Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Superintendent seeks confirmation of annual evaluation timeline; board discusses board-attorney duties and timing
Summary
The superintendent reviewed the annual evaluation timeline and recommended using the same evaluation instrument the board used last year; board members also discussed timing for the board-attorney evaluation and narrowed the attorney's role language around counsel responsibilities.
Get email alerts on the Personnel Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The superintendent asked the board to confirm the annual evaluation timeline and the instrument used in the prior year; board members signaled they preferred to reuse the same form.
The superintendent told the board his contract requires an annual evaluation in June and that he will provide a self-appraisal ahead of the board's review. "My employment contract indicates that I'm evaluated annually during the month of June," he said, and he offered a draft timeline that would deliver his self evaluation to board members on May 23, collect board responses by June 10, conduct one-on-one meetings in mid-June, and present the compiled evaluation for board approval on June 24.
Board members agreed the instrument used last year was simple and effective and that the superintendent should not be required to assemble extensive bindered evidence. The superintendent said he would provide the same materials as last year and add specific artifacts only as requested.
The board also discussed the board attorney evaluation and the attorney's scope of duties. Members questioned a line in the draft form that read "informs the board of pertinent changes in state and federal law" and suggested striking or narrowing it because up-to-date legislative summaries now come from multiple counsel and sources. They also discussed adding a line clarifying the attorney's role in coordinating with district counsel and assisting staff on intersecting legal issues when appropriate.
Board members agreed the board-attorney evaluation timing can be completed in the November timeline used previously, and they asked staff to check contract and policy language that governs that process. No formal votes were taken on evaluation forms or timing at the workshop; the superintendent will proceed with the draft schedule and supply materials to the board.

