Jackson Free Press

Jackson Public Schools Superintendent Lonnie Edwards has consistently failed to communicate about major issues facing the district, JPS Board President Kisiah Nolan testified today. Nolan was the board's first witness in a hearing on Edwards' three-year contract, which the board voted Dec. 7, 2010 not to renew.

Reading extensively from evaluations of Edwards' performance, Nolan said that Edwards has failed to present comprehensive plans for improving the district's academic performance. He also has not kept the board informed on major issues, such as a pending federal lawsuit over special-education issues and audits of the district's federal Title I funds, Nolan testified.

On cross-examination, Edwards' attorney, former Jackson mayor Dale Danks, attempted to raise doubts about the board's willingness to cooperate with the superintendent.

The school board's based its decision on findings that JPS has not made adequate progress in areas of student test scores, dropout rates and high-school graduation rates, especially with respect to statewide averages, JPS' attorney Jim Keith said.

"Simply put, the district is not gaining ground on the rest of the state," Keith said.

While no one in the district was "naive" enough to expect Edwards to solve the district's problems immediately, "he was expected to stop the bleeding," Keith added.

Keith cited a litany of formal evaluations by the board that found Edwards' performance unsatisfactory. In his first year, the board issued Edwards two letters of reprimand, first in July 2009. In September 2009, the board placed him on an improvement plan, with specific targets to demonstrate his progress. Then, in March 2010, the board provided Edwards feedback that he was failing to meet many of those targets, including several dealing with presentations on the district's academic status.

Under Keith's questioning, Nolan detailed the board's rationale for voting against renewing Edwards' contract. In addition to the district's low academic performance, the board was also concerned about complaints of low morale and "cronyism" among district employees.

Danks objected to Nolan inferring these problems from others' complaints. Hearing officer Nathaniel Armistead sustained Danks' objections, saying that such hearsay was admissible, but only if Edwards could challenge Nolan's account on cross-examination.

On Nolan's cross-examination, Danks revealed that, in June 2010, Board Attorney Dorian Turner received three letters from private firms offering their services in a search for a new superintendent. Danks asked Nolan whether these letters indicated that the board had already decided to let Edwards' contract expire well before its December 2010 vote. Nolan, who took her seat on the board in 2009, replied that she was unaware that the board had ever authorized a search or asked firms for proposals.

Addressing the difficulty of Edwards' job, Danks began to refer to his tenure as mayor before an objection from Keith cut him off. Armistead sustained the objection that Danks' service as mayor was irrelevant, but Danks continued. "This job is worse than the mayor's job," he said.

Edwards requested that his hearing be open to the public. The hearing, which began at 9 a.m. today in the board's meeting room at 621 S. State St., is likely to take more than one day, board attorney Dorian Turner said. All parties involved will have to schedule additional days after consulting their own calendars.

The board's original vote on Edwards' contract was 3-1, with Board President Kisiah Nolan and members Monica Gilmore-Love and George Schimmel voting not to renew. Otha Burton cast the lone vote in opposition, and Ivory Phillips was absent. With the addition of two newly confirmed members, Tim Collins and Linda Rush, the outcome of a second vote on Edwards' contract is not certain.

Previous Comments

ID

162784

Comment

Why wouldn't he just quietly go away? I'm surprised Edwards wanted his hearing to be public, but I think he's fooling himself if thinks the districts' parents are behind him. Stop fooling yourself.

Author

833WMaple

Date

2011-03-25T13:49:27-06:00

ID

162809

Comment

Still another question is WHY would Edwards use Dale Danks as his attorney? Perhaps he is unaware of the negative history Danks has with the City of Jackson. I'm not saying that the system would be unfair to him simply because of this; however, I am saying that you don't go into the woods for a fight with a bear and get on the side of the bear. Just saying!

Author

justjess

Date

2011-03-26T10:04:36-06:00

ID

162813

Comment

I agree with 833WMaple and justjess. This should be a confidential personnel matter between the board and the superintendent, and not treated like a circus event. That Edwards is dragging the public into this in an obvious effort to bring about public pressure and political influence on the board is just another example of his lack of leadership and, frankly, competency. The children and parents of this school district and the taxpayers of this community deserve better and could certainly do better with a salary of $175,000 plus generous fringe benefits.

Author

msnative1943

Date

2011-03-26T21:47:45-06:00

ID

162816

Comment

This appeal is not free, I'm sure it is costing the JPS valuable time and funds that could be spent elsewhere. How much is this costing the district? And can JPS recoup some of the cost of this appeal from Edwards if the district wins which I pray they do.

Author

833WMaple

Date

2011-03-28T08:38:56-06:00

ID

162874

Comment

msnative1943, I agree that this should not be a circus and that it is, or should be, a private issue between Edwards and the Board. According to a recent press report, Edwards has 25 witnesses. It will be interesting to see if the Board is well documented and that they have evidence to support their charges against him.

Author

justjess

Date

2011-03-29T09:48:44-06:00

ID

162877

Comment

25 witnesses? How many of those are relevant to the issue at hand, which is his job performance?

Author

833WMaple

Date

2011-03-29T10:09:04-06:00

ID

162879

Comment

Great question, 833WMaple: No answers.

Author

justjess

Date

2011-03-29T10:14:33-06:00