Sexton Elementary: What I’d Need to Know Before Voting
By Curtis Campogni, Candidate for Pinellas County School Board (District 3 – At-Large)
Before I offer my opinion on the recommendation involving Sexton Elementary, I want to start with the facts.
During the September 10 School Board workshop, Superintendent Kevin Hendrick addressed what he described as an obvious question: Why Sexton?
Here is his explanation:
“The choice of Sexton, which is a relatively newer building compared to some others, is an obvious question, and certainly one that we considered. As I mentioned as one of the bullets earlier, is that we have had a number of conversations with public and private entities on space in our schools. And while we are not prepared today to announce a partnership at Sexton Elementary School, we have had lengthy conversations with a nonprofit partner that we believe would add great value to the community, and that was a suggestion in many of the community meetings that we had. And so we anticipate bringing that partner and the announcement of that to the Board later this fall. But that was the primary reason when you looked at why Sexton and not perhaps another nearby elementary school, was a specific public private partnership that we think the community will enjoy and make great use of the space. Other, certainly other elementary schools in this area were looked at, but at the end of the day, this we felt was the best recommendation as it relates to that.”
I am starting with the Superintendent’s full explanation because I want to be clear about what I am questioning and what I am not.
I am critical of parts of this process. I am not automatically opposed to school closures.
Those are two very different positions.
Pinellas County Schools is facing real enrollment and utilization challenges. Maintaining significantly underutilized buildings has costs. Consolidation can create opportunities to use staff, programs, and resources more effectively. Finding innovative community uses for district property can also be a very good thing.
I am willing to consider all of that.
But being willing to consider a recommendation is not the same as being prepared to vote for it.
This Is How I Would Govern
I am not running for School Board to fight the district.
I am also not running to simply approve whatever the district recommends.
The administration and Superintendent have a job to do. They study the district, work with staff, analyze information, listen to stakeholders and bring recommendations to the School Board.
The Board has a different job.
The Board governs.
To me, that means asking questions. Testing assumptions. Looking at the data. Listening to families and employees. Understanding consequences. And ultimately deciding whether the information supports the recommendation in front of us.
That is where I think my approach may sometimes differ.
At the end of the approximately 2-minute and 44-second presentation on Sexton, Superintendent Hendrick opened the floor for questions.
No Board member asked about the prospective partnership or questioned his statement that it was the “primary reason” Sexton was selected instead of another nearby elementary school.
That doesn't mean Board members don't have additional information. They may.
But if I were sitting there, I would have questions.
My First Question Would Be Simple
If this nonprofit partnership did not exist, would Sexton still be recommended for closure?
For me, almost everything starts there.
If the answer is no, that would tell us something important. It would reinforce that the potential partnership wasn't simply about what to do with the property after a closure decision. It was part of determining which school was selected.
That doesn't automatically make the recommendation wrong.
It does mean I would need to know significantly more before voting for it.
When Did the Partnership Begin Influencing the Recommendation?
The Superintendent described the district's discussions with the nonprofit as “lengthy conversations.”
That naturally raises questions for me.
How long have those conversations been occurring?
When did Sexton become part of those conversations?
When did the potential partnership begin influencing the closure analysis?
At what point did it become the “primary reason” Sexton was selected rather than another nearby elementary school?
Again, I am not implying wrongdoing.
I am trying to understand the order of events that produced the recommendation.
There is a meaningful difference between determining that a school should close and then finding a productive use for the property, versus identifying an opportunity for a property and allowing that opportunity to become a primary reason for selecting the school.
Either could potentially be defensible.
But I would want to know which one happened.
What Did the Community Actually Ask For?
Another part of the Superintendent's explanation deserves clarification.
While discussing the potential nonprofit partnership, he said it “was a suggestion in many of the community meetings that we had.”
I don't want to assume what he meant.
Maybe community members strongly encouraged the district to find nonprofit or public-private uses for underutilized school properties.
If so, great.
Show us.
What feedback was collected during the Planning for Progress meetings in South County?
Was repurposing school property through nonprofit partnerships identified as a priority?
Was Sexton specifically discussed?
Was this type of use discussed?
What exactly was suggested?
Community engagement should be more than holding meetings.
If community feedback helps shape a recommendation, the community should be able to see how its feedback influenced the recommendation.
This Is Ultimately About Trust
This is where this issue becomes bigger than Sexton for me.
After the Cross Bayou closure, parents contacted me and told me they felt they had been told the outcome was essentially a done deal before the School Board actually cast its final vote.
I wasn't in those conversations, so I cannot independently tell you exactly what was said or what was intended.
