The cornerstone of the meeting was the decision to pursue the RFP process for hiring a consultant to assist in the search for a new superintendent. Members explored the merits of the RFP method, which allows the committee to outline specific goals and evaluate proposals based on a scoring rubric. This approach was favored for its flexibility and potential to attract qualified candidates, as opposed to selecting solely on cost. However, the financial aspect of the search was a concern, with past superintendent searches cited as costing approximately $38,000. Members debated various fiscal caps for proposals, ranging from $50,000 to $75,000, to ensure budgetary control while maintaining candidate quality. The need for city council approval for expenditures above certain thresholds was also highlighted.

The urgency to move forward with the RFP process was underscored, as the posting must remain open for at least 14 days before responses can be reviewed. Members recognized the critical nature of this timeline, as many superintendent searches were already underway. Additionally, the potential cost implications of advertising and travel expenses for candidates were discussed, with an understanding that these could impact the budget. The committee acknowledged the necessity of consulting with the Mayor to align on budget constraints before proceeding.

Ethical considerations were also a focal point in the discussion of the RFP process. Members debated the appropriateness of school committee involvement in the initial screening of candidates, with a general consensus that it could be unethical for the committee to engage in this phase. Instead, members leaned towards allowing the consultant to handle preliminary vetting to ensure impartiality in the final decision-making. This discussion included the suggestion to require training on legal and ethical interview practices for the selected board to prevent potential pitfalls.

The RFP process’s structure was another topic of interest, particularly the composition of the search committee and the inclusion of diverse representation. Members emphasized the importance of a diversified search group that reflects the community’s demographics, including bilingual capabilities to ensure representation for the Spanish-speaking community and others such as Haitian Creole speakers. The potential for a “blind committee” approach was considered, wherein the consulting firm would present candidates to the committee without disclosing identities to minimize political biases.

As discussions continued, the committee addressed the need for transparency in the selection process. This transparency was deemed critical to avoiding backlash if diversity expectations were not met. Members proposed that the purchasing department draft the RFP for review. There was also talk about the potential requirement for search committee members to sign non-disclosure agreements to maintain confidentiality.

Project timelines were cautiously approached, with the acknowledgment that the dynamic nature of such searches necessitates flexibility. The committee planned for the RFP to be posted around the holiday season, considering extending the timeline to accommodate potential candidates adequately. The goal was to have responses ready for review by the first meeting in January, enabling the newly formed committee to engage effectively with candidates.