Editor’s note: This is the October contribution from Boardhawk columnist Alexis Menocal Harrigan.
On Monday night, with zero debate, the Denver school board approved a $17,326 bonus for Superintendent Alex Marrero – a curious move just days before voters weigh in on a billion-dollar bond package, while negotiations with the teachers union remain unresolved.
Board President Carrie Olson provided the sole commentary on Marrero’s performance, and it was highly complimentary — unjustifiably so. Olson cited four of Marrero’s “achievements.” They were his work on the Community Planning and Advisory Committee, his responsiveness to new-to-country students, safety audits, and sustainability.
They were strange achievements to highlight, as none were academic, and their connection to Marrero’s leadership is unclear.
The CPAC is led by six volunteer co-chairs and mostly supported by staff dedicated to building out a bond package and coordinating the committee’s engagement work.
The district’s response to recently arrived students is laudable. Let’s not forget, however, that the legislature provided nearly $5 million in funding to DPS for migrant student support. And the city created expansive support systems meant to welcome, house, and provide basic services for new Denverites.
The safety audits were a response to community outcry and I doubt they would have been done independent of the pressure placed on DPS leadership.
On sustainability, students are the real heroes who have advocated for years for climate justice. It just took the district a few years to catch up and make a plan of action.
In other words, most of these successes were district responses to outside forces.
Board members could have celebrated academic achievements, such as the record graduation rate, and perhaps the optics might have been different. Alas, that would have required any of the other six board members to speak.
Improved retention rates for teachers of color and increasing the number of kindergarten through grade 3 students reading at grade level are other notable accomplishments that could have been highlighted.
While l believe the evaluation bar was set too low, particularly for closing student gaps in academic achievement, I also believe that if the superintendent met the criteria for a predetermined evaluation rubric, he should be compensated accordingly, as outlined in his contract. This piece is not intended to critique the superintendent’s achievements for which he does deserve some credit.
I will, however, critique the board’s lack of tact, political acumen, and overall PR strategy.
Political climate
My unsolicited advice to the board: You probably shouldn’t be approving a 5% bonus to the top boss, who makes just shy of $350,000 a year, during an election, where you are asking voters to approve a billion-dollar bond package, all while in the midst of arbitration with the teachers union.
As a supporter of the 4A bond ballot measure, I am grateful there isn’t a strong opposition campaign. Or we would be seeing digital ads flooding Denver news sites and social media feeds with slogans like “Fund Classrooms, Not Bonuses: Say NO to the Billion-Dollar Bond!” (thanks chatGPT).
Just two days after the election, the superintendent will recommend a list of schools for closure and consolidation. Again, the time to give a bonus is probably not when you are trying to convey the need to consolidate resources and explaining that students in low-enrollment schools don’t have art classes (those who attended the community meetings on consolidation and watched the propaganda video know what I’m talking about).
Finally, last I checked, the district is still in negotiations with the teachers union who only last week held a rally in front of the DPS central office building asking for a 5.2% cost-of-living adjustment. If the social media comments on the many news posts about the bonus are any indication of public sentiment, it is clear that people think teachers should be getting a 5% bonus and not the superintendent.
Their frustration is understandable.
The board could have moved this decision to a November or December board meeting, avoiding much of the backlash they are currently facing. Better yet, let this be a lesson for future contracts and setting evaluation rubrics. The bar for performance should be set higher and a higher threshold should be met before a superintendent can become bonus eligible.
Silent board
Perhaps the most disappointing part of Monday’s meeting was the apathy shown by board members on this issue. Their silence was loud, and their unanimous vote was a slap in the face to DPS teachers.
As we move past this latest saga, I hope Denver voters take note of this behavior and remember that some of these board members’ seats are up for re-election next year.