But I remember the frustration.
And that perception matters.
Because once families begin believing that recommendations are already decisions, the entire public process starts losing credibility.
Why attend the meeting?
Why submit feedback?
Why speak at a Board meeting?
Why contact your elected representative?
Why participate at all if you believe the outcome has already been determined?
That's where districts lose trust.
And rebuilding trust is much harder than losing it.
I don't believe the solution is for Board members to oppose the administration just to demonstrate independence. That would be equally irresponsible.
And to the district's credit, this is still formally a recommendation. Community meetings are being held, additional public input is being collected, and the Board has not yet cast its final vote.
Again, my concern is not that there is no process.
My concern is whether that process gives families enough information to understand the recommendation and a meaningful opportunity to influence the outcome before the decision becomes final.
Explain the primary influence for the recommendation. Answer the difficult questions. Show how community feedback influenced it. Be transparent about what is known and what isn't. And demonstrate that public participation can still matter before the final vote is cast.
The Timeline Needs Clarification
The Superintendent also said the district anticipates bringing the nonprofit partner and the announcement to the Board “later this fall.”
The School Board is scheduled to review the recommendations again on October 6 and take a final vote on October 13.
Those timelines may align.
The announcement could come before the vote.
But “later this fall” could also mean afterward.
I don't know.
So I would ask:
Will the Board and the public know who the potential partner is, what is being proposed for the Sexton property, and the relevant details of that partnership before the Board votes on the recommendation to close Sexton?
If the partnership has been identified as the “primary reason” Sexton was selected rather than another nearby elementary school, I believe families should have an opportunity to understand that reason before the decision becomes final.
If You're Going to the Sexton Meeting, Go With a Plan
Sexton families have two community meetings scheduled, September 15 and September 29 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sexton Elementary cafeteria.
I understand the emotion surrounding these recommendations. These aren't simply buildings. They're classrooms, teachers, friendships, routines, and communities.
But if you're attending, I would encourage you to go with a plan.
Of course, tell the district what Sexton means to you.
But also use the opportunity to get answers.
Here are the questions I would ask:
If the potential nonprofit partnership did not exist, would Sexton still be recommended for closure?
When did conversations with the nonprofit partner begin?
When did those conversations begin influencing the recommendation involving Sexton?
What specifically was suggested during the Planning for Progress community meetings that relates to this potential partnership?
What other nearby elementary schools were considered, and what ultimately made Sexton the better recommendation?
Have School Board members been told who the potential nonprofit partner is or what is being proposed for the property?
Will the identity of the partner and details of the proposed partnership be made public before the Board votes?
And listen to the answers.
The purpose shouldn't be to catch someone saying the wrong thing.
The purpose should be to leave understanding the recommendation better than when you walked in.
You may leave agreeing with the district.
You may leave more opposed to the recommendation.
But families should not leave wondering how the district arrived at the decision in the first place.
Where I Stand
I know some people want me to simply say whether Sexton should close.
Based on the information I have today, that's not where I am.
I am critical of the process surrounding this recommendation. I am not prepared to say that every closure recommendation is wrong.
Those positions can exist at the same time.
And I think that tells you more about how I would govern than simply choosing a side.
I am not running for School Board looking for opportunities to criticize Pinellas County Schools.
My children attend these schools. I believe deeply in public education. I want this district to succeed.
I also don't believe supporting our district means accepting every recommendation without scrutiny.
If elected, I will listen to our Superintendent and district professionals. I will respect their expertise. I will listen to teachers, parents, students and community members. I will look at the data and recognize the financial realities facing our district.
Then I will ask questions.
Sometimes those questions will reinforce the Superintendent's recommendation.
Sometimes the answers may lead me somewhere different.
That's governing.
I want to approach these decisions as objectively and authentically as I can. I don't want to start with the answer and work backward to justify it.
And I don't want families believing that's what their School Board is doing either.
Because ultimately, this is about trust.
These recommendations will have ripple effects across Pinellas County Schools for years to come. They affect where children attend school, where employees work, how neighborhoods connect with their public schools, how taxpayer-owned property is used, and what the future footprint of public education looks like in Pinellas County.
Some difficult decisions may be necessary.
But every difficult decision deserves scrutiny.
Before I cast a vote that permanently changes a school community, I want to be able to explain not only what I decided, but why I decided it.
If elected, that is the standard I expect this community to hold me to, and the standard we should expect from the district and current board members today.
Disclaimer: The views expressed here are solely those of Curtis Campogni, Candidate for Pinellas County School Board, District 3 (At-Large), and do not represent the official position of any organization or governing body.
Comments