Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Search topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board narrows superintendent search process after concerns about top‑scoring firm
Summary
The board reviewed nine proposals and discussed rescoring and interviewing the top three firms after the North Carolina School Boards Association (NCSBA) led the scoring; members raised concerns about the chair’s affiliation with NCSBA and asked to resubmit rankings and interview the top three firms by Friday.
The board reviewed the results of a request‑for‑proposals to select a superintendent search firm and discussed next steps after nine submissions. Dion Jenkins, the district’s chief legal counsel, said board members scored the proposals anonymously and that the North Carolina School Boards Association received the highest total score.
Several board members raised concerns about perceived conflicts of interest and about uneven participation in the scoring process. Board Member Campbell noted discomfort because the board chair has a role on an NCSBA executive committee and said that earlier leadership choices by NCSBA had not worked out for this district. Vice Chair Bohannon and other members said the scoring pool appeared skewed by uneven participation and recommended a rapid follow‑up that would preserve the timeline for the superintendent search.
The board agreed on a compromise: staff will identify the top three firms (NCSBA, Summit, McPherson as the three highest scorers in the presentation), ask all nine board members to re‑rank those three and return rankings by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, and then schedule interviews with the top contenders. Dion Jenkins said the board has not taken any final action and that a consulting agreement included in materials could be acted on if the board chooses.
Discussion versus decision: There was no final contract approval on Aug. 12. The board directed staff to resubmit a focused scoring step and to schedule interviews with the top three firms. No hiring decision was made.
Ending: Board members said they want the final choice to be objective and to avoid any appearance of closed‑network recruiting. Several members said they would call references and seek additional information during the expedited interview phase.
