SCOE trustees will debate loosening approval process for publicly funded conference travel

Current bylaws require Shasta County Office of Education Board approval for training and conferences. A proposed update would remove that approval process, a move one trustee warns could risk becoming an “open checkbook.”

The current image has no alternative text. The file name is: DSC_0663-scaled.jpg
The Shasta County Office of Education. Photo by Maya Nelson

July 9, 2026 4:15 p.m.: Due to multiple trustee absences at the July 8th meeting, the board decided to postpone voting on the bylaw proposals until the next regular board meeting, which is scheduled for August 12.


Right now, Shasta County Office of Education board members need majority approval to attend a conference or other professional development activity.

Even with that safeguard, costs for training have doubled over the past few years.

Now board member Authur Gorman has proposed an amendment to SCOE’s current bylaws that would allow members to submit details for desired training — including registration, travel, meals and related costs — directly to the superintendent, rather than bringing a request to the board for a vote. The amendment’s wording indicates that SCOE “shall” reimburse such requests, indicating no approval from the superintendent would be required. Gorman did not respond to a request for comment and clarification. 

He brought the amendment forward during a June 26 board meeting, when he argued that the proposed process would save time during meetings and encourage board members to seek out more educational opportunities. His case drew pushback from trustee Laura Manuel, who was wary the amendment risked making the bylaw an “open checkbook.”  

In a counterproposal, which will be discussed at tomorrow’s meeting alongside Gorman’s, Manuel suggested funding requests continue to be capped annually and approved by the board. Her rewrite adds that board members must present estimated costs of the training, including travel and accommodation expenses.

According to data shared by SCOE Communications Director Kerri Schuette, the board spent about $17,000 last year for board members to attend conferences and trainings. That number has been steadily climbing from about $8500 in 2022. The increase is due to rising cost of registration fees and travel expenses, as well as a greater number of trustees attending professional development activities, said SCOE’s Associate Superintendent of Administrative Services Austin Preller. 

Conferences that require travel, like the California School Boards Association’s Annual Education Conference held in San Diego, often have registration fees nearing $1000 per head — not including flight and accommodation costs. 

Manuel, who attended the CSBA conference a few years ago, said during the June meeting that while it was well-done and informative, the experience did not seem proportional to the cost of attendance. Other conferences SCOE trustees regularly attend include those led by the Association of California County Boards of Education ACCBE and the California Association of Student Councils. 

During the June meeting, board members disagreed on whether out-of-state conferences should also be covered by SCOE funds. Gorman highlighted the value of learning from other states that have seen significant improvements in education rankings, like the so-called Mississippi Miracle, where test scores have risen over the past decade. 

But Manuel’s proposal argues that because SCOE operates under the California Education Code, professional development activities that require use of public funds should take place within the state. The current bylaw does not place any limitations on conference location, though according to a list provided by Schuette, trustees have not requested funds to attend out-of-state conferences since at least 2022.

Discussion at the last board meeting included whether attendance at conferences put on by political organizations should be covered by public monies. Manuel mentioned Moms for Liberty, a political organization that advocates against mentions of race, gender identity and discrimination in school curricula. Gorman serves as the treasurer for the local chapter of Moms for Liberty and board members Teresa Roberts and Jackie LaBarbera have expressed similar ideological viewpoints.

Manuel also noted the number of free trainings, webinars and opportunities available for board members to pursue, such as those run by the Association of California County Boards of Education. 

The board will discuss both Gorman and Manuel’s proposed amendments before voting on a direction to take during the July 8 board meeting. The meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m. at SCOE’s Shasta Hall Conference Room, located at 2985 Innsbruck Drive in Redding.

July 7, 2026 4:55 p.m.: We have updated the story to clarify information about the proposed reimbursement process as well as next steps for the board’s vote.

Maya Nelson is a student at Brown University. She’s reporting for Shasta Scout as a 2026 summer intern with support from the Nonprofit Newsroom Internship Program — created by The Scripps Howard Fund and the Institute for Nonprofit News.


Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.

Author

Maya is an intern with Shasta Scout this summer. As a student journalist, she has covered student life, crime, and education.

Comments (5)
  1. This politically motivated Board majority, because Michael Orlicky (who I regret voting for) lied and ran as an anti-extremist and has chosen to flip-flop and govern as an extremist now that he’s in office… the majority of this Board, which I don’t even call the Board of Education anymore – I call it the Board of Money for Bigotry (cough cough Moms for Liberty) or the Board of Turning Point USA, has spent WAYYYYYYY too much time talking about internal board matters, and no time improving educational opportunities for all children in Shasta County. They are in dereliction of their duty to guarantee all kids the right to a free and appropriate public education, and can I just confirm to the community that under my dad Robert Brown’s leadership on this board, before Authur Gorman and his reactionary special interest oligarchic minions got in and held everything hostage for profit, things improved drastically. I am quite jealous of the kids who now get testing through ACEs and resources through Community Connect, who get their individual literacy, social, emotional, nutritional, etc. needs met so they are in a condition to learn, because there were no such opportunities when I was an autistic kid with an IEP. I was way ahead in math and reading until the 3rd grade (the infamous make or break moment) when I started getting in personality conflicts with teachers and other kids, once my teacher even threw my textbooks in a garbage bag and gave it to me, I went through 3 schools in 5th grade. No one should go through what I went through ever again. I should have math knowledge beyond an 11th grade level. I should have a bigger social life. Maybe, if there’d been the supports that exist today, I could’ve even asked that girl out that I constantly talked about at Board of Supervisors meetings in 2023. And, if you listen to nothing else that I say here, listen to this: the $30M surplus my dad and other sane board members left will all end up in Reverge Anselmo’s pocket under Gorman, LaBarbera, Roberts, and Orlicky. That is a transfer of money and wealth from children to wealthy special interest donors, and its utterly SICK! I am not delusional enough to think any of you MAGA people will ever focus on governing or anything other than politics, so I’m just going to mock you with this final sentence: thank you for your attention to this matter! -Joshua, your neighborhood comrade and favorite boogeyman!

  2. Why do all of our local MAGA elected officials turn out to be grifters? It must have much to do with selfish dispositions paired with serious deficits of principled core beliefs.
    .
    I wonder where Authur was hoping to vacation?

  3. I trust Laura Manuel’s measured opinions leaps and bounds above the opinion of Author Gorman. Manuel is always level headed, Gorman not so much (to put it mildly). Case in point – Mom’s For “Liberty” (ha!).

    • “I trust Laura Manuel’s measured opinions leaps and bounds above the opinion of Author Gorman. Manuel is always level headed, Gorman not so much (to put it mildly). Case in point – Mom’s For “Liberty” (ha!).”
      What’s the problem with Moms for Liberty?

      • RF
        “ What’s the problem with Moms for Liberty?”
        I put “Liberty” in quotes for a reason. Non-inclusiveness and intolerance of “others” ain’t that. Any attempt at tortured pretzel logic will not erase the fact of “Liberty for ALL”. Not “Intolerance for SOME”.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.