Paradise Valley Unified Board approves superintendent search, sets $210,000–$255,000 salary range and timeline

The Paradise Valley Unified District Governing Board voted unanimously to approve a superintendent search process and timeline during a regularly scheduled meeting, moving the district toward selecting finalists in late March and a potential hire by early April.

Dr. Tim Ogle, the search consultant from Arizona School Administrators (ASA), presented a six‑phase search plan and a draft job posting. "I am really excited for you," Ogle told the board, adding that the district should expect a competitive field because "this is a wonderful place to be a school leader." The board asked the consultant to refine posting text, add district highlights, and work with district graphic arts to produce a visual posting for ASA’s career center.

The board’s action clears the way for a community survey, a public posting, candidate recruitment and screening in executive session, and later public interviews with finalists. The board set a base salary range of $210,000 to $255,000 for the position and directed the consultant to include language that final salary will be determined during contract negotiations. Board members discussed neighboring districts’ pay and agreed a visible range would help the district remain competitive.

Why it matters: The board’s decisions determine how broad or narrow the candidate pool will be, which attributes are required versus preferred, how the district frames its challenges and strengths to applicants, and the schedule that must align with state timelines for administrator contracts. Board members raised a statutory timing issue: the transcript records a reference to Arizona Revised Statutes §15‑503 regarding notification deadlines for superintendent contracts, which the board said their legal staff would monitor.

Key changes and requirements

- Posting and marketing: The board asked the search consultant and district staff to beef up the opening page with bullet points on award‑winning programs, add an introductory sentence for linked materials (strategic plan, program pages), and include a map or graphic showing the district’s schools. The consultant said graphic arts could finalize visuals over the weekend and post early the following week.

- Qualifications: Board members debated whether to require a specific number of years of district administrative experience. The board removed a hard "five‑year" requirement but kept experience as a district administrator as a requirement; the language will not state a fixed year count. Several board members pushed to keep classroom experience and traditional K‑12 credentials prominently listed as required or preferred attributes. The board added a preferred attribute for experience with public finance or financial acumen.

- Narrative screening questions: The application will require short narrative responses. The board agreed to make the first question a candidate’s stated philosophy of education for public schools, keep several operational and community questions, remove one redundant question, and add an item asking candidates to describe experience leading in financially complex environments.

- Timeline and confidentiality: The board agreed on a posting date and schedule that the consultant summarized as: post early next week; application deadline of March 2; board screening in executive session the evening of March 6 (after the regular board meeting); preliminary interviews March 18–20 (flexible); and finalist interviews on March 25. The consultant emphasized that the Phase 3 screening would be confidential and candidates would be coded in executive session to protect applicants’ privacy.

- Community survey and outreach: ASA’s research‑based survey will be used to solicit input from parents, staff, students (where appropriate), and community members; the board asked for Spanish language availability and discussed extending access or translation for other languages. The consultant will compile and summarize survey themes for the board prior to the March 6 screening meeting and will provide all raw comments in paper form.

Board comments and debate

Board members discussed tradeoffs between narrowing required qualifications to attract a broader applicant pool versus keeping a higher bar to signal the district’s expectations. President Greenberg (Governing Board President) said the superintendent’s chief role is educational leadership: "Public schools are are in the business of accepting all kids, educating all kids, and creating an environment that teachers, families, and students want to be at." Dr. Lim (Board Member) argued that classroom experience matters: "If we don't have someone who has that lived experience of being in the classroom ... I don't think they're gonna understand the impact of the work they're doing quite at the same level."

Motion and vote

A motion to approve the superintendent search process and timeline "as presented and discussed" was moved by Mr. Pantera and passed unanimously. The meeting record shows an aye vote from all board members present and the motion was recorded as approved.

Next steps

The consultant will revise the draft posting to reflect board edits, share a draft with the board president (and the board upon request) before publication, post the position on ASA and other outlets early next week, and open the application window through noon Sunday, March 2. The consultant will summarize community survey results for the March 6 meeting and prepare coded candidate materials for executive session screening. Finalist interviews and community meet‑and‑greet events will follow in late March.

Votes at a glance

- Motion: "Approve the superintendent search process and timeline as presented and discussed." Mover: Mr. Pantera. Outcome: approved (unanimous).