Candidate Forum - March 26th, 7 p.m.

Leo Human

leohumanforclaytonschoolboard@gmail.com | tiny.cc/leoforclayton

Education

Clayton schools K-12
Willamette University B.A. (History)
Washington University J.D.

Employment

Thirteen years as an attorney at Shands, Elbert, Gianoulakis & Giljum, working extensively on issues affecting regional public education; currently Senior Litigation Counsel for a large national retailer.

Family

I have two daughters at Wydown (6th grade and 8th) and a son at Meramec. I also have a niece and nephew currently in the district and many extended family have attended Clayton schools over the years. My wife, Beth, is a 20-year educator who has taught 2nd graders, graduate students, and most levels in between. She now works on curriculum design and strategic plan implementation as an administrator.

1. What prompted you to run for election to the Board of Education?

I was asked to run for an expected open seat based on my previous service to the district and relevant professional expertise. Public service in our local community is a family tradition, and one I take seriously.

Ultimately, though, the reason I decided running was the place I wanted to dedicate my time and energy is that I believe in the mission of public education. Public schools uniquely embrace the mission and duty to educate every child, regardless of the many things that divide and separate us in our society. That mission contains a set of ideals and aspirations that go deeper than just trying to create an educated workforce – though that is important. Through the mission of universal education, we are modeling and building a better, more inclusive, society.

Clayton has a role to play in this vision. Because of our supportive community, wonderful teachers, and strong tradition of academic excellence, our district should aspire to be the beacon representing the best of what public education can be.

2. Why are you qualified to represent the Clayton community on the Board of Education? Please include any previous involvement with the Clayton School District as a parent, volunteer, employee, or business partner.

I have volunteered on a district financial advisory committee for nine years. In the lead-up to Prop E, I chaired a subcommittee studying the district’s budget and supported the district seeking a tax levy increase to maintain educational excellence. I have been a member of this community for most of my life and I share its values of inclusion and excellence.

Professionally:

– As a young lawyer, I represented our district against the State of Missouri in trial and appeals challenging a poorly-drafted student transfer/”choice” statute.

– In 2016-2017, I successfully defended our deseg transfer program (VICC) from a challenge by an activist group seeking to end it.

– I represented many other educational institutions and school districts, giving counsel on a variety of topics.

– As a result of my work, I learned a lot about our district and the state education environment – including observing board role and function, learning about our district’s discretionary and non-discretionary enrollment patterns and facilities, and digging into the workings of school finance locally (primarily property tax driven) and state-wide (Missouri’s “foundation formula”).

3. State the most important goal you will work towards during your term, and specify how the community can measure your success.

A major board project over the near future should be developing a long-term facilities plan. I would measure success by the board and administration having worked together to develop a shared picture of district facility needs, with the board appropriately challenging administration thinking, asking hard questions, and engaging in open, robust, healthy dialogue. At the end of that process, my goal would be to have an understanding of district facility needs that has broad community buy-in.

4. What do you see as the biggest strengths of the school district and how can the Board of Education continue to support these? Additionally, what aspects of the school district do you feel need further improvement? How could you accomplish this?

Our district’s greatest strength is its teachers. Because our community has stepped up over the years to support educational excellence, we have teachers with an amazing depth of experience and strong academic credentials. Our second core strength is engaged and active parents who support the school and help foster the academic success that has been a hallmark of the district. Our third strength is our supportive community – even those that do not have kids in the schools – which has had what people have called a “pay it forward” attitude that keeps our schools strong. These three strengths are mutually reinforcing and we maintain one by maintaining them all.

An important opportunity for the district right now is in improved communication that strengthens the bonds between each of the three groups listed above – that includes the school-to-home connection for parents and district-to-community communication for things with broader effect. This requires a culture of respectful engagement and thoughtfulness about how the interests of those groups align so that we can build on that common foundation.

5. How would you address concerns from parents who feel their children are overlooked because they are not designated as high-achieving or struggling students and therefore not considered for some district programming?

This is a long-term discussion for the district, and one I take seriously. For years, a push-pull has been “individualization for everyone” (which is the ideal) against “teaching resources are limited” (which is an unfortunate reality). The challenge is to find ideas that escape this resource-competition mindset and serve all children. Here are some opportunities I see:

1. Where possible, we should be opening up classes based on interest rather than gating them behind formal requirements.

2. Teachers who differentiate in their classroom or create a different style of classroom can create options that work for all learners and result in a great experience. We should encourage and support that. (Shout out to some great Meramec and Wydown teachers – you know who you are!)

