Get email alerts on the Consent Agenda topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves broad consent agenda; Vice President Moniz objects to Exact Path amendment
Summary
The Tulsa Public Schools Board approved a slate of consent items by 6-1; Vice President Calvin Moniz voted Nay on item E.22 to increase Edmentum Exact Path funding by $135,000 to extend grades 6–8 licenses through FY2027.
Get email alerts on the Consent Agenda topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board approved the consent agenda on a 6-1 vote after a motion from John Croisant and a second from Kyra Carby. The recorded vote listed Stacey Woolley, John Croisant, Susan Lamkin, Kyra Carby, Sarah Smith, and Connie Dodson voting Aye and Vice President Calvin Moniz voting Nay on one consent item (E.22).
Item E.22 amends a prior approval for Edmentum Exact Path to increase the total cost by $135,000 in order to extend grades 6–8 licenses through the 2026–27 fiscal year. The amendment was included on the consent agenda, which otherwise covered dozens of routine contracts, renewals, MOUs, and purchases across departments including agreements with Discovery Lab LLC for a prom venue, Nevco scoreboard purchase for Booker T. Washington, KIPP Tulsa's exercise of first‑refusal on Mark Twain School for $302,000, and multiple special‑education and early‑childhood MOUs.
Vice President Moniz’s lone Nay was recorded as voting against E.22 while he voted to approve other consent items; the transcript records the vote but does not include an on‑record explanation for his objection. The consent action bundled many recurring district contracts and program renewals that will be implemented in the coming fiscal year.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
