Green Bay School Board members got internal culture report 5 months ago. They haven’t discussed it.

GREEN BAY —The Green Bay School Board has not discussed or taken action on an internal report that says school district senior leaders created a “dynamic of distrust and antagonism,” despite receiving it almost five months ago.

All board members said they received the report in September, shortly after it was delivered to Superintendent Claude Tiller. It had not been made public until the Press-Gazette obtained it through an open records request in January.

Most board members told the Press-Gazette they have questions about the report, but those questions have largely gone unasked.

Multiple board members — including Board President Laura McCoy, Vice President James Lyerly and member Bryan Milz — question the report's lack of concrete numbers and anecdotal findings.

Board members Nancy Welch and Andrew Becker both said they want a meeting to discuss the report. Their seats are on the ballot this spring, but only Becker is seeking reelection.

Board members Laura Laitinen-Warren, Lynn Gerlach and Welch said they are open to looking into the culture issues raised in the report.

What was in the report?

The 34-page report was authored by consulting firm Burns/Van Fleet for Tiller, who started as superintendent in July. The $30,000 contract did not have to be approved by the board since it was under the cost approval threshold.

The firm conducted 60 interviews with district employees and administrators throughout June and July. The report details a district whose senior administration undermines its employees and whose members are tethered to their desks and have turf wars among colleagues.

Principals often spoke of "initiative overload" with virtually no coordination, and frequent undermining, from the department heads of teaching and learning, student services and school leadership. The report further detailed a "seemingly impenetrable barrier" causing district senior leadership to resist engaging with principals and other staff at schools, creating "a dynamic of distrust and antagonism."

Burns/Van Fleet also reviewed administrative staffing and compensation compared to other districts.

It found the district has sufficient staffing in its administration, but compared to other districts of similar size — like Appleton, Madison and Milwaukee — Green Bay has more administrators below the senior level. Administrators are compensated at a competitive rate compared to other Brown County districts as well as other Wisconsin districts of similar size, given Green Bay's low cost of living.

Burns/Van Fleet has done over 40 of these reports in the last four years, including two in Wisconsin, according to consultant Stuart Berger, the report's author.

"My job is to tell the truth as I see it," he wrote in an email.

Berger said he was asked by the district not to discuss the report.

Why hasn't the board discussed the report?

A majority of board members said the report was for Tiller, not the board, and that action is already being taken. That's why it hasn't been discussed.

In a statement accompanying the release of the Burns/Van Fleet report to the Press-Gazette in January, Tiller outlined a list of actions the district is taking. He declined to answer further questions.

Some of these actions include:

• Starting a study of administrative positions;

• Reviewing the roles of executive, associate and standard directors;

• Reviewing roles below the senior level in comparison with other urban districts;

• Organizing education team meetings for cross-departmental collaboration;

• Adding 870 minutes, or five minutes a day, to the 2024-205 school year.

The district is also "seeking principal and staff voice in district decision-making," but Tiller did not answer questions about how the district is specifically doing that. He also did not answer questions about how the district plans to specifically address the work culture concerns outlined in the report.

McCoy said in an email that a more in-depth study around district staffing is underway.

The report "by no means offers a full and comprehensive picture of our district," she wrote.

She did not answer the Press-Gazette's questions about whether the board will discuss the report and whether it has a role in seeing its findings addressed.

Lyerly said he is comfortable that Tiller is taking the report seriously and taking action. He is giving Tiller the latitude to perform his job, he said.

More: Internal Green Bay Schools report shows a culture of 'distrust and antagonism'

"(The report) didn't meet the threshold for an expenditure that the board needed to approve, nor was it intended for board action," Lyerly said. "I agreed at the time, and I still agree, that he was to consume this report, and it was to help him understand anything that he wanted to click into or dive into more."

Milz said the report was for Tiller to get a feel for what's going on in the district.

"We're constantly working on making sure that we have happy employees, that we have communication, and those are goals that we have as a district and Dr. Tiller is working on," he said.

