As Evanston approaches a school board election that could shape the future of its elementary and middle schools, some parents and community members are expressing frustration with a controversial superintendent they compare to a “patriarch.”
Hardy Ray Murphy Jr.’s 10-year tenure has been marked by improved student performance and balanced budgets, Evanston/Skokie School District 65 board members and staffers counter. But the critics, many of whom said they did not want to speak publicly for fear of retaliation, said the accomplishments came at the expense of community input, teacher morale and school safety.
“He is kind of an autocrat,” said Anne Honzel, president of the Kingsley Elementary School PTA. “It seems like, a lot of the time, decisions are being made without a lot of input from the community.”
The criticism intensified last month after a 10-year-old student apparently hanged himself in the school bathroom. It was the fifth safety incident in the district during the past five years.
District employees maintain the critics are a vocal but small minority.
“A lot of people are satisfied with our district,” District Communications Director Pat Markham said. “We do have maybe a handful or two handfuls of local parents who are unhappy, but I don’t think that’s the majority.”
Regardless, it’s clear the superintendent is a controversial figure.
Board members unanimously selected Murphy, now 60, in June 1999 after a 14-month search. He came to the 17-school, 6,500-student district from Fort Worth, Texas, where he served as an associate superintendent.
Tensions boiled quickly. Within a year, the district’s second-in-command resigned, citing discomfort with structural changes.
In 2004, Murphy drew fire again when a former teacher sued the district for violating her First Amendment rights. The teacher won her lawsuit, earning $250,000 and a letter affirming her teaching skills.
Three years later, the superintendent angered some when he responded to a question from a board member about his use of a $5 million technology funding request by saying “give us the money, and we’ll show you a plan.”
The board extended Murphy’s contract three times in his first eight years, but only four of the seven members voted in favor each time. Two days after a 2007 extension vote, board member Sharon Sheehan resigned.
In December, the board approved a fourth Murphy contract extension, voting 6-1 to guarantee the contract through 2013. The next month, they voted to increase the superintendent’s overall compensation package to nearly $300,000.
Reached on his cell phone Saturday, Murphy declined to comment.
Board Vice President Jerome Summers said the controversy around Murphy was inevitable.
“If you’re not ruffling some feathers somewhere, you’re not doing your job,” he said. “Is he a sweetheart? Probably not. Is he an inspirational leader? I don’t know. Does he create systems that work? Yes.”
‘Meeting the objectives’
Murphy is not without his supporters in the district, and they have plenty of evidence to support their case.
Test scores have increased, especially among minority students, who have lowered the achievement gap on standardized math tests by 59 percent during his tenure. Overall, student achievement has increased by about 30 percent since 2003.
“Dr. Murphy is a fine superintendent,” board member Bonnie Lockhart said. “He’s brought more academic success to Evanston than Evanston has seen in 50 years in terms of decreasing the achievement gap for minority students.”
Markham added that the superintendent balanced the budget, initiated capital improvements and helped to initiate successful projects such as the African-centered curriculum.
“He’s been meeting the objectives that have been set forward for him,” Evanston NAACP President George Mitchell said. “I don’t know what people want from him.”
‘Not a factory’
What the people want is more input, said several parents who felt left out of much of the district decision-making during the last decade.
“My constituency has some concerns about his level of independent decision-making without consulting the board or the community,” said Cari Levin, founder of Evanston Citizens for Appropriate Special Education.
Levin and others cited a recent debate about the start time of district schools. The time change was presented as already-decided instead of as a proposal, said Nancy Traver, a Haven parent and Medill School of Journalism professor. After some voiced concerns, the administration held a public hearing, eventually deciding against the change.
Nothing is preventing parent involvement, Mitchell argued.
“Our community speaks to the superintendent and the board every time there’s a school board meeting,” he said. “There’s a microphone, and they go up and they get three minutes or whatever, and they speak.”
