialists. In the presentation Dr. Grant said a director-level position for educational equity and a preventive-services framing for MTSS/SEL were under consideration; translation services would move to community relations; school resource officers (SROs) would report directly to the executive director for school leadership because of the school-safety work now required by recent legislation.

Board members asked questions about the practical impact on students and classrooms, the comparison between a chief of staff and an associate superintendent, and whether raising some office-level supervision would increase central-office administrative head count rather than shifting resources to schools. Board Member Ashley Anderson said her top concern was whether the reorganization would deliver direct classroom benefits and whether modest projected savings (about 1.5 FTE reported in the presentation) were sufficient to redirect funds to school staffing. Board Member Bryce Williams and others asked for formal job descriptions and for clear succession planning language if the board approves a chief-of-staff role.

Several board members encouraged broader staff and community engagement before a final vote: members asked for written job descriptions for the proposed chief-of-staff/associate-superintendent role, a phased rollout plan and additional opportunity for principals and teachers to comment. Dr. Grant said she had briefed executive leaders and would solicit additional feedback; she said the proposal was intended to be brought back to the board at a future meeting for further deliberation.

Ending: The board did not vote to adopt the reorganization at the Jan. 21 meeting; members asked for job descriptions, implementation timing, and expanded staff and community input. Dr. Grant said she would provide additional materials and that the issue would appear again on a future agenda for further board consideration.