Becker also said that while he thinks it would be healthy for the board to have a meeting about the report, he hasn't asked for one because he feels progress is being made — particularly on getting senior leaders into schools.

"I think Dr. Tiller has done more to break down barriers between (the district) downtown and the buildings than anyone has in a very long time," Becker said.

Some board members question the report's lack of data, call it anecdotal

A majority of board members said they have questions, particularly about the lack of data backing the report's conclusions. Yet few board members have asked questions or discussed the report with Tiller.

Lyerly had questions about the lack of data in the report, he said, but has not asked to see any numbers. He spoke with Tiller and recommended that the report's findings be confirmed.

The results from the strategic planning survey the district is currently administering to staff and the community will provide more information, he said.

"That will inform me of — hopefully — magnitude, scoping of this, so that I know what actions should be taken and from the board," he said. "I'd like to validate the original report before saying, 'Yes, I'll recommend bringing up a particular topic (to) the board.' Because right now, I don't know what that would be."

Milz also had questions about the lack of data behind the report's conclusions, but he hasn't spoken to Tiller or other board members about the report.

"With it being anecdotal and not having names, that kind of brought some questions for it," he said.

To Becker, even if one person has a concern, it's important, he said. But it's hard to measure the report's findings without numbers, he said. He has not asked for them.

"If one person comes to me with a comment that's concerning, then I'm concerned," he said. "That is valid. That's important. But I don't know how pervasive it is."

Similar to Lyerly, Gerlach wants to confirm the report's conclusions. She has not spoken with Tiller about the report.

"If those things are valid, I have concerns," she said. "But I have to first, understand and know if they’re valid. If they’re valid, that’s OK. We’re not perfect. We just embrace the problems and start to solve them."

McCoy's opinion is that that the report was put together using anecdotal narratives and not quantitative, measurable input, she previously told the Press-Gazette in an email. She did not answer whether she's discussed the report with Tiller.

Others open to addressing report's findings

Welch said the culture concerns definitely need to be looked at.

"I think it was a time when a lot of people who were interviewed actually had a moment to tell how they really feel," she said.

The board should discuss the report, Welch said, and she's tried to get it on a meeting agenda. But it has yet to be discussed at a meeting.

School board agendas are set by the board president and the superintendent, according to district policy. The board president does not have the authority to deny a board member's request to place an item of business on an agenda. The only exception is if the topic is prohibited by law from being placed on an agenda, whether it's a special, open or closed meeting.

Welch said she doesn't have concerns about the report's validity but suggests a meeting would provide the opportunity to get questions answered.

"What we can do is, we can ask the (report's) writers to give us some more information," Welch said. "If there are numbers out there and things like that, then maybe that would get rid of those feelings."

Becker said a meeting on the report would be helpful, and he will put in a request.

Laitinen-Warren said she wants to see what positive change the board can influence and what report findings or recommendations are within its purview.

"I do not want to delve into day-to-day operations," she wrote in an email. "But since I regularly refer to the importance of organizational culture from the board table, there are findings in the report that give me pause."

Gerlach thinks the board should discuss the report and is ready to if others are interested, she said.

The Green Bay School Board's next meeting is Feb. 12. The meeting agenda is not yet available.

Danielle DuClos is a Report for America corps member who covers K-12 education for the Green Bay Press-Gazette. Contact her at dduclos@gannett.com. Follow on Twitter @danielle_duclos. You can directly support her work with a tax-deductible donation at GreenBayPressGazette.com/RFA or by check made out to The GroundTruth Project with subject line Report for America Green Bay Press Gazette Campaign. Address: The GroundTruth Project, Lockbox Services, 9450 SW Gemini Drive, PMB 46837, Beaverton, Oregon 97008-7105.

This article originally appeared on Green Bay Press-Gazette: GBAPS Board hasn’t discussed culture report. They got it 5 months ago.