by Leslie Lytle, Messenger Staff Writer

“I encouraged principals to have the cost of school supplies not exceed $12,” said Director of Schools Cary Holman, prior to a vote of approval for the elementary and middle school supply lists presented for review at the June 9 Franklin County School Board meeting. The board also approved program fees for the 2025-2026 school years and after lengthy discussion agreed to voluntarily complete the director of schools’ evaluation questionnaire created by the Tennessee School Board Association (TSBA) in addition to the evaluation questionnaire in use by the district for nearly a decade.

Holman stressed purchasing school supplies was a hardship for some families, especially those with three or four children. Overhearing a conversation in a store where parents shopping for school supplies complained about the cost prompted Holman to advise school principals to only include “must” have items on the school supply list. He also asked principals not to post “wish lists” on social media like Facebook. “It’s inappropriate to constantly be asking parents for all these extra things,” Holman stressed.

School board member Linda Jones pointed out in the past churches made donations. Board member Sarah Marhevsky suggested the school purchase items like crayons in bulk and distribute them to students.

“I don’t think we need to add burdens to families,” observed board member Sara Liechty in support of Holman’s directive to school principals, but she added, “We don’t need to take away the excitement of shopping for a box of crayons that has 48 colors. It’s important for children and parents to shop for school supplies together. As a parent it gave me an opportunity to express how important school is.”

Deputy Director of Finances Jenny Phillips pointed out, “the school supply list is considered a fundraiser in the eyes of the state and needs to be approved because we’re asking other people for things.” Board member Sandy Schultz questioned the need for items on some of the lists and asked for an opportunity to review the lists prior to the request for approval next year. Holman concurred with the suggestion.

The list of program fees presented for the board’s approval was largely unchanged from the 2024-2025 school year, according to Vice Chair Lance Williams. Marhevsky asked about the $125 fee for marching band which included expenses for robots to paint the practice field striping. Williams explained, “That’s something we leased several years ago. It’s quite expensive, but it does a good job. It was taking several people hours upon hours.”

Marhevsky introduced a discussion about the board completing the TSBA director of schools’ evaluation as well as the evaluation used last year. In recommending the board “try out” the TSBA evaluation, Marhevsky said, “It has a rubric for each category to help with scoring … and it gives more insight and feedback … prompting us to have conversations we want to be having.” She proposed going forward, the board might want to customize the TSBA evaluation for the district’s use.

“Does this mean we’re changing the evaluation?” asked Jones. Jones took issue with the Student Performance category on the TSBA evaluation. “I’m not sure my conscience would allow me to evaluate, judge our director’s performance based on what’s happening in every individual school.”

Liechty said the evaluation currently used was adopted seven or eight years ago. The evaluation in use previously was more comprehensive. “I think what Sarah [Marhevsky] is saying is in this new world where operating in something more comprehensive would be better.”

“I think it’s having us choose which one we want by doing both,” Jones said.

In response to a question about whether the board should vote on whether or not to fill out both applications, Williams insisted, “It’s voluntary so we don’t need a vote.”

Taking up finances, the board approved a Cooperative Purchasing resolution. “We can pool the number of items we’re going to buy [with other districts] which pulls down the prices,” Phillips said, explaining the reason for the resolution.

Marhevsky reported on education related bills voted on by the Tennessee state legislature. Commenting on a new law requiring school districts to have a policy prohibiting use of wireless communication devices during instructional time, Marhevsky said, “We already have a similar policy, so this may not have much impact.” A bill allowing the state to take over poorly performing schools did not pass. “This one will likely come back,” Marhevsky speculated.