Community speakers urge APS to slow, open review of Council of Great City Schools contract and RFP process

At the June 18 Albuquerque Public Schools board meeting, multiple public‑forum speakers asked the board to slow the process to replace coaching services, open the procurement to public input, and explain how an out‑of‑state contract with the Council of Great City Schools was approved and renewed.

Janet Harmon told the board, “It takes an enormous amount of time vetting these outfits, many of whom have questionable motives,” and thanked the board for not renewing the contract with the Council of Great City Schools. Harmon asked whether such contracts are mandated and urged the board to investigate the vendor’s funding sources and the district’s decision to hire out‑of‑state coaches.

Megan Long, a parent in District 3, said the request for proposals process to replace the CGCS contract appeared “negligent” and urged more inclusion. “We expect inclusion and transparency going forward and not further division,” she said, asking that parents be involved in future decisions about coaching and governance support.

Nina Sembana urged the board to open the hiring process to public comment and questioned how the original, open‑ended CGCS arrangement was approved. “We demand an accountable and public process from APS as a whole,” she said, noting community distrust stemming from recent district missteps.

Not all public speakers opposed the contract. David Ames (spoke in support) told the board he supported a student‑outcomes‑focused governance model and the use of an aligned coaching vendor such as the Council of Great City Schools. “This board is going to show that they actually take care about kids,” Ames said, urging the board to “stay the course with student outcomes focused governance.”

Joe Cardillo, an executive coach who attended the meeting, urged the board to consider leadership and teamwork dynamics when evaluating coaching: “I would encourage this board to really listen closely,” he said, praising some comments from members who had offered suggestions for improved governance.

Teacher and ATF representative Tanya Hopkins warned that narrowing board work to high‑stakes goals and giving implementation decisions solely to district leadership can silence democratic voice. “Focus on measurable outcomes is important,” she said, but asked the board to preserve educator and parent voice in oversight and implementation decisions.

The board acknowledged the public comments at the end of the meeting and listed topics heard from speakers — including the RFP process, community engagement, reading instruction and board leadership — without taking formal action on the contract during the session.