School board sets steps for interim superintendent search
After much more discussion, the Lee County School Board further laid out the steps it will take to take to search for an interim superintendent during a workshop on May 4.
The board discussed the language for its job position posting, outlets and budget to list the job post and three potential consultants.
After a very lengthy discussion, the board agreed that the verbiage of three years of effective, or highly effective public school classroom teaching experience was not needed as an essential job function qualification.
They also agreed that “documented history of progressive responsibility as an executive in the public, or private sector” needed to be added.
Some of the board members said the interim superintendent did not need a background in schools to be considered.
The board also agreed that the current base salary of Superintendent Dr. Greg Adkins of $209,000 will be prorated and the district will provide benefits in accordance with the state statute. The contract will be for six months with a monthly extension if needed.
It was agreed that the board would look over the wording of the job posting again and have any corrections sent to district staff by May 6, so the interim superintendent position could be posted that day.
The board also came to consensus to gather more information on local consultants, Joe Mazurkiewicz, Cole Peacock and Scott Kashman. They were scheduled to come before the board today in a formal vote on which one to hire.
Although it was agreed by consensus that the board would hire a consultant, board opinion was still divided.
“I reached out to at least 10 or more people to see about sending us something to help assist us in the interim search,” Board Chair Debbie Jordan said. “To consult, to lead, so everyone can have that same conversation. Out of all of them I have received two back.”
Those two included Mazurkiewicz and Peacock.
Board Member Mary Fischer added Kashman to the list, a former employee of Lee Health, who just returned to town after working with several corporate boards in finding appropriate chief executive officers.
She said he is working as an independent consultant at this time.
Board Member Gwyn Gittens was opposed to hiring a consultant at all.
“At the last meeting I was looking at it differently,” she said. “When I looked at the whole thing again I changed my mind. Forgive me for doing that. It does not make sense for us, as an administrative piece, to have someone else sit there and do what staff is already doing. The dividing line for me is the receipt of applications.”
She said that all applications should be sent to the board, and handled only by the board.
Gittens suggested that they use the district’s Human Resource Department to help with the process. She said HR has the job description, interview questions and a rubric that they could use.
“I don’t think we need anyone to tell us how to do what we already have in place,” she said.
Jordan reminded Gittens that the board decided the week before that they did not want the district staff involved at all, that a consultant would lead them through the process.
Board Member Chris Patricca, who has supported a consultant since the beginning, said there needs to be someone who facilitates the discussion of the board.
“There is a level of need of some kind of intervention in this process,” she said, adding that she feels uncomfortable having staff serve in the role of correcting the board, as they are employed by the superintendent, who is employed by the board. “It already took us two hours to make one decision, put off another decision and discuss at length a third discussion. A highly functioning board would have done this in a half hour.”
Board Member Melisa Giovannelli said the board is making a simple process too complicated.
“I am concerned on spending $2,500 on someone for a couple of hours. I just think we need to define our expectations and our need and see who fits in that box,” she said, adding that a consultant was more for the process for the permanent superintendent position.
Board Member Betsy Vaughn, was in the middle, stating that the consultant should be on call, as they need an outside objective person when they reach the interviewing process.
Fischer, who at many times was on both sides of hiring and not hiring a consultant, later said one might be of value to the process.
“I myself as a board member, I have some inexplicit bias because I know so many people in the district and have years to observe their character and work ethic. It’s a difficult situation and I think the three potential consultants can be valuable to us,” Fischer said. “They have the skill set and experience.”
The board then took consensus on what the scope of work would look like for the consultant. The board agreed the consultant would meet with each individual board member to gain their perspective on the process after being hired, help facilitate interview questions and the rubric, as well as the interview process.
The board agreed that they would be making the phone calls to the candidates references and not the consultant.
The budget was also discussed, as to where they should advertise the job posting and how much it would cost.
It is free to post on Indeed.com, LinkedIn, the district’s Website, and press releases with Priority Marketing, as the district already has contracts with them.
The board also discussed posting the job listing on School Spring ($250), Top School Jobs/Education Week ($1,100), School Superintendent Association ($749), New York Times ($399 online) and Washington Business Journal ($500). They were waiting for more information for Wall Street Journal and National Association for School Superintendents.
Most postings would last for 30 days.
The board took a consensus that the budget would be around $3,000, but would be adjusted as needed today when more information was provided.
To reach MEGHAN BRADBURY / news@breezenewspapers.com, please email