Westside principal’s contract nonrenewed despite public pleas from teachers and parents

The Gary Community School Corporation Board of Trustees voted on Feb. 19 to approve recommendations to nonrenew multiple administrative contracts, including the high-school administrative contract tied to Westside Leadership Academy. The moves drew sustained public comment from teachers, staff and parents who urged the board to retain Principal Carl Scott and cited improvements in student performance and school climate.

Teachers and school leaders took the podium during the public-comment period to oppose the nonrenewal items, which appeared as action items 6.7 and 6.8 on the agenda. J. Henderson, a Westside teacher who spoke in support of Principal Scott, said the school had shown measurable gains and asked the board to reconsider: "With proud judgment I give Mr. Scott my vote of confidence in him and his ability to get the job done." Assistant principal Dr. Jamora Holmes described the recommendation as "very disturbing" and asked that student and staff voices be heard before a final decision.

Board discussion and votes followed the public comments. For action item 6.7 (nonrenewal of an elementary administrative contract) the board recorded a roll-call result of three votes in favor and one against; the motion carried. For action item 6.8 (nonrenewal of the high-school administrative contract and an accompanying teacher contract), the roll-call recorded two yes votes, one no and one abstention; that motion also carried.

Board members who voted in favor said they were acting on a recommendation presented by district administration. Several commenters emphasized that the nonrenewal would remove a source of continuity for students, particularly Westside’s graduating cohort. Angela Blakeley, a Westside teacher and coach, told the board: "When leadership is supported, schools are strengthened... Our students deserve stability. They deserve leadership that is present." Those remarks were echoed by multiple staff members and community supporters who described academic and behavioral improvements under current leadership.

The superintendent’s office presented the personnel recommendations during the meeting; the board treated them as formal action items and voted accordingly. The transcript does not record additional details about the personnel review process or the underlying personnel file material in open session. Several speakers requested more transparency about the reasons for nonrenewal and asked the board to allow further consideration before final action.

Next steps: The board carried the motions at the meeting, which means the nonrenewal recommendations will be recorded in the district’s personnel actions. District staff and the board did not announce an immediate replacement plan during the meeting. Several audience members and staff said they intend to follow up with the board and administration, and speakers asked for additional public briefings explaining the district’s rationale for the decisions.