A Well-Credentialed Challenger Hopes To Help Fix The Moronic Amphi School Board.
By Jim Nintzel
ONCE UPON A time, the Amphi School District had a low but
generally positive profile. In recent years, however, the sprawling
district, located on Tucson's rapidly growing northwestern corridor,
has found itself at the center of controversy. The homebuilding
explosion has meant increasingly crowded classrooms filled with
students whose school supplies are stretched thin. Modular buildings
thickly dot some campuses to handle the overflow and some schools
have been forced to experiment with alternative scheduling to
manage the increasing number of pupils.
As if all of that wasn't enough, there's been the battle to build
a new high school on the edge of critical habitat for the endangered
pygmy owl, which has cost Amphi taxpayers more than a million
dollars in legal and other related costs. There are the district's
secretive land deals. There's an ongoing battle by parents who
want to reclaim their right to address the Board of Governors
at public meetings. And now there are questions about the qualifications
of Amphi Superintendent Bob Smith, who has seen his salary steadily
climb in the two-and-a-half years he has headed the district.
These issues have driven Kenneth Smith, a professor emeritus
at the University of Arizona, to challenge incumbent Amphi Board
members Gary Woodard and Mike Bernal in the race for two seats
on the November ballot. With more than 40 years of experience
teaching reading and English from grade school to the university
level, Smith is no stranger to education. His wife, Barbara, taught
reading for 17 years, including stints at Amphi's Nash Elementary
and Cross Middle School.
"I held back for a long time, but I saw the things that
were happening in the school district and decided it had to be
done," says Smith. "They seem to have their heels dug
in on matters that are costing the district an enormous amount
of money."
Take the pygmy owl troubles. When the Board first learned that
a pygmy owl had been sighted on the proposed high-school property
in early 1997, the majority--with the exception of Nancy Young
Wright, who had just been elected to the Board in the fall of
1996--downplayed the crisis. Despite Wright's request to be included
in the discussion of the issue, Bernal and Woodard shut her out
of the process, taking the lead and pushing plans for construction,
which were ultimately halted by a federal lawsuit filed by the
Defenders of Wildlife and the Southwest Center for Biological
Diversity. Although Amphi won the suit last spring, the environmental
groups were able to get an injunction which now prevents the district
from breaking ground on the property until an appeal is considered
by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Lawyers from both sides were
scheduled to argue the case in San Francisco this week and a ruling
is expected by the end of November.
In the meantime, the district has been unable to break ground
on a third high school--critically needed to relieve overcrowding
at CDO High, a school originally designed for 1,700 students
which is now serving about 2,700. According to an analysis in
another newspaper, the cost to the district to fight to build
the school on the property have climbed to close to $2 million.
Smith finds that an unacceptable price tag, and argues that the
money would have been put to better use finding a different location
that wouldn't have been a legal quagmire.
"They keep throwing away district money they can ill-afford,
and time is passing by and they're not looking at anything else
and CDO continues to explode," he says. "They ought
to give up and find a reasonable site."
Smith further criticizes the Board--which then included Bernal--for
purchasing the land in 1994 without having environmental surveys
or appraisals done. The parcels were purchased from families of
local real-estate sharpies in deals arranged by well-known land
broker Bill Arnold, who was allowed to negotiate his own fees
with the sellers of the property even as he was spending Amphi
tax dollars. A Tucson Weekly investigation in 1996 showed
that nearby parcels of raw land sold for thousands of dollars
less per acre.
BUT SMITH SAYS the land deals are just a symptom of a school
board that "needs to change."
He points to the ongoing controversy revolving around something
as basic as a call-to-the-audience segment at the public meetings.
The district used to allow for the "hearing of visitors,"
but began skipping that portion of the meeting several years ago.
Some Amphi parents have been fighting to restore a call-to-the-audience
segment to the Amphi Board meetings for more than a year.
"Over the years, we have definitely lost our input,"
says Diana Boros, who has three kids attending school in the district.
"We wanted to restore call to the audience, so the people
we voted for understood that we're concerned about our children's
education."
Boros and other parents organized as a group called Students
First to bring attention to policy problems ranging from overcrowded
classrooms to a lack of supplies for schoolchildren. They collected
hundreds of signatures from parents on 38 pages of petitions asking
to reinstate call-to-the-audience and began lobbying Board members.
Wright supported the plan; Woodard and board members Virginia
Houston and Richard Scott opposed the proposal.
Bernal's position has been more difficult to ascertain. Although
he met several times with Boros and promised to support call-to-the-audience,
for months he refused to put the item on the agenda. (As Board
president, Bernal is the only Board member who can place an item
on the agenda for discussion--which has further marginalized Wright's
efforts to open the Board's modus operandi.) Boros finally
became so frustrated by Bernal's procrastination she sent the
signatures to the Board last April so she and her supporters would
be able to address the issue as correspondence to the Board.