Although anybody can speak at board meetings, few parents usually do. The exception is controversial issues like the time change.
The superintendent has also disrespected teachers, said Vikki Proctor, the former social studies and language arts teacher who won the 2004 lawsuit.
Proctor, who sued the district after being transferred to an alternative school after protesting against the No Child Left Behind Act, said Murphy’s style has severely damaged teacher morale.
“Education is not a business,” she said. “It’s not a factory. Students aren’t robots. You don’t just march them through, but that is what Murphy believes, and he does not trust teachers.”
Hired Through 2013
Critics also expressed frustration with the superintendent’s contract.
The board’s December decision to extend Murphy’s contract proved controversial because it guaranteed he will be in place through 2013, longer than the current or next group of board members.
The extension wasn’t a big deal, since the contract already stretched midway through 2012, said board member Andrew Pigozzi, who called five-year contracts “standard.” The Illinois State Board of Education doesn’t keep information about average contract lengths, spokesman Mark Wancket said.
“It didn’t seem out of line,” Summers said.
In January, the board raised Murphy’s salary. The contract now includes a base salary of $214,000, a $25,000 housing allowance and other benefits, bringing his total yearly compensation to about $285,000.
“Many people, including myself, feel he’s overpaid,” said Jane Kuelbs, whose son attends Orrington Elementary School. “At a time when people are struggling to buy groceries, to raise the salary of a public servant is wrong.”
While an analysis by the Chicago Sun-Times found the average Illinois superintendent salary to be $140,000, board members said Murphy’s salary is comparable to other similarly-sized districts.
Proctor disagreed.
“Who makes $300,000?” Proctor said. “Bond traders or Wall Street. It’s outrageous. It’s inexcusable.”
Safety Concerns
Criticism against Murphy increased after the recent death of a student in school.
Aquan Lewis, a fifth grader at Oakton Elementary School, apparently hanged himself in a school bathroom on Feb. 3.
It was only the latest of several incidents in the district during the past five years.
Since September 2004, police have arrested four district employees – a janitor after they found $100,000 worth of stolen property and weapons in his basement, another janitor for selling cocaine on school property, a third janitor after a 7-year-old student found his loaded gun in the school bathroom and a teacher for arranging to meet for a sexual encounter with an undercover police officer whom he thought was a teenage student.
Multiple former district employees compared the district’s hiring practices to a “patronage system.”
Markham said the district “has a pretty strong track record of safety” and “all of us live in a world where things happen.”
In a press conference announcing Aquan’s death
, Murphy accepted responsibility.
“I have to take the blame for that,” he said on Feb. 5. “I personally feel that as far as my responsibilities as superintendent is concerned, my first order of business is to make sure that every child is safe in our buildings.”
Multiple parents said they think Murphy should resign.
“If you can’t step up to the plate, you need to take yourself out of the equation,” Kuelbs said.
Race and Retaliation
The underlying controversy about Murphy is race, both his supporters and opponents acknowledged.
Murphy, a black superintendent in a diverse district, angered some parents by focusing on minority achievement, Mitchell said. He added some district parents “want to return us to the days” of segregated schools.
But some of Murphy’s critics said the superintendent deftly uses race as a way to further his agenda.
“If he was actually doing his job, the race issue wouldn’t come up,” said Kuelbs, who accused Murphy and his supporters of “playing the race card” by painting all criticism of the superintendent as racially motivated.
Proctor agreed, adding that critical parents and their children are often subject to retaliation from district administrators.
Eleven parents and former school officials voiced criticism of Murphy but declined to speak on the record, mostly due to fear of retaliation, such as discrimination in school and class placement.
Markham denied the district retaliates against critics.
Honzel called Murphy “a patriarch” but added that, for some of the critics, their cynicism has led them to be irrationally afraid and critical.
“The community has been skeptical of Dr. Murphy, and because of that, they don’t support the district’s policies,” she said. “I don’t think it’s as clear-cut as it might appear to be.”
