Consultant tells Buffalo school board: 'The baton is the students' as training focuses on norms, agendas and committee clarity

Consultants leading a governance session told the Buffalo Board of Education that clear norms, protocols and shared agenda ownership are essential for focusing the board’s energy on student outcomes.

Rottney Thornton of the Council of Great City Schools opened a presentation with a short relay‑race video and used it to illustrate transitions of responsibility. "I thought of the baton as the students," Thornton said, urging members to pass institutional knowledge to new board members and to keep attention on student outcomes rather than internal disputes.

The presentation and discussion covered several recurring governance challenges: who sets the board agenda, how committees should be structured and described, the timing of board packets, and appropriate conduct when board members visit schools. Thornton and the coaching team recommended that the board adopt a compact set of norms (for example, depersonalizing disagreements, supporting majority decisions, and maintaining confidentiality when required) and clear protocols that specify how agenda items are proposed, who coordinates committee work and how external communications are handled.

Board members recounted past practice in which the superintendent’s office and clerks had taken a leading role in developing agendas, and several said they would like the board leadership to co‑design the agenda more explicitly with the superintendent going forward. Board member Rodriguez pressed for procedural clarity and warned against soliciting legal advice beyond the board’s counsel: "If we have legal questions, we should write them down and direct them to the right place," she said.

Coaches also proposed a 'policy/committee diet'—a focused review to streamline the policy manual and determine which committees are truly board work versus administrative tasks. Members asked for simple one‑pagers describing each committee’s purpose and membership requirements so volunteers and the public can more easily understand committee roles.

A hypothetical scenario about a board member visiting a school prompted a discussion of role confusion and legal risk. The coaches and several board members said protocols for school visits should be clear so a member acting as a parent does not unintentionally use board authority in a way that creates liability or undermines staff.

The session closed with a review of survey responses (six members participated) showing mixed awareness of agenda development and packet timing. Coaches promised to circulate slides, templates for norms and protocols, and a recommended next step plan for continued coaching.

The board agreed to continue the work in subsequent sessions and accepted coaches’ offers to provide materials and to help the board streamline policies and committees to better support student‑focused governance.