Board reviews nepotism policy in work session, debates supervisor definitions

During a work session following the regular meeting, the Overton County School Board discussed revisions to the district’s nepotism policy and whether the organizational chart and job descriptions accurately reflect supervisory relationships.

Board members noted the existing policy and related emergency provisions lack precise language defining which positions are considered supervisors and which relatives are covered. One board member said, “we as a board need to discuss and go through and put what we, define out a supervisor in this,” urging clearer policy language. Another member observed that assistant principals are described in job documents as assisting principals and “they don't supervise any of the personnel,” and emphasized that the teacher contract specifically names only the director of schools and the principal as direct supervisors.

Participants also raised concerns about public perception: even if assistant principals do not make major decisions in practice, community members often view them as acting in charge when principals are absent. A board member suggested that clarifying the organizational chart and adding explicit language to principals' job descriptions identifying supervisory relationships would reduce confusion. The transcript records that some positions were described as being “grandfathered in before the policy started in 2013,” a factor board members said should be considered in any revisions.

No formal amendment or vote on the nepotism policy was taken during the work session. Board members asked staff to review state requirements on disclosure of relationships and to update the organizational chart and job descriptions as appropriate so that future personnel actions align with clarified policy language.

The board moved from the work session to routine reminders and closed with staff appreciation remarks and praise for a clean audit result.