Search committee finalizes brochure tasks, agrees framework for director contract draft

Coffee County's Director Search Committee met Jan. 21 and agreed to finish the recruitment brochure's community description this week and to prepare a draft employment contract for the new director that the full board will review.

The discussion focused first on the brochure's page two, which the committee said must include Coffee County Schools system facts, community highlights (including Manchester), and local economic or agricultural notes. Dr. Powell said staff would provide system data, and the committee asked Dr. Cornelison to supply recent student- and population-demographic figures. "Yes, sir. We can. I don't I don't have it with me, but we can we can get that information," Dr. Powell said.

Why it matters: Committee members said a concise, locally grounded brochure will drive candidate interest and ensure the application packet reflects the county and Manchester's community identity. Members asked that the brochure's community paragraph go beyond generic language and include items such as local events, agricultural activity and tourism assets cited in prior Manchester tourism materials.

Key deadlines and tasks: the committee expects the page-two materials to be assembled and sent to TSBA (Tennessee School Boards Association) this week so the brochure can be circulated. The committee also set a special called meeting for Feb. 12 to finalize selection criteria and minimum qualifications that will appear on page one.

Contract approach and major provisions: committee members agreed to use the Boyd contract as the baseline format and to import specific clauses from other example contracts (identified in the meeting as Halliburton and Washington County forms) where they preferred language.

- Residency: members discussed requiring the director to maintain a local address and debated how narrowly to define "local." The committee reviewed Halliburton's residency clause as one example, which reads in part, "the director shall maintain his or her residency in Washington County throughout the term of this agreement," and discussed adapting similar language for Coffee County while retaining board discretion for exceptional hires. Several members asked for a clause allowing the board to waive strict residency requirements during contract negotiation.

- Term and start date: the committee discussed an initial two-year contract with an anticipated start date of June 1, 2025, with the possibility of extended terms on renewal. "Our goal would be to start June 1st," a member said while reviewing term language.

- Compensation and performance bonuses: members preferred separating base salary and performance-based bonuses in the contract. The Boyd format under consideration ties bonuses to measurable benchmarks derived from the district strategic plan; the committee discussed annual bonuses rather than a single bonus paid only at the end of the full contract term. As an example of structure discussed, members considered annual performance bonuses (suggested range discussed in the meeting: up to about $5,000 per year) tied to specific, measurable goals aligned to the strategic plan and the director's annual evaluation.

- Strategic plan and evaluation: the committee reinforced that the director should develop a proposed strategic plan and that measurable benchmarks used for bonuses should be drawn from that plan. The committee discussed evaluation timing, with several members preferring a year-end evaluation and one group recommending a December 15 target to give time for corrective action or contract discussions before the new school year budget cycle. The committee agreed to include language requiring written feedback, a summary of strengths and areas for improvement, and a mechanism for the director to submit a written response attached to the board's evaluation.

- Benefits, work calendar and other terms: members agreed to adopt benefit language similar to the Halliburton example but to add dental explicitly. The committee discussed placing the director on the central-office work calendar (about 257 workdays was proposed as the baseline), how annual/accumulated leave would be handled, and whether to continue the previous director's vacation/leave structure. Moving expenses and temporary housing were left for negotiation or board discretion in individual contracts.

- Travel and mileage: committee members reviewed two approaches used in sample contracts: a flat monthly stipend for in-county travel (examples cited in other contracts ranged from $400 to $600 per month) plus mileage reimbursement at the state rate for travel outside the county, or reimbursement-only based on submitted mileage. The committee did not adopt a final figure and left the mechanism as a negotiable item or a policy-dictated practice.

Decisions and next steps: the chair asked staff to consolidate the agreed pieces into a single draft contract and a brochure page-two packet and circulate both to committee members for review. The committee will meet in a special session Feb. 12 to finalize selection criteria; the full board will be asked to adopt the final brochure and contract template and will handle any terms negotiated with finalists.

The committee recorded no formal motions at the Jan. 21 meeting; members treated the session as committee work that will culminate in materials presented to the full board for formal action.

Committee members and staff said they would circulate the consolidated draft for comment and return with any suggested edits prior to the Feb. 12 special meeting.

Ending: The committee chair closed the meeting after members agreed on the path forward and scheduled the follow-up work and the special called meeting to finalize selection criteria and circulate the brochure and contract template to the full board.