3. We need to make sure that information about things that work for a particular kid follows them through transitions so that each kid is seen and understood. (And we need to make sure that this is done without becoming a vector for stigma.)

6. How do you view the role of the Board of Education in teacher recruitment, retention, and performance?

The primary role of a school board in teacher recruitment and retention is to provide the supportive environment district staff need to do their jobs and let them do them. Teachers value an institution and culture that supports them as they do their work and respects their work as teachers. We have amazing teachers that work really hard and as a district we need to continue to give them what they need to be successful. The board also needs to maintain its commitment to the board grant program, which allows district staff to send their children to the district.

When it comes to teacher performance, the board does have a role in setting strategic priorities and giving some guidance as to what the community values and what “success” looks like. As we discuss those priorities at the board table, my perspective will be that our district needs to maintain and build on educational excellence while adapting for the future, and that we should continue to explore options to meet the needs of each student.

7. What did you learn from the community's response to the potential Caleres deal and how would you handle a similar opportunity in the future?

To start, I believe that it made sense for the district to explore purchasing the Caleres property, and that the board made the right decision when it terminated the contract. What happened between those two points needs to be examined. One thing I have asked for is a look-back review to learn lessons for the future. Looking forward, I believe we need to:

1. Communicate clearly. That requires unity of purpose across the board and administration, allowing time for pertinent information to be shared, and focusing on key facts.

2. Increase public engagement. Publicly answering questions, listening to feedback, and being willing to take “no” for an answer if necessary – all things the board ultimately did, to its credit – need to be formally built in from the start.

3. Build understanding of district needs. Through the long-term facilities planning process, and on an ongoing basis, the district should develop understanding of its needs and demonstrate those needs to the community. Future approaches to similar opportunities should be guided by that understanding.

8. What are your top two funding priorities and how would you fund them?

Our top spending priority is teachers and staff (more than 70% of our budget). Teachers and staff are funded almost entirely by the district’s operating levy. This was the purpose of Prop E and it does not seem likely to need to be revisited in the near future – we have the ability to provide appropriate cost-of-living increases and maintain our position in the marketplace over the next several years.

The district’s second funding priority is facilities. The exact scope of facilities needs should be determined over the course of the upcoming facilities planning cycle. Once that planning and public engagement work is done, we will have a picture of what improvements are needed. To fund those improvements, the district needs to explore options for financing without an increase in tax rate, and I believe those options exist. For this process to work, the community needs to know what we are doing and why we are doing it – the keys will be open communication and building public support, as we have done in the past.

9. What do you see as the biggest challenges facing public education in general and the School District of Clayton in particular?

One big challenge for all Missouri districts, but especially ours, is that we exist in a state that does not robustly support public education or align with our community on many important issues. Unfortunately, the best we can hope for from Jeff City is often benign neglect. As a district, we have faced challenges from problematic state mandates in the past, and that is likely to continue if not increase in the future.

All educational institutions are facing teacher shortages and teacher job dissatisfaction. Clayton is less affected than some districts, but we always need to remember that we have great teachers who work really hard and we need to support them.

Nationally, and to some extent in our district, we face challenges with certain achievement measures, and questions about whether this is merely an aftereffect of COVID or a more far-reaching concern. I know the district has its eye on these issues, but the board needs to support their efforts, appropriately challenge the district, and ask hard questions.

10. The State Legislature is currently advancing legislation that would make Missouri an open-enrollment state. What are your views on open enrollment and how do you think this could impact the district?

At a general level, systems that allow us to accept new students into existing “seats” in the district are often going to be attractive for Clayton. The district should keep an open mind on proposals that do that.

This particular proposal raises some concerns. It has provisions that are unsustainable and will certainly be altered in the next few years. That means the statute we now see is not the one we are going to get and we are placing our trust in a future Missouri legislature sight-unseen. Missouri’s “Adequacy Target” for financing education is $6,760 per pupil, and statewide education funding is very low. We should hesitate to support rearrangement of our education system by a state government that does not prioritize education.

I would like proposed statutes to meet three criteria: (1) To responsibly serve students and families, they should be built and funded for long-term stability; (2) they should maintain local control; (3) they should not undermine the state/regional system of public education of which Clayton schools are a part.

Page updated

Report abuse