Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance And Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board plans school‑site work sessions, boundary committee and superintendent evaluation timeline
Summary
Directors agreed to hold work sessions at school sites, discussed a draft board‑superintendent working agreement and set an evaluation timeline for the superintendent; staff also proposed a boundary committee to examine school organization and attendance areas.
The board discussed governance and strategic planning items Sept. 9, including a plan to hold regular board work sessions at school sites, a draft board‑superintendent working agreement containing OSBA‑sourced censure language, the superintendent’s goals and an evaluation timeline, and formation of a boundary committee to study school organization.
Board members and staff reviewed a tentative schedule for work sessions at individual schools (Edwards, Catalyst, the high school, Ewing Young, Mountain View, Joanne Austin) and a “staff spotlight” plan to recognize building personnel. Several directors said meeting at schools should include signage and parent notification and suggested reopening limited public comment at those site meetings to increase community engagement.
Superintendent Dave Parker presented draft goals aligned with the board’s priorities: communications and community visibility; instructional impact and student achievement (including PLCs, UDL and local assessments); governance and strategic planning including boundary review; and long‑term financial sustainability. Parker proposed a formal self‑evaluation presentation and a spring evaluation timeline; board members noted state assessment data typically arrive in October and asked for interim local metrics for evaluation.
Parker proposed a boundary committee to begin Oct. 2 to review school organization that has resulted in multiple small K–5 schools and constrained class size flexibility and funding; staff proposed a six‑meeting schedule and said the committee’s charge would be to deliver recommendations to the board. Directors volunteered to participate and suggested rotating membership to allow more perspectives while avoiding quorum issues for the committee itself.
Staff also introduced a draft board and superintendent working agreement with a clause on potential censure procedures drawn from OSBA materials; board members were asked to review and return any edits before a formal vote at a future meeting.
