By Joe Enge

The retirement of Carson City School District’s Superintendent raises a very important issue for our community, the selection process to choose a replacement.  Community confidence that the District and Board are truly working in the best interests of students and public hinges on the selection process being open, thoughtful, fair, and transparent.

To do its duty, the Board must be fully open to public input and make a concerted effort to solicit potential candidates as widely as possible.  Thoughtfulness requires identifying the priorities for the District and the qualities sought in a leader.  Fairness (and fidelity to our public trust) demands that the Board objectively evaluate qualifications of individuals from both inside and outside of the District.  Transparency involves holding several public forums on this specific topic and proactively surveying the community to determine its selection priorities.

A good example of a school district that embraces these principles is Portland Public Schools (PPS).  The PPS Board took to heart the fundamental idea of community outreach -- which for too many school districts is a meaningless mission statement for consumption of the masses – in its selection of a new superintendent last year.

In The Search Process: Placing a priority on community involvement, PPS wrote,“All of the community input the School Board received was closely reviewed and discussed by the board, and has been incorporated into a new set of superintendent hiring criteria, which will help guide the Board’s decision-making.  The community input was gathered during an extensive series of public engagement meetings.”

This Oregon school district did a Superintendent Survey, available on its Web site, in hard copy at forums, and distributed by e-mail, and directly incorporated the results into its superintendent selection criteria.  PPS Board Director Doug Morgan said, “We want the community to offer their best advice as we tackle the single most important duty of any School Board: hiring a superintendent. What do our schools and our city want and need in our next leader?  What is the right combination of knowledge, skills, and leadership experience that will help our schools take the next steps toward excellence for all?  These are the questions we want our community to help us answer.”

So how does the Carson City School Board match up this challenge, these guidelines and the PPS example? Unfortunately, not very well so far.  Superintendent selection was on the agenda for the Board’s February 12^th meeting.  It was the last substantive item of a long meeting, and only a few hearty concerned citizens persevered to speak on the topic.

I was concerned by three elements during the Board’s discussion: the rush to select someone without criteria or a search, the appearance of prior coordination to that end, and the Board’s dismissive attitude towards public input.  I have nothing but the greatest personal and professional respect for the current District employee under consideration, and I will not be surprised if he is the best applicant.  An open selection process may very well confirm him as an excellent choice.

A closed, rushed selection will be a disservice to any Superintendent candidate, the District, and the community we serve.  We do not need to leave an unnecessary aura of favoritism on a candidate who clearly is deserving of such a position based on his merits.  We do need to use this opportunity as a district to question, review, and define our educational priorities.  We do need to engage the public to develop citizens’ priorities and to demonstrate that your views are not only sought when asking for bond money or electing school board members.

Your next opportunity to be heard on this matter will be during the February 26^th, 7:00 p.m. meeting at the Community Center.