Inside the reorganization that may have led to CMS’ ‘weakened and collapsing board structure’

Early this year, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board restructured the staff responsible for advising board members on matters of policy and law. It raises questions about whether the changes contributed to, or even enabled, the web of irregularities that state and federal agencies are investigating.

Before 2026, three employees reported directly to the CMS board: the superintendent, general counsel and a chief compliance officer. Those offices included staffers who advised board members to make sure they followed district policy and state law.

But early in the year, after new board members took office, the board made a flurry of organizational changes that, at the time, seemed like minor bureaucratic maneuvers. They eliminated some positions, created or consolidated others and reorganized departments — all in the service of “efficiency.”

But taken together, the changes have raised new questions about what’s led to a leadership crisis at CMS and multiple investigations into alleged financial irregularities — and whether the removal of oversight and support staff contributed to them.

Board member Cynthia Stone hinted at this during the Sept. 22 school board meeting, as she voted to retain Superintendent Crystal Hill. She was outvoted, and Hill was fired by a 5-4 vote.

“I voted in favor of these changes — and I’m talking about the board staff — with the understanding that board leadership has developed a clear path forward with this," Stone said. "That has not proved to be the case. We have a weakened and collapsing board structure, and that’s very frightening.”

Even if the board’s motivation was efficiency, the changes had other, specific effects: They dismantled the board’s independent, standalone compliance office. They created new positions that have not been filled. And they came as board General Counsel André Mayes — in charge of offering the board legal advice — left her job under circumstances that remain unclear. Some former board members have questioned whether the pre-2026 staff could have prevented the current controversy, or at least helped the board navigate it.

“I mean here’s the thing, I’m not a fortune teller," former board member Melissa Easley said Monday. She wrote a Substack article recently about the changes. “I can’t read if these things would or would have not made a difference. But I know that they were taken away. And so they could have, right? They could have. Somewhere along the lines, this could have been caught.”

Board Chair Dee Rankin told WFAE on Tuesday that the purpose of the restructuring was to make board operations “more effective and more efficient” and insisted that board still has its key functions like legal and compliance covered.

“Our compliance is a priority to us, and the reorg was really centered around making sure we have efficient and effective practices and that we’re being fiscally responsible with the dollars that we have budgeted," Rankin said.

But it’s difficult to track the reorganization’s full scope. Months after the changes, the district has not created an organizational chart that reflects them, board spokesperson Sheri Costa confirmed in an email Tuesday.

What we do know: At the start of the year, the board eliminated its chief compliance officer position. In April, it formally dissolved the Office of Compliance and Ethics.

The compliance office was established in 2019 after controversies with past superintendents. It was meant to provide an independent check on administration, and it maintained a hotline for teachers to report workplace concerns without fear of retaliation. Easley said the decision to close it disappointed her. The Charlotte Ledger reported this week that other former board members agreed.

“Making sure we’re in compliance there, and we’re doing all the things, and everybody knows where they’re supposed to go, and all that kind of stuff, and it was just yet another path of teacher voices that got destroyed," Easley said.

At the same time, in January, Mayes left. The district called it a retirement, but Mayes signed a separation agreement for a year’s salary, and the board has not explained why. The board has not named a replacement. Anna Hehenberger is filling that position on an interim basis.

Rankin said the Office of General Counsel now handles compliance matters. That office now falls under a new department, created in June: the Office of Compliance, Legal and Advocacy. That office’s chief would report directly to the board.

“We’ll still have representation as a board, we’ll still have compliance, and we’ll still also have our, what we’ll call our governance and advocacy arm," Rankin said. "We’ll still have all three. But we’ll have one person that will report to that.”

The board has not yet hired that person. Members made a formal request in April for information from search firms to find someone to helm the office, but the position remains vacant. An April email obtained through a public records request shows Hehenberger had estimated its salary at $300,000 to $325,000, although Costa said the range was not final.

Several other planned jobs are vacant as well: executive director of compliance, director of compliance, compliance data analyst and senior litigation attorney. In an email, Costa confirmed that only the senior litigation attorney has been approved for hire.

Rankin acknowledged the vacancies and said he didn't have a timeline on when they'd be filled. But he maintained that the general counsel’s office is still carrying out oversight and compliance duties — noting, for instance, that he recently got an email reminding him about upcoming deadlines for completing mandatory trainings.

“We had other priorities over the last few months that we’ve been dealing with, and so when it’s time for those positions to be posted, we will," Rankin said.

The reorganization made other changes, too. The board eliminated a prior executive director of board and legal operations position. Board communications positions were folded into district staff. The board clerk’s position evolved into board governance, support and operations officer. That position was also recently vacated.

That means that since January, the three positions that report directly to the board have either been vacated, not filled, or filled on a temporary basis: superintendent, the chief compliance, legal and advocacy officer and the board governance, support and operations officer.

I asked Rankin what happened to the funds for those vacant positions. He said he’d have to check with the board’s general counsel and noted it was possible they could have been reallocated to other areas of need.

Board member Stone told WFAE she wasn’t sure if the restructuring led to the questions about contracts and alleged “financial irregularities” under investigation. But her bigger concern is the lack of support staff to help board members govern appropriately, get information and navigate complicated situations.

“We were too light on support staff, and I still feel that way now we’re short a board clerk, but we still don't have a level of just administrative support, I think, is what we might need help with," Stone said.