High Plains Report

With thanks to our friends at the venerable Quorum Report...see a note about Lubbock's Bob Craig near the end.

www.quorumreport.com

INSIDE STORY OF SHIRLEY NEELEY LEAVING TEA

Too close to education community for the Governor?

Education Commissioner Shirley Neeley was a victim of the Governor Office's decision to keep an iron-grip on education policy by creating a state agency run by two people.

This was the brainchild of the Governor's Office back in 2004 - some say the idea came directly from chief of staff Mike Toomey - to give Neeley the title of Education Commissioner and let Deputy Commissioner Robert Scott run the agency. If you've ever looked at the agency's organizational chart, that point becomes abundantly clear. All roads at the agency point to Scott.

Scott, for his part, had been interim commissioner between Felipe Alanis and Neeley. He is a long-time insider, well versed on education policy, and known for his loyalty to Gov. Rick Perry. Perry's office has never been known for negotiating well with the education community, and the education lobby promised a fight over the appointment of a non-educator, especially given Perry's views on issues such as vouchers.

This is the way the Texas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers describes it. In an alert to members this week that praised Neeley's tenure, lobbyist Eric Hartman wrote, "Gov. Perry's appointment of a successor for Neeley will tell us much about whether the state's top leaders have learned from their past mistakes or plan to forge ahead with controversial educational initiatives based more on executive-suite ideology than on classroom reality."

Initially, this two-leader idea seemed to work out well. Neeley was on a perpetual road show around the state - proclaiming herself to be a "cheerleader of education" - while Scott did the day-to-day work and policy implementation at the agency.

The transformation in the public Neeley - well-known back in Houston as being a self-deprecating but strong-willed superintendent -- was almost immediate. In one of her early speeches, before the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Neeley proclaimed, "I'm not afraid of the devil himself." She openly offered up opinions on vouchers and certificates.

That would change. After a stumble over some controversial comments before a group of administrators, Neeley began to censor her own remarks, to craft that as vaguely as possibly. Education in Texas was great and teachers and administrators were worthy of praise was a common theme. Sometimes the speech would simply be a laundry list of activities going on at the agency without any real core vision statement. Neeley championed groups like Friends of Texas Public Schools.

Clearly, someone had spoken to Neeley about her bold talk. While many of those points are worthy of mentioning, they ring hollow after a while when superintendents are clamoring for answers on issues like school finance and the 65 percent solution. Some of Neeley's support in the ranks began to erode.

"Being the cheerleader for the first three, six months is one thing," one lobbyist said. "Being a cheerleader two years into the job is just too much."

If Neeley had been marginalized by the Governor's Office, it was obvious she was still trying to make good behind the scenes. While not overt in public meetings like the State Board of Education, she was still active in agency issues such as assessment and testing security. One agency vendor said many of his clients and superintendents left meetings with Neeley wowed by her energy and dynamism. Members of the State Board of Education were clearly her allies, often noting that Neeley was the one commissioner who had taken the board seriously and treated them with respect.

If you watched Neeley this legislative session, though, you could see some of the old spark returning. In a budget committee meeting, for instance, Neeley made bold statements about extending the school, not something she would dare touch in her "cheerleader" mode. While not as conversant on numbers as she needed to be, Neeley was actively making policy statements to lawmakers, statements she included in her resignation letter that she distributed to staff and friends of the Texas Education Agency.

It could be pure speculation, but if you looked at Neeley's behavior and demeanor, it might be assumed that Neeley intended to finally weigh in as a "full" commissioner after three years in office, to ask the Governor's Office to take the training wheels off and give her the agency. Obviously, Neeley's resignation letter shows that didn't happen.

Newspaper reports have specifically mentioned Neeley's handling of the alleged TAKS scandal as being one reason for her departure, even pointing to sources in the Governor's Office. That allegation, however, doesn't quite ring true. Most of the decisions went through Scott on their way to Neeley. As one employee pointed out, "If there was blame on that one, there was plenty of blame to go around."

And some in the education community considered the names circulated as possible candidates to replace her - Superintendents Michael Hinojosa, John Folks and David Anthony - to clearly be a plant, possibly by the Governor's Office. None would have taken the job, and Anthony is so outspoken the chances are practically nil that the Governor's Office would ever have considered him a serious candidate.

Superintendents who knew her well back in Houston - and had seen the transformation of Neeley as subservient to the Governor's Office -- marveled that she lasted so long. The betting line among the superintendents that knew her was that she would last 18 months, possibly quitting in disgust over being the Governor's mouthpiece.

"We were surprised she lasted as long as she did," one said.

Now has come the time for speculating on the new commissioner. Commissioner is a type of niche job, one that most superintendents would want at the end of their careers. To meet the $166,000 salary cap on the job, though, the typical candidate would have to be one from a small- to medium-sized school district. Superintendents from larger school districts make well in excess of that amount. Not to mention the fact, that many superintendents who have crossed swords with the current administration's education policy would refuse to be dictated to by Perry's office.

A number of people close to Sandy Kress have indicated he has told the Governor's Office he is willing to take the position if offered, but the ed lobby has promised a bloodbath if that occurs. "The gloves come off if that happens," said the head of one ed group, promising to fire off a press release as soon as that happens outlining Kress' inherent conflicts in his current lobbying contracts.

Conventional wisdom right now - especially given the impending start of the school year -- is that Scott will be appointed to a term as commissioner. He would serve until the 2009 session, when the Governor's Office would name a new candidate to what would likely be no more than another 18-month term. A new Governor in office in 2010 would likely bring a new commissioner.

The bottom line is that Perry is about to appoint his fifth commissioner of education in just over six years in office. Many in the education community assume that no one the education community -- read "someone who would buck his agenda" -- would last under Perry.

And it can be added that Neeley did not leave without her parting shots. Not only did she outline her areas of concern for the agency in her resignation letter, she also recommended Bob Craig of Lubbock to serve as the next chair of the State Board of Education, a point that she alluded to in her letter to SBOE members. The Governor's Office is currently deciding between Craig and Don McElroy, who represents the more conservative faction of the SBOE board.

Reprinted with permission.

 Copyright June 22, 2007 by Harvey Kronberg, www.quorumreport.com, All rights are reserved