With no public discussion, Houston ISD’s Board of Managers on Thursday approved a five-year contract extension for state-appointed Superintendent Mike Miles.
The five-year term will ensure that Houston ISD “can continue its transformation for the duration of the state intervention, while allowing for continuity and a smooth transition when the district returns to local control,” board president Ric Campo said in a statement shortly after the meeting. While official contract documentation and pay were not disclosed, Campo said the new contract “maintains rigorous evaluation criteria and compensation” that aligns the position with comparable districts in Texas.
The vote comes after Miles touted earlier that day improvements in state exam preliminary scores for the third through eighth grade, with increases on nearly every exam. The state recently extended its takeover of Texas’ largest school district for two more years to sustain these academic achievements, the state education commissioner said at the time of the announcement.
“With the recent release of STAAR exam results, it is clear that under his leadership, our schools and students are making extraordinary academic progress,” Campo said in a statement. “The HISD Board is proud of the incredible success of HISD students, and with Superintendent Miles’ ongoing leadership, we look forward to continued progress.”
This contract decision comes after the replacement of nearly half of the nine-member board by TEA Commissioner Mike Morath: Vice President Audrey Momanaee, Cassandra Auzenne Bandy, Rolando Martinez and Adam Rivon. In their places, the state put Edgar Colón, Marty Goossen, Lauren Gore and Marcos Rosales.
The board also chose Angela Lemond Flowers to become the new board vice president and Paula Mendoza to become the new board secretary.
Some elected trustees, who have no decision-making power during appointed leadership, were concerned by the removal of board members who they say asked the most questions and pushed back.
Trustee Plácido Gómez said at the board meeting that the Texas Education Agency sent a message to the community that it did not value collaborating with or listening to community members.
“So last week, when TEA announced that not only was the takeover going to be extended, but also four of the board members were being replaced — just so happened coincidentally to be the four board members who have the most questions, who have the most pushback,” he said to audience applause.
See here, here, and here for the background. Obviously, I’m glad for the academic improvements. It’s why Miles was foisted on us in the first place. But the deal, at least as I understood it, was that he’d make things better and then get the hell out. I guarantee you, no elected Board would have done this. The fact that this was done by an all-appointed Board, one that had been freshly purged of anyone who dared question anything Miles did, stinks to high heaven.
We don’t know yet if any of this is sustainable, academically or financially. As I asked before, what happens if student performance plateaus, or even starts to drop? What happens if the exodus away from HISD continues? What happens if the extra money Miles is spending on the NES schools, which again seems to be the basis of those improved scores, can’t be sustained because of Republican scorn for public schools? What happens if HISD’s finances get screwed as a result?
I’m being a bit of a doom-and-gloomer here, and that is perhaps not fair. All I’m saying is we didn’t have to extend Miles out past the two more years that HISD is under the state’s thumb. If he would have walked if we hadn’t thrown a bunch of money at him, then fine. I’m sure someone else could maintain the good parts of his reforms, while hopefully being a better communicator and leader. If not, if literally the only way any of the improvements could continue are with Mike Miles and only Mike Miles in charge, then that to me is the strongest possible evidence that all of this is unsustainable and nothing more than a sugar high. Extending Miles out five years is a reckless and irresponsible decision in addition to being a slap in the face of the voters. It’s a giant middle finger to all of us, and we should be extremely pissed off about it. The Press has more.