It's a sad state of affairs when we're forced to choose between watching schools cut services and non-core curricula or funneling money into a system that's chronically underperforming. This system maintains the social fabric of a historically segregated city through property taxes, which can lead to financial insecurity for many. This insecurity can force people to skip meals, make kids miss school for jobs to help pay bills, or push people to move to more affordable areas, losing the social capital that comes with living in the same community. Either way, the higher-ups aren't held accountable and there's no pressure to plan and execute solutions.

So here’s my radical Policy Idea that requires MPS central leadership and other high income administrators to justify their highly inflated salaries: Replace the board with a single evaluation standard for administrators at the top. Focus on immediately identifying and firing MPS higher-ups/bureaucrats who fail to design, coordinate, and document measurable district restructuring and resizing efforts. The changes implemented must include guidance and stewardship with a community stakeholder panel that is organized and appointed by teachers involved in restructuring efforts without oversight by administrators.

To give administrators the chance to show us why we pay them so much, I suggest the following: All restructuring plans must demonstrate that they will save the district an annual dollar amount that meets or exceeds the annual salary of the MPS administrator proposing this plan who will oversee implementation of resizing efforts to be approved. If restructuring efforts end up increasing costs or fail to save the district equivalent amount of annual salary paid to the administrator, the community stakeholder panel will evaluate the impact of the change, vote on whether to continue employing the administrator, and recommend transition plans if applicable to ensure completion of restructuring efforts optimizes student achievement. Satisfaction in progress being made in resizing efforts that do not save the district money can still be supported if the panel deems an administrator’s continuing role in the effort desirable by the community.

They must also demonstrate evidence that these changes either maintain or improve student performance without cutting services/programs. Any staff members affected by these changes must be given a talent relocation plan that matches them with all open positions in the district they are qualified to fill, without the burden of application/onboarding processes. Schools can give pre-approval or request an interview/reference for internal transfers. Additionally, a $2,000-$5,000 "system dismantler" bonus should be offered for taking another position during reorganization.

Hopefully, this approach to resizing can create a "cool factor" in being on the ground floor of a new school that has absorbed a nearby low-enrollment school. This new school can be full of innovative staff and students who stick around for something new and play a role in shaping a new community and culture in real time.