Pullman board approves personnel report after contentious public comments over athletic director and assistant superintendent hires

The Pullman Public Schools Board of Directors approved the personnel report at its May 2025 regular meeting after more than an hour of public comment urging the district to reconsider recent staffing decisions, including the elimination of a standalone athletic director (AD) position and the planned hire of a full‑time assistant superintendent.

Why it matters: Community members and district employees said the moves affect staff morale and trust in the board’s decision‑making and questioned whether the proposed assistant superintendent hire is necessary given budget pressures and peer‑district staffing levels.

Public comment and board discussion Several parents, teachers and staff urged the board to delay or reject the assistant superintendent hire and to restore or reconsider the AD position. Allison Harris, a parent, said, “I ask that you vote no or delay the vote.” Wendy Krueger, who identified herself as a parent, staff member and taxpayer, criticized the board’s response to the community and said, “words without actions are meaningless.” Anthony Haynes, a parent and staff member, told the board, “Human beings flourish under the right conditions and wither in the wrong ones,” urging attention to culture and staff morale.

Speakers asked the board to remove two administrative contract renewals from the consent agenda to allow public discussion of where those employees would be assigned. Board members debated whether to postpone action on the entire personnel slate until staffing allocations and open principal positions were resolved. Superintendent Maxwell and district staff described a dynamic hiring environment: openings listed as “to be determined” may shift between certificated administrative and classified roles depending on applicant pools and internal moves.

Budget and staffing context Diane, the district staff member who presented the finance update, told the board the finance committee projects closing the fiscal year with a fund balance of about 8.5 percent, above the board policy threshold of 7.5 percent. She said Pullman is funded for roughly 2.43 certificated district administrators but currently has four and noted that some peer districts organize leadership differently — some with assistant superintendents, others with multiple directors and larger central‑office staffs. Diane said special education director positions are typically funded from special programs and are not counted against the basic education administrative allocation.

Board action and outcome After discussion the board moved the personnel report from the consent agenda to be considered separately. The personnel report was then brought to a vote; the motion to approve passed. The transcript records the motion passing but does not show a roll‑call tally. The board also recorded a prior unanimous approval of the amended consent agenda earlier in the meeting that removed the personnel report for separate consideration.

What remains open Board members acknowledged remaining questions about where the “to be determined” positions will land if internal hires and shuffles occur, and several directors urged clearer public communication about the rationale for administrative staffing levels. Several public commenters requested a staff morale survey and that contract renewals for employees without assigned positions be discussed openly rather than included on a consent agenda.

Next steps and context District leaders said hiring timelines and candidate availability will shape final assignments for open administrative positions; the superintendent noted a risk that delaying hires could cause candidates to accept other opportunities. Several board members asked for more opportunities to review comparative district staffing data and for continued public engagement on the district’s administrative structure.