Newton County board tables summer-school contract after members surface conflicting price figures
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Board members questioned whether the contract for the National Summer School Initiative should be for $72,000 (budgeted) or $66,000 (contract math). After debate over per-student pricing and program outcomes, the motion failed and the board voted to table the item until Jan. 13, 2026.
The Newton County Board of Education on Tuesday tabled action on a proposed summer-school contract after trustees flagged an inconsistent dollar figure in the paperwork and asked for additional data on program outcomes.
Superintendent-designee remarks introducing item 13 a recommended a contract with the National Summer School Initiative for a structured summer program, saying the district had budgeted up to $72,000 for the program. Board members, however, pointed to the contract language and arithmetic showing 550 students at $120 per student — a total of $66,000 — and asked which figure the board was being asked to approve.
"The motion on the floor is for the contract price of $72,000, and the contract is $66,000," said a trustee during discussion, citing the contract pages shown to the board. Doctor Mike Barr (presentation lead on capital items but answering budget/process questions during the item) said the per-student rate remains $120 and the district budgeted for up to $72,000 to cover enrollment variability, but acknowledged the document needed clarification.
Trustees also pressed for evidence of academic impact after the program's initial year. The district said summer participation last year produced average gains of about 9 percentage points in English language arts and about 25 percentage points in math on pre/post tests for participants and that staff will continue to track participating students' milestone results and I-Ready growth this school year.
Because the motion was presented with inconsistent contract figures, the board first voted the recommendation down as presented and then approved a motion to table the item for reconsideration. The board set the item to return to the January 13, 2026 meeting.
Next steps: The superintendent's office said it will reconcile the contract pages and budget figures and return with a corrected recommendation in January.
(Reporting note: quotes and attributions are taken from the meeting transcript.)