Springfield school board adopts curricula, grapples with divisions

The Springfield school board approved new curricula and staff reductions at a tense board meeting on Monday, May 11.

Board members pulled the district’s elementary science and secondary social studies curricula across the finish line in a 4-1 vote. The approval comes after years of elementary science curriculum development and significant public criticism over district-provided materials. Board member Amber Langworthy voted no for “reasons,” she said.

The board also voted 4-1 to approve a reduction in force, allowing the district to begin the process of cutting 33.7 full-time equivalent positions. Langworthy voted no to the reduction, matching her no vote last week over the 2026-27 budget.

The meeting also put the divisions in the Springfield Public Schools community on full display. Community members criticized board members’ behavior and staff reductions, while board members continued to clash with each other and district administrators over access to schools and information.

Elementary schedules and curriculum adoption

Elementary director Joyce Smith-Johnson gave a presentation about elementary school schedules before the board’s approval of elementary science materials. 

She and principals Megan Knight from Maple Elementary and Andy Price from Walterville Elementary went through elementary school standards, and each principal explained the minute-by-minute schedule of their schools. Price said he takes into consideration core content requirements, student needs and teacher requests when building his schedule.

“We anchor our schedule around reading and math and specials, but there is flexibility in the day,” he said.

Teachers and members of the public have voiced concerns this year about Springfield schools’ lack of elementary science and social studies materials and instructional time. District administrators have at times admitted to, and at other times denied allegations that the district has done a poor job in the past of ensuring teachers are meeting elementary standards in these subject areas.

Board Chair Jonathan Light mentioned a public concern he had heard that math and reading time crowd out other subjects.

Elementary students spend 2 hours on reading and writing and 1 hour on math per day out of a 6 hour 25 minute day. An hour is allocated to science, social science, health, remaining P.E. requirements, social-emotional learning and art per day. Teachers also have an additional 45 minutes that can be used flexibly. 

In practice, school schedules vary by building. Maple Elementary, for example, allocates 35 minutes a day to science, health, social studies, library and social-emotional learning, but Smith-Johnson said students also read and write about these subjects during their literacy time.

“If there are individual concerns that a student is not receiving instruction in all of the subject areas, we would encourage families to reach out to their building administrator, because as the two sitting next to me will tell you, these subjects are being taught every single day,” she said.

The elementary science curriculum will cost the district roughly $16,000 a year. The middle and high school social studies curricula will collectively cost the district about $71,600 per year for a seven-year period.

Staff cuts

It’s not yet clear how many staff members will be laid off. As much as possible, the district will use natural attrition to trim the 33.7 full-time equivalent reduction, said communications director Brian Richardson.

One public commenter gave a preview of what was to come. Sheila Garrelts, a teacher at Walterville Elementary School, said the school’s principal position was going to be reduced to half time, which Lookout Eugene-Springfield confirmed with Richardson after the meeting.

“Please consider that there can be no half-time principals unless there are half-time students,” she said. “The students are at school all day. The teachers and students need the support and guidance of the principal throughout the day. It does not matter how many students there are. We have the same issues that schools with more students have.”

Following the passage of the reduction in force resolution, acting Superintendent Jodi O’Mara asked the board for additional compensation for the responsibilities she’s covering that previously belonged to former Assistant Superintendent David Collins.

“I am working extremely hard to manage both responsibilities, but it is a substantial undertaking,” she said. “I ask to be appropriately compensated for the additional effort required to keep operations running smoothly and help restore stability to the district.”

She acknowledged the difficult timing of the request, but said she was told during contract negotiations that they could revisit adding a stipend for assistant superintendent duties once her work with the district began.

Light said this was a verbal statement and was not included in the contract. O’Mara makes $20,000 a month, according to her contract. She also receives up to $2,000 in compensation a month for her personal cell phone bill, meals, lodging, and mileage to and from the district.

The board did not choose to take action on O’Mara’s request.

Criticism and discontent

Throughout the meeting, the audience was divided over their support for district and board leadership, with representatives on both sides sharing complaints about board and district operations. Board members openly argued and interrupted each other.

Former board members Heather Quaas-Annsa, Zach Bissett, Naomi Raven and Lisa Barrager attended to express disappointment in the board. They specifically criticized Light, some saying he should not be board chair after being formally censured in November, a sentiment shared by board member Nicole De Graff. Quaas-Annsa said board members should remember their role and not try to manage district operations.

The board voted Light back to his chair position in February after Quaas-Annsa resigned. Light was censured for reaching out to the state about the status of a pending investigation and his subsequent leak of administrators’ complaint against him for doing so.

“Current board members have misrepresented information and conducted themselves in ways that contributed to the resignation of two top district leaders,” Raven said. “This toxic environment continues and is a substantial deterrent for qualified candidates.”

Barrager spoke out about board members’ “unprofessional and inappropriate behaviors” such as making snide comments.

Some criticism was directed at Light’s desire for more board access to schools and staff. Light spoke during the April 27 and Monday meetings about wanting to change the district policy on how the board interacts with staff, which he finds restrictive.

Light said he’d like to contact principals directly about school visits with a courtesy “cc” to loop in the superintendent. The policy, as it stands, requires board members to go through the superintendent for “all official communications, policies and directives of staff interest and concern.” 

Light defended himself from the criticism Monday, saying he does not want to insert himself in district operations but does take the board role of oversight seriously. Having access to staff and schools is necessary to perform this role, he said.

“Take your shots, however, that’s my understandinging of my responsibility,” he said. “If I’m making decisions on budget and policy, then I need to have the information, so that I’m fully informed, so I can make a quality decision.”

Langworthy and Light have repeatedly mentioned their inability to schedule school visits this school year. O’Mara said at the meeting that she was told board members were previously not allowed to go to schools due to licensed staff bargaining and allowing the aftermath of midyear cuts to settle. When she arrived in March, her own visits to schools took precedence, she said.

In his closing remarks, board member Bob Brew spoke about his main roles as a board member: passing a balanced budget, choosing and evaluating the superintendent and adopting policies as needed.

“I just want to make it clear that when I ask for information or when I have hard questions, it is just because I’m trying to fulfill those roles,” he said. “And so I will ask questions.”