KCK school board to discuss whether or not to fire special education director
Despite voting earlier this month to discontinue an employment contract with the district’s executive director of special education — whose leadership has been called into question by staff and families — school board members in Kansas City, Kansas Public Schools no longer seem fully decided on the matter.
More than six hours into their meeting on Tuesday, school board members by a 5-2 vote decided to table an item related to Special Education Executive Director JaKyta Lawrie’s departure from KCKPS until later this week, putting a final call about her employment on pause.
Board member Wanda Brownlee Paige motioned to remove Lawrie’s “involuntary separation” from the meeting’s human resources report and to revisit the item during a Friday meeting.
Members Yolanda Clark, Robert Milan Jr., Pamela Penn-Hicks and Valendia Winn backed up that motion. Members Randy Lopez and Joycelyn Strickland-Egans voted against it.
Before that, members had indicated KCKPS planned to part ways with Lawrie when they voted not to extend her contract during an April 14 meeting. That nonrenewal was due to take effect June 30, according to board documents. Their vote came at the recommendation of the human resources department, an item that was included in the meeting’s consent agenda.
A resolution to not renew Lawrie’s contract then appeared on Tuesday’s consent agenda. Earlier in the meeting, Penn-Hicks requested that agenda item be set aside for further discussion. Board members took that item up last.
The attempt to remove Lawrie from her position at the school district comes at a time of tumult within KCKPS’ special education program. In recent years, numerous special education staff members have spoken out — during public meetings, in an audit conducted by the University of Kansas and in the media — with concerns about the department’s leadership.
Staff, former and current, have said they worry that directives from department leaders cause them to fall out of compliance and fail to serve students as required by law. They also said administrators acted retaliatory toward them when they pushed back on directives.
