CCSD Superintendent Jesus F. Jara attends a joint meeting of the Clark County Board of Commissioners and the Clark County School District Board of Trustees at the Clark County Government Center on Thursday, July 18, 2019.
Published Wednesday, July 29, 2020 | 7:45 p.m.
Updated Wednesday, July 29, 2020 | 8:15 p.m.
A motion to prematurely end a meeting of the Clark County School Board on Wednesday before discussing the future of superintendent Jesus Jara is being called “cold, calculated and disenfranchising” by trustee Linda Cavazos.
Trustees Deanna Wright, Chris Garvey, Irene Cepeda and Lola Brooks, the board’s president, voted to end a special meeting of the board before an agenda item to look at Jara’s job status.
Wright moved to adjourn the meeting and the motion carried 4-3, with trustees Danielle Ford, Linda Young and Cavazos voting against the motion. As the live broadcast of the meeting was turned off, Ford could be heard saying, “It’s OK. I’ll call another meeting.”
Cavazos posted her displeasure on Twitter in calling the move calculated.
“We didn’t even have a chance to voice an alternative to termination, or how we wanted to move forward, or if this could be tabled for now. We didn’t even get to voice what our constituents preferred,” Cavazos posted.
In his own Twitter post after the meeting, Jara said he's grateful to move forward and to "focus on the work ahead of us."
"I am mindful that I have work to do in strengthening and developing relationships across all areas in which I work," he said. "We are in the midst of unprecedented times and the weeks ahead will be challenging. I am confident that by working collaboratively together, we can address the immediate needs of our students and staff to safely reopen our schools."
Some on the board are questioning Jara’s ability to work with the Nevada Department of Education, Gov. Steve Sisolak and state lawmakers after a failed attempt to pass legislation to help fund education during a recent special session of the Nevada Legislature. Sisolak accused Jara of “misleading the communities he represents” after a funding bill failed at the superintendent’s request.
Assembly Bill 2 would have allowed a school district with more than 100,000 students to use the year-end balance of local school precincts as unrestricted funds for the current fiscal year to shore up instructional programs losing funds. The bill was heard as lawmakers addressed a $1.2 billion budget deficit caused by the coronavirus crisis.
State officials have said the bill was brought forward at the request of CCSD, but Jara denied that he recommended the bill. Garvey said she was in support of repurposing carryover dollars, saying the district was sitting on much-needed funds and that ”it is ridiculous that we have millions of dollars in carryover that is not being spent on our students.”
Another emergency session of the Legislature is expected to begin this week. Ford said she was concerned about Jara’s relationship with lawmakers because more than 30% of the CCSD budget comes from the state.
“I’m not willing to go into one of the crucial legislative sessions on record with a superintendent who is not welcome in Carson City,” Ford said. “At the end of the day, we have a Legislature that sent a public letter stating they lost trust in the superintendent.”
Wright defended Jara by saying it wasn’t in his purview to negotiate with the Legislature. “He’s not a politician. He’s an educator,” she said.
Wright also brought up CCSD partnering with the Nevada Department of Education to provide plans for effective distance education as school returns remotely next month out of coronavirus concerns. The Nevada Department of Education is also working to help identify funding to get 20,000 at-risk students internet service.
“If his relationship with the state is so damaged, why do we have a new agreement to work with the department to put this distance learning information together is my question. Doesn’t that show that this is water under the bridge?” Wright asked.
Brooks stressed that the meeting was not a disciplinary hearing for Jara. If it were, it would violate the board’s contractual obligations to the superintendent, which requires the board provide feedback through the evaluation process, which was completed last month. Wright agreed with Brooks.
“We are, in a roundabout way, violating his contract having these discussions,” Wright said.
The discussions are also providing a distraction when there’s a school year to plan for, and not just any school year as emerging from the COVID-19 closures last spring requires much coordination.
“I am begging the board to please stop the negative distractions. We have a responsibility to all children, parents and staff to provide the best possible distance education,” Clark County resident Patty May wrote in a letter to the board. “We cannot afford to lose Superintendent Jara, we do not have the money at the time. Please consider focusing this energy to giving all students Chromebooks and internet access.”
John Vellardita, executive director of the Clark County Education Association, says requesting Jara’s termination is reckless and irresponsible because the district would have to pay the remainder of his contract, which runs through June 30, 2021. The contract stipulates that Jara be paid all salary and benefits until the end of his term, a payout of $363,000 if terminated at this time.
Vellardita also said bringing in a new superintendent would introduce many unknowns at the beginning of the school year.
Ford countered that there is also a cost to keeping Jara in place.
"We would easily lose that (amount of money) by not getting that much funding at a minimum from the state in their hesitation to trust the district with money," she said.
