At the forefront of the meeting was the discussion around the search for a new superintendent, an endeavor led by Kathleen Helawa. Helawa outlined the careful steps involved in this process, including the advertisement of the position, recruitment of candidates, and conducting input sessions through surveys and live engagements. She emphasized the significance of understanding the board’s expectations for a candidate, which would shape the job advertisement. The board participated in creating a generalized calendar for the search.

A key discussion point was the qualifications necessary for the superintendent role. Board members debated whether to specify “superintendent experience” or “assistant superintendent experience” as requirements, recognizing that such stipulations could limit the candidate pool. An example was provided of a curriculum director performing similar duties to an assistant superintendent but not holding the title, illustrating concerns about excluding qualified individuals. The term “educational experience” was proposed as a broader category to encompass various relevant roles. The necessity of leadership experience was underscored, with a consensus to use “strongly preferred” for certain qualifications.

The timeline for the search was another significant aspect discussed. While Helawa proposed running the advertisement from June 2 to June 29, participants debated whether this was sufficient. Drawing from experience at the New Jersey School Boards Association, one speaker advocated for a five-week advertising period to ensure a more qualified candidate pool, stressing that rushing the process could reflect poorly on the board. The conversation revealed a belief that casting a wide net would attract diverse applicants and that if initial candidates were unsatisfactory, the board could revisit the search process.

Community involvement was a componet of the search strategy. There was discussion on incorporating community feedback through surveys, which would be summarized and analyzed to identify the district’s specific needs. Presentation slides capturing participant responses and a report were proposed as methods to provide board members with insights before candidate interviews. This structured approach aimed to align candidate qualifications with community expectations.

Public comments further highlighted community concerns. One parent, Katie Galen, expressed strong opposition to the renewal of the business administrator’s contract, citing a lack of results in academic achievement despite a salary of over $200,000. Another parent, Vicky Davenport, raised issues regarding the staffing of aides in classrooms, particularly the absence of promised support for her son’s class. Davenport also called for anti-bullying initiatives at younger ages, expressing concern about the treatment of special needs students and the necessity for education around bullying behaviors.

Additionally, the board discussed the importance of networking and collaboration among superintendents within Warren County. The supportive nature of the county’s superintendents was praised, contrasting with competitive environments in other regions. The ideal candidate was envisioned as someone who could leverage relationships across districts for shared programs, understanding the local dynamics and importance of maintaining relationships with sending districts. This aspect was particularly crucial given the presence of students who attend vocational schools yet participate in local athletic programs.

The board also tackled the dual role of the superintendent position, emphasizing transparency with applicants about the additional responsibilities involved. This duality was to be clearly communicated in the job advertisement, avoiding misunderstandings about the position’s scope, especially for candidates from larger districts with different expectations.

Recognizing the challenges posed by summer scheduling, the board discussed the feasibility of conducting interviews during this period. Concerns were raised about the availability of members due to personal commitments, including childcare and vacations. Despite these challenges, there was a commitment to engage in the process responsibly, adhering to legal requirements for public meetings while respecting individual schedules.