Dearborn trustees debate procedure, postpone second vacancy amid fairness and representation concerns

Trustees at the Dearborn Board of Education's Sept. 8 special meeting spent more than an hour debating the process for filling two trustee vacancies, debating whether to vote on two appointments together or handle them one at a time, how to avoid a "first-motion" advantage, and whether gender or community representation should factor into nominations.
Why it matters: The method the board uses to select appointees affects who gets appointed and how representative the board appears to the community. Trustees said the choices matter because the appointed members will take part in immediate decisions including senior hires and possible bond planning.
What trustees said: Several trustees described a selection philosophy that prioritized candidates who could be "up to speed" quickly and who had relevant experience. Trustee Petlichkoff described the role as temporary and stressed readiness: "this is a temporary position, basically." Trustee D'Ambrosio and others said they used community vote history, experience and demonstrated preparation to narrow choices. Public commenter Kathy Martin, speaking for the Dearborn Federation of Teachers, urged the board to consider conflicts when appointing candidates with ties to city government: "when you have people who work in city government serving on the school board, it could be a conflict of interest," she said.
Parliamentary questions and counsel advice: Trustees repeatedly raised Robert's Rules of Order and whether the board could combine two names in a single motion. Board counsel Kevin Sutton said the agenda was set with individual motions and "I don't see any reason that you can't do that," and he recommended keeping the appointments separate given timing and agenda structure. Counsel also noted the practical effect that an appointee seated before a second vote would participate in the follow-up selection and that interview materials are public record.
Equity and representation concerns: Several trustees raised concerns that the names most frequently mentioned were men and urged reconsideration to increase female representation; others warned against making selection decisions based solely on gender, nationality or race. Trustees discussed a tally of how many times names were mentioned (one candidate received four mentions; two others received three), and they debated how to avoid the procedural effect where the first motion can defeat other contenders.
Decision: To avoid giving the appearance of an unfair advantage to the first-named candidate, the board moved to appoint one candidate at the meeting and to postpone action on the second vacancy to Sept. 15 at Henry Ford College. Trustees approved that postponement on a roll-call vote (4-1). Counsel confirmed the timeline would allow the board to act within the vacancy window.
Next steps: The board scheduled the second vacancy for the Sept. 15 regular meeting and said the newly appointed trustee will be sworn in and will have access to the interview materials prior to participating in the next vote.