CCSD trustees pull controversial proposals targeting termination of some employee contracts
Clark County School Board trustees pulled controversial proposals from the agenda on Thursday night that would terminate confidential employees at the end of their contracts, a plan that sparked a harsh backlash and highlighted the continuing tensions between Superintendent Pat Skorkowsky and some board members.
The proposal from Trustee Chris Garvey asked the superintendent to terminate the contracts of confidential employees after they expire, allowing them to work on an at-will basis with the same salary and benefits.
Garvey also proposed a resolution to determine salary, benefits and other employment conditions for confidential and at-will employees whom the superintendent appoints.
But the move was perceived by some as a way to effectively oust Superintendent Pat Skorkowksy and his administrative team, once again stirring up the belief that Garvey and Trustee Kevin Child are trying to block the district’s mandated reorganization.
“I’ve put up with this crap for six months from those two,” said Tom Skancke, head of the TSC2 Group that the district must pay to assist with the reorganization effort.
The contract with Skancke, who has publicly remained somewhat reserved on the tensions between his firm and the district, was forced upon trustees through the Advisory Committee for AB394. It initially struck a sour note with the district.
But on Thursday, Skancke claimed that Garvey and Child are playing childish games.
“Those two specifically don’t want to address any of the difficult issues at the school district that improve achievement or education or outcome for our teachers,” he said. “They want to play political games. They are nothing but a couple of schoolyard bullies that are trying to stop progress.”
Skorkowsky also had strong words for Garvey at the meeting, claiming that she was secretive about the proposal and calling on her to be transparent.
“To put the leaders who are working with our school administrators, our school teachers, our school support staff in our community in this kind of turmoil for a week is not appropriate,” Skorkowsky said.
But Garvey argued that the proposal wasn’t meant as a threat to terminate anyone. She noted with concern that school associate superintendents, who are at-will employees and not members of a union, currently have no representation at all.
“I’m going to pull these items now, but know that I would like to bring forward a policy discussion about how confidential contracts come forward,” she said.
She also noted the backlash from Skancke and Glenn Christenson, chair of the Community Implementation Council tasked with overseeing the district’s reorganization, who called the action “destructive and distracting.”
Garvey said neither of the two reached out to ask her about the proposal’s intent.
“I find it a little disingenuous,” she said. “Because if we’re going to go forward in a transformative way, we have to have good, clear, transparent conversation.”
Child called Skancke’s behavior unprofessional, and said trustees are there to support the kids.
“We’re here to work on the best solutions for our children,” he said.
Child said trustees welcome change, but he wondered why they can’t have questions about the reorganization.
The reorganization has come with a variety of employment shifts among high-level administrators, including Rick Neal, who assumed the new role of chief operating officer. Garvey has taken issue with that hire, arguing that there was no contract presented to the board for that new position.
The proposal would have affected five current confidential employees — who assist in collective bargaining for the district — and 47 employees with at-will contracts. Skorkowsky is not considered a confidential employee.
The move comes at a strenuous time for trustees and Skorkowsky, whose relationship with the board has been strained over the district’s mandated reorganization.
It’s the second proposal from Garvey that has sparked a strong public outcry. In December, Garvey proposed retaining a no-cost mentor to assist with the reorganization — which some interpreted as an attempt to limit Skorkowsky’s role in the effort.
Trustees have been locked in a battle with the state over the reorganization, which requires millions of dollars in resources and must be implemented by August.
Bank of Nevada CEO John Guedry, too, questioned the timing and thought process behind Garvey’s latest proposal.
He said he is not the only person in the community with concerns.
“If this continues to pop up on agendas, you’re going to see more and more of us here voicing our concerns a lot louder than you’re hearing today,” he said.
Contact Amelia Pak-Harvey at apak-harvey@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4630. Follow @AmeliaPakHarvey on Twitter.
