Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Strategic Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Moore County board debates two‑year strategic plan horizon, calls for clearer problem statement
Summary
Board members split over a proposed two‑year district strategic plan, with several urging a longer vision and a formal problem statement before final approval; superintendent recommended bringing a final draft to the June 9 business meeting.
Moore County Schools leaders and board members spent much of the June 2 special work session debating the district's proposed 2025'—27 strategic plan and its two'year vision horizon.
The discussion centered on whether the plan's short horizon is sufficient and whether the board has clearly defined the district's core problem to be solved.
Board member Kenneth Benway said the two'year horizon is too short for a district with multimillion'dollar annual budgets and long construction timelines. "Moore County Schools is a hundred and $60,000,000 a year, multidisciplinary, multifunctional, complex enterprise. It deserves a longer vision than we're recommending here," Benway said. He urged the board to develop a 10' to 15'year vision and a formal problem statement identifying persistent challenges such as chronically struggling elementary schools.
Superintendent Rich Locklear told the board he recommends approval of the revised plan and asked the board to consider whether additional work on a problem statement should occur during the summer. Deputy Superintendent Doctor Metcalfe and Chief Academic officers described the draft process: community input was collected through an online portal, changes requested by board members were highlighted in red in the June 2 draft, and a final endorsement was planned for the June 9 business meeting.
Other board members praised the district's continuous improvement work and said the two'year cycle aligns with curriculum review timelines, but several members reiterated the need for a clear, shared problem statement and more explicit measures for tracking progress (including regular dashboard updates and explicit action steps tied to priorities).
No final vote was taken at the June 2 meeting. Locklear said he would present a final draft for endorsement on June 9; members also discussed dedicating summer work sessions to develop a longer strategic vision and a formal problem statement.
Board debate included multiple specific suggestions for edits to the plan's vision language (including adding the word "education") and for creating organizational tools such as an org chart that explicitly shows citizens'role and oversight. Several board members said they will submit written edits before the June 9 business meeting.
The district will return to the topic at the June 9 meeting, when the board may choose whether to endorse the revised plan or send it back to committee for further changes.
