Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newberry County Board approves one-year extension for superintendent amid debate over contract length
Summary
The Newberry County Board of Trustees voted on Feb. 24 to extend Superintendent Michael Presley’s contract one year, to June 30, 2026, while attaching a five-point action plan requiring increased school visits, monthly reporting and other accountability measures.
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Newberry County Board of Trustees voted on Feb. 24 to extend Superintendent Michael Presley’s contract for one year, to June 30, 2026, attaching a five-point action plan intended to increase superintendent visibility and strengthen leadership supports.
The motion to extend the contract was presented by a board member and seconded; the motion carried on a recorded voice vote with five in favor, four opposed and one abstention. The action plan requires the superintendent to make three to four school visits each week (both announced and unannounced), provide a monthly visit report in board packets, produce a monthly encouragement video highlighting staff and student achievements, observe principal evaluation meetings in accordance with state law and regulation, and make monthly contact with each board member between meetings.
Board members debated the extension for roughly an hour. Several trustees voiced support for Presley’s leadership and recent student achievement gains. “We are a high performing district. And I promise you, we will be one of the top 10 districts in this state with student achievement. Give me one more year,” Presley said during the meeting.
Other trustees said they had concerns about limited progress in some areas and wanted stronger, measurable accountability. One board member said she had been on the board only three months and had not had time to review past evaluations and so abstained, saying, “I haven’t been here long enough to really dig into what’s been going on.” Several trustees also questioned whether Presley’s contract was a rolling three-year agreement; Presley and other board members said the initial contract was for three years and that annual extensions are added after successful evaluations.
The board’s discussion touched repeatedly on the mechanics of the contract. Presley clarified during the meeting: “My contract is a three-year contract. It is not a one-year contract. And that’s the only comment I want to make.” Other trustees said they had not been aware of the rolling three-year language and asked the superintendent and attorney to confirm the contract terms.
The board attached the five action items to the one-year extension and approved the extension with the action plan. Members discussed the possibility of offering a longer extension but voted on the motion as presented.
The board’s action follows an executive-session discussion of personnel matters and public comments earlier in the meeting about district performance and leadership.
Details recorded in the meeting packet and discussed aloud cite South Carolina Code of Laws and state education regulations concerning principal evaluations and superintendent responsibilities.
The board will review implementation of the action items during its regular meetings and will revisit the superintendent’s contract next year if necessary.

