Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Committee Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Renaming committee reviews scoring process, research checks and timeline; two nominee verifications flagged
Summary
The Chavez renaming committee reviewed its scoring process, confidentiality rules and research workflow on July 15, and researcher Gail Martinson flagged two proposed names whose obituary records could not be verified; the facilitator said nominators will be contacted and legal staff may be consulted if verification fails.
Get email alerts on the Committee Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the July 15 meeting of the Madison Metropolitan School District Chavez school renaming committee, staff reviewed rules of engagement for scoring candidate names, explained how members would split into working groups, and reminded members of a July 20 scoring deadline.
Facilitator Chelsea Tubbs outlined the "11 ways of working," anchored the committee to Policy 6,700 for renamings, and explained that members may request additional research. She instructed members who had completed scoring to leave the meeting and encouraged anyone who needed help to remain for onboarding or request one-on-one support.
Gail Martinson, the committee's researcher, reported she could not verify obituary records for two nominees (Peter Munoz and Maria G. Banulos) using available public sources and asked the committee to confirm nominators' information. Tubbs said she would contact the nominators, copy Gail on follow-up, and, if verification proved inconclusive, consult legal counsel and the board secretary; she noted names might need to be removed if they could not be verified.
Members asked whether the district would be restricted to the four names the committee forwards. Tubbs said the committee refers up to four names under the older district policy (two of which must be deceased people of prominence) but the school and ultimately the board retain discretion under board procedures. The committee did not take any final votes; members moved to adjourn after the work-session instructions and left to complete scoring.

