The discussion around the superintendent search was a focal point of the meeting, with the board emphasizing the necessity of starting the search process early to ensure completion by the end of October. This timing is crucial given the competitive nature of the superintendent search season, which has shifted to September and October, as opposed to the quieter period in January in previous years. Initiating the search promptly is deemed essential to attract a broad pool of qualified candidates and to avoid the complications that could arise from delays, particularly with upcoming board elections potentially altering the board’s composition.

The MSBA’s proposal was highlighted for its structured approach. The proposal involves comprehensive resources for vetting candidates and conducting interviews, with a strong focus on transparency and trust. MSBA’s representative, Barb Dorne, outlined the benefits of their model compared to traditional search firms, emphasizing that MSBA is dedicated to serving school boards exclusively, allowing the board to maintain oversight and authority throughout the process.

An important aspect of the search will be the inclusion of stakeholder input. The board discussed various methods to gather feedback, such as online surveys available in multiple languages, focus groups, and stakeholder Q&A sessions. The board acknowledged lessons learned from the pandemic regarding online engagement, noting that stakeholders have become more comfortable with digital surveys, which eliminate barriers such as language and travel. However, the board expressed caution to ensure that these methods do not amplify certain voices over others, thereby skewing the feedback received.

The board also considered the implications of having internal candidates in the search process. Concerns were raised about the potential chilling effect on external applicants if internal candidates publicly express their intentions to apply. It was emphasized that maintaining the integrity of the search process is critical, with all candidates undergoing the same evaluation procedures to ensure fairness.

Another topic was the potential need for an interim superintendent during the search process. The board discussed the financial implications of hiring an interim leader, particularly concerning salary and job responsibilities, to prevent contractual conflicts and budgetary issues. Director Fryberg voiced concerns about the district’s ability to sustain two superintendent salaries simultaneously. The board agreed on the importance of having a superintendent in place and the urgency of proceeding without delays to support the district’s operations and stakeholders effectively.

In addition to the superintendent search, the board addressed the termination of probationary teacher contracts, citing Minnesota statute section 122 a.40 subdivision five. The resolutions for non-renewal were passed without any questions or comments, with the reasons for non-renewal classified as private data unless related to disciplinary actions. The board also approved teacher appointments for the upcoming school year, including Aaron Fleming, Zachary Hack, and Tanner Tweet, without discussion.

The meeting further addressed the long-term facilities maintenance (LTFM) plan, highlighting a proposed increase in funding from $13 to $14 million to $22 million due to inflation and aging facilities. The board ensured that the increased funding would not result in additional taxes for the community, as district growth would absorb the costs. The importance of fulfilling commitments to the community regarding facility maintenance was acknowledged, with assurances given about managing the debt structure to decrease taxes over time.