Last week the Board majority decided
to launch a search for the next superintendent of the Buffalo School
System. That decision comes nearly two
months after the Board’s minority proposed and advocated for a search and
barely a week after the vociferous objections of the community to the plan to
appoint Principal James Weimer, without a search, to the position. It also appears to be no coincidence that
this change of heart comes on the heels of legislation submitted by
Assemblywoman Crystal Peoples-Stokes that would greatly change the leadership
of the District.
If successful, the new law would
give authority to Mayor Brown to recruit, hire and supervise the
Superintendent. He’d also be empowered
to dismiss current Board members and appoint 9 new members of his
choosing. In effect, this legislation
would eliminate local control and undermine the democratic process of an
elected school board. There is still a
lot to learn about the model of mayoral control that the Assemblywoman and the
Mayor envision, but few of us see the value of governmental takeover and
question the “reform” philosophy that under-girds it. While there are many questions as yet unanswered,
a principle one is whether the Assemblywoman will get the support she needs to
move her bill forward. With Albany
politics being what they are, it remains to be seen how deals will be formed to
reach this end goal.
As for the Board majority’s newly
found determination to hold a search?
It’s likely the result of the community’s opposition, the Board
minority’s systematic questioning of the exclusionary process used to select
Mr. Weimer and the majority’s failure to identify the specific qualifications
which warranted his appointment as Superintendent. Larry Quinn, the spokesperson for the Board
majority, plans to present a resolution at the May 13th Board
meeting to conduct the search. However,
while this new found recognition of the Board’s responsibility to conduct a
search appears sincere; the majority has refused to engage in a conversation to
define the search process. True to form,
Mr. Quinn’s resolution demonstrates that the majority continue to plan outside
of the full Board. The resolution includes
a pre-arranged public meeting to be held on May 21st. He has already requested that the CAO
organize this meeting in order to give “real parents” an opportunity to express
their concerns to the Board. Further
Quinn claims that this will avoid the “circus atmosphere” of the last Board
meeting.
The meeting, the date, and the
organizers were all finalized without the knowledge, input or agreement of the
Board’s minority. Some things just don’t
change. Moreover Mr. Quinn’s message to
parents and concerned citizens is that he’s still not interested in including
parent or community involvement unless he can control who speaks. He has expressed confidence that the search could
be completed by June 1st. He foresees
Board members reaching out to people they know to apply for the job in addition
to a job posting that will be widely published.
Mr. Quinn does not realize how unrealistic his timeline is or could
there be another hand-picked individual waiting in the wings to take Mr.
Ogilvie’s place? Thus far, the actions
of the majority while praised by the Buffalo News, do not engender trust and
confidence that this search will be open and transparent.
As of the publication of this
article, attempts by the Board minority to have the Board meet to establish a
timeline and set other parameters for a legitimate search process have been
futile. Board member Sharon
Belton-Cottman drafted a document to initiate this discussion, but like the
April 29th meeting, none of the majority members have
responded. Mr. Quinn has insisted that
the job of selecting a superintendent is the purview of the Board. We certainly agree with him on that. In fact, we concur that the Board has the fiduciary
obligation to do a diligent and thorough search for a new leader. However, to do this the Board (all 9 members)
has to agree to develop and implement an organized and comprehensive search
process.
Here are a few of the key questions
we have raised for Board discussion and decision:
- · What time frame will we establish to guide the process from job posting, to selection of candidates, interviewing, vetting finalists, contract negotiations, setting start date?
- · What experiences, competencies, credentials and evidence of successful educational management are we looking for?
- · What questions will we develop to interview candidates?
- · What criteria will we use to rate applicants to determine finalists?
- · How will parent/community questions, concerns be incorporated into the process?
- · In addition to the above, what will we require the applicants to present in order to demonstrate how they would address an issue impacting our district at the present time?
- · What criteria will we use to rate applicants to determine the finalist?
- · Once the finalist is selected, who will conduct contract negotiations?
- · Start Date? Orientation and other phase in activities?
Undoubtedly there are questions
that are not included in the foregoing. However,
what is critical now is that all members of the Board spend time developing the
process and the timeline. If “urgency”
is indeed a critical factor in the selection of the next Superintendent, then
majority Board members need to be willing to put in the time to ensure that the
process produces the best candidate. We
Are!
No comments:
Post a Comment