Monroe Dispatch - No Struggle, No Progress

Monroe City Schools Superintendent Brent Vidrine got an early Christmas present, in of all months, July. That Christmas present was an 18-month contract extension in his position that was slated to expire December 31, 2021. Santa, aka the board members, decided to "reward" Vidrine with a new contract, even though the signed contract was only a draft. An incomplete contract wasn't a problem for five members of the board, who voted to extend Vidrine's contract without making sure that all of the "i's" and "t's" were dotted and crossed. One would assume that board members would take time to consider, even possibly debate, a topic presented before them as important as approving a leader's contract. It appeared that several board members' minds were already made to vote yes and that any dissension would have been seen as a mutiny. According to media reports, board members Betty Ward-Cooper and Brandon Johnson both said that they needed more time to look at the contract, seeing that they (the board) had received the incomplete contract on the same day of the scheduled Tuesday, July 13 meeting. Board president Daryl Berry said that he sent out emails to all board members letting them know of changes in the new contract and that all board members were aware of the changes. Berry allegedly said that there were some additional changes, and they haven't "totally put it [contract] together", but everything else was the same as in the past. From there, board members were asked to confirm a document that not all of them were comfortable voting on at the moment. So, why the rush?

Vidrine got "words of support" from Monroe Federation of Teachers President Sandie Lollie, reportedly saying that Vidrine "had done an excellent job" before the contract came up for debate. It was obvious that Cooper and Johnson were not prepared to vote until they saw/read the final copy of a contract that would, in essence, keep Vidrine as superintendent for at least two more years. Their objection was simply asking for more time. Though the contract was "supposed" to be the same as previously signed agreements, changes and additions were made to the new incomplete contract presented. A prudent-minded person would want to read/study a contract before voting for it. So, why the rush?

Something stood out during the debate that reminded some in the community that this current board is like boards in the past. Before any votes were cast, board member Jennifer Haneline castigated her colleagues by calling them "fools, absolute incompetent fools" if they(board) didn't renew Vidrine's contract. Those are strong words to use if one is looking for support from someone that they may need. Who were those words directed towards? Calling someone a fool just because they may not vote/agree with you shows disrespect for their right to act independently. Board member Bill Willson questioned Cooper's reluctance to vote for confirmation when she voted to approve Dr. Virdine's contract once before. Cooper gave a sensible answer, saying she needed more time to see a final contract. Taking a public vote that may be unpopular to some takes courage, but one should not be targeted because they are voting in the best interest of their constituents and not trying to win a popularity contest. That's the way the system works. Two more no votes and Vidrine would be heading out of the door. One can only imagine what they would be called if that had happened. So, why the rush?