Bernal assured Boros she would have a chance to discuss the matter
before the Board at the May 12 meeting. Boros then mailed, at
her own expense, letters to everyone who had signed the petition
to inform them that they could speak on the matter. But one day
before the meeting, Boros got a letter from Bernal informing her
he was postponing the discussion for several weeks.
Smith says these are the sorts of maneuvers that have inspired
him to challenge Bernal on the November ballot. He supports the
campaign for call to the audience.
"Virtually everybody else does it," he says. "It
serves a purpose. When there's pressure building through frustration
and there is no place to go and nothing that one can do, then
that explodes."
But all the effort appears to have been for naught. At a meeting
two weeks ago, the Board voted 4-1--with Wright again dissenting--to
"streamline" the district's policies. As part of that
streamlining, call-to-the-audience no longer exists. Amphi administrators
said they could find no policy that ever established the segment
in the first place, so they didn't really eliminate it.
Bernal and Woodard are now traveling to different schools' PTO
meetings as part of an "outreach tour" designed to help
parents better understand issues in the district. Smith complains
that gives the incumbents a captive audience for their re-election
campaign.
The incumbents have also raised more money than Smith. His most
recent campaign finance reports, which cover activity through
August 9, show he'd raised only $445. In comparison, Woodard had
raised $860 and Bernal had raised $1,035. All but three contributions
on both incumbents' lists came from Amphi administrators, whose
salaries and promotions are approved by the Board.
THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE salaries are another sore point--particularly
for Amphi Superintendent Bob "Bubba" Smith (no relation
to Ken Smith).
Bob Smith was named interim superintendent in March 1996 when
longtime Amphi Superintendent Rick Wilson stepped down. Rather
than doing a national search, the Board decided to promote from
within. Bob Smith, the only candidate to apply for the job, began
at a base salary of $87,000, along with an $8,200 expense account,
a $6,400 car allowance, and six weeks of paid vacation, four weeks
of which can be converted to a cash payout of $389 a day.
Since then, the Board has been generous to Bob Smith. In July
1997, he received a $4,000 merit bonus, a 2.5 percent raise, and
a contract extension through the year 2000. Five months later,
in December 1997, the Board--in a vote taken close to midnight,
after a lengthy executive session--gave Bob Smith another $5,000
annual raise and extended his contract through 2002.
Two weeks ago, the Tucson Civil Rights Coalition complained in
a media release that Bob Smith had cut corners in his pursuit
of an administrative certificate. In a December 1981 letter to
the Arizona Department of Education, CDO principal Bill Kemmeries
wrote that both "myself and Superintendent of Amphitheater
District, Dr. Richard Wilson, are very anxious for Mr. Robert
Smith to receive his provisional Administrative Certificate."
Kemmeries' letter details Smith's two years of teaching physical
education and asks that a combination of other teaching experience--including
scattered instruction of classes like "personal growth and
development," interscholastic phys ed, and summer-session
weight training--should be considered a full year of teaching
experience.
Evidently, Kemmeries' letter did the trick, as the Department
of Education removed Smith's classroom experience deficiency later
that month.
"We really weren't surprised when we discovered he was the
only candidate and he did not qualify for the minimum requirements,"
says Delores Grayam, director of the Civil Rights Coalition. Grayam
says the teaching requirement is important "because that's
what the institution is all about--teaching. Obviously he was
on a fast track from the beginning for an administrative position.
He did not want to be a teacher. I think it's really important
for an administrator to be able to identify with that experience."
In a press release, Amphi called the Coalition's charges "ludicrous."
The release defended Smith's experience as an educator, saying
the accusation "represents a defamatory and politically motivated
attack intended to impugn the integrity of Amphitheater's Superintendent
and to discredit members of the Governing Board. Anyone reading
the TCRC press release must surely quesion the political motivation
of its authors and the timing of its release, just five weeks
prior to the general election."
Amphi's release says the Civil Rights Coalition's accusations
amount to "an unsubstantiated attempt to foment distrust
against the Superintendent and the Governing Board," and
concludes with a legal threat: "Dr. Smith and other top administrators
of the district have been advised that they have legal rights
against the authors of the press release and any person or entity
which publishes false information contained in it."
Candidate Ken Smith, hoping to unseat one of the two ringleaders
of the Amphi Board, believes the latest round of accusations against
Smith are simply endemic to the district these days. He believes
Amphi taxpayers have plenty of reason to distrust Bernal and Woodard,
who have blundered repeatedly through their terms of office.
"Everybody can make mistakes, but reasonable people, when
they've made mistakes, recognize that they've made them and are
willing to change," Smith says. "These people don't
seem willing to do that."
|