A quick note on Thursday's upcoming Worcester School Committee

With the agenda for Thursday's Worcester School Committee meeting now posted, it seems we may need a quick explainer on a Worcester (it's part of Plan E) process, as Member Maureen Binienda has filed for reconsideration of the motion to allow students to march in graduation who have yet to complete 2 credits or fewer, a vote which she lost at the last meeting, 8-1.
I wrote about this back in 2014, but let's walk through how this works for this upcoming meeting.

A primer to the 2024-25 Worcester School Committee

 as requested

As I regain today what Justice Louis Brandeis referred to "the most important office,"¹ I offer here in that capacity² a primer to the 2024-25 Worcester School Committee. 

This does not pretend to be exhaustive, but to, as the title notes, present some foundational elements on which to build.

A word on the position of vice chair on the Worcester School Committee

 With a new school committee will come the election of a vice chair, as the Worcester School Committee (unlike the Worcester City Council, for whom the vice chair is the mayoral candidate who came in second whilst also winning an at-large council seat) elects its own vice chair. 

This past term, of course, our vice chair has been Jermaine Johnson. While Jermaine did come in first in the at-large race in November of 2021, his election was a recognition of the historic nature of his taking the seat, as the first Black man to serve on the Worcester School Committee.

In the 2020-21 term, the vice chair was Jack Foley. Jack had also come in first in the election of 2019 (recall that Brian O'Connell's name was on the ballot, but he died in October), but Jack, we also knew, was retiring after his decades of service to the district, and thus was elected to the position.

In both cases, at least part of the consideration was also the power of the vice chair under most city school committees, and now under Worcester's, to work with the superintendent to set the agenda, and to ensure that the Committee fulfills its legal obligation to meet with the Student Advisory Council every other month. While this rule change only was implemented in this (2022-23) term, the revamping of the rules began in the 2020-21 term, to ensure that the Worcester School Committee was (finally) reforming itself in light of the critique of the Committee's lack of adherence to its business in the Comprehensive District Review of 2017 by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. 

Prior to these two terms, the tradition--though this was not in the rules--was for the position to rotate among members. As the position of vice chair prior to this term had no authority beyond chairing the meeting in the absence of the mayor, considerations such as the ability of the vice chair to work with all members and with the superintendent, the knowledge the vice chair had of the role, purview and authority of the school committee, and the temperament of the vice chair did not play into the decision.

The recent history of the position is as follows: 

2019: Molly McCullough
2018: Jack Foley (Brian O'Connell was the top vote getter in 2017)
2017: Dianna Biancheria
2016: Brian O'Connell (Brian O'Connell was the top vote getter in 2015)
2015: Dianna Biancheria 
2014: John Monfredo (Brian O'Connell was the top vote getter in 2013)
2013: Jack Foley
2012: me (Brian O'Connell was the top vote getter in 2011 by 11 votes)
2011: Brian O'Connell 
2010: Jack Foley (Brian O'Connell was the top vote getter in 2009)

A quick note on reconsideration

for Worcester watchers--as our vote from two weeks ago striking the requirement to take the AP test to get AP-level credit in the GPA is back on Thursday's agenda--but also in general; as I've said before, it was Mr. O'Connell who taught me to know the rules: 

A motion to "reconsider" a vote is just what it says: it asks the public body if they want to consider again what they have already voted.

• A "yes" vote to reconsideration means "yes, let's vote that again."
• A "no" vote to reconsideration means "no, let's stay with the vote we already cast."

If the "yes" votes succeed, the item is taken up again, and the members of the body then vote whatever the item was.
If the "no" votes succeed, the item goes forward as originally voted.

In most committees, only those who cast a "yes" vote can make a motion to reconsider and it must be done within the same meeting.
In Worcester, any member can file for reconsideration of a vote within 48 business hours of a meeting. They are to give the reason for doing so. It then appears as the first item on the following agenda.
As a result, no vote in Worcester is official until 48 business hours after the meeting.
In Worcester, this is sometimes staved off--and votes go through right away--by voting reconsideration at the same meeting, as an item can only be reconsidered once.

Thus if you are watching the AP item for Worcester for Thursday:

• if your hope is that the requirement for testing is waived for this year, you're looking for a "no" vote on reconsideration (and that's it; the vote from two weeks ago is the vote).
• if your hope is that the requirement of testing is reinstated for this year, you're looking for a "yes" vote on reconsideration followed by a "no" vote on the actual motion. 

Got it?

change in rules: Open Meeting Law

We've adopted a change in rules on a two-thirds vote (O'Connell and Monfredo against) that all items will be submitted to the clerk, who will circulate those items to members. Members may contact the clerk if they wish to co-sponsor any items. Those co-sponsorships will be announced by the Mayor at the meeting.

also just a request from me

...in connection with adding my name to a co-sponsorship, asking for clarification from the City Solicitor on co-sponsorship in light of the Attorney General's decision regarding it.
Mayor Petty says this is coming; further, Councilor Russell, chair of Rules, will be meeting with the state ethics committee on this issue.
Mr. O'Connell asks that the decision be forwarded to all of us.
sending this out there to the Open Meeting Law observers

For those wondering

...why it is that the School Committee doesn't deal with what's "top of the news" (for example, Goddard, tonight): the School Committee rules (different, by the way, than the City Council rules) allow for items under suspension only if they're an "emergency" (and the chair is pretty strict in his definition of "emergency").
We do vote our own rules, by the way.