April 21st Agenda - further amended

The Agenda for the April 21st Special-Called Board Meeting has now been further amended.

Item 3.1 now is "New Business - No Action Requested" and the topic is Superintendent Update COVID-19.

What's wrong with this?

An "update" is just that. The superintendent should be making a report to the board. Unless the superintendent is going to ask the board to consider doing something (besides just listening to an "update"), then it is a only Report and not "New Business - No Action Requested".

If the superintendent is asking the board to consider something on which they will be expected to vote next week, April 28, then his Update should have been attached to the Agenda and called something other than an update. The Board members deserve to get it in advance of the meeting, so that they can study it and prepare questions for him to answer while he gives his "update".

Before each board meeting, the board chair (James Manning) and the superintendent put their heads together and settle on the agenda, which is then laid on the board members.

The Continuing Resolution, already on the agenda, has been moved to Item 4.1. That whole item could have waited until the next Regular Meeting, one week from now on April 28.

Will any board member ask what the rush was and why a Special Meeting was called in the first place?

Somewhere in the Board Policies Robert's Rules of Order is mentioned. This board doesn't seem to have a clue what Robert's Rules is all about.

This board needs a skilled Parliamentarian who stands ready to correct the board when it veers off-course. There are many times during board meetings when the board should be steered back on-course or informed through a Point-of-Order that what they are doing or saying is wrong.

Probably a Parliamentarian should be a non-Board position, contracted and paid, and insulated from influence by any board member or administrator.