Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forest Hills board clashes over evaluations and transparency; work session proposed
Summary
Board members debated whether to adopt a NEOLA evaluation template or a locally adapted tool for the superintendent and treasurer, with calls for a public work session and sharp exchanges about leaks, trust and last-minute agenda materials.
The Forest Hills Board of Education spent a large part of its Dec. 18 meeting debating how to evaluate district leadership and how the board should work together going forward. Members disagreed over whether to adopt a generic NEOLA evaluation form or use a more tailored tool that aligns with local job descriptions.
Board member Wendy (last name not specified in the transcript) said she had reviewed the NEOLA template and "it is only about halfway aligned with the job descriptions," and proposed an adapted form that would better reflect the superintendent and treasurer roles. The superintendent, Bob Hook, and treasurer Alana Cropper were discussed in the context of those evaluations but did not speak during the exchange on the evaluation tool.
Board members voiced frustration about the timing and communication of materials. One trustee said the draft was circulated "an hour before the meeting," and another asked that members be canvassed individually before spending time updating a form. Multiple trustees urged a public work session after the Jan. 15 organizational meeting so members could review a draft and offer edits before any decision.
The discussion grew personal at times. One trustee read from an email alleging that internal receipts and social contacts indicated which trustees may have shared information externally; another trustee demanded "Where's the proof?" and called some of the allegations "hearsay." Trustees exchanged sharp remarks about "lying" and "leaks" to community members and the media; several speakers emphasized the importance of using email for recordable communication.
The group also discussed state legislation cited by members. Trustee Wendy said she read Senate Bill 295 and concluded that closing schools is one of five potential state actions under the bill, but that the legislation also includes other improvement options; she added that the bill uses norm-referenced criteria that she finds problematic.
Outcome and next steps: several trustees asked that all members review the draft evaluation tool and noted their willingness to hold a public work session after the Jan. 15 organizational meeting to negotiate a final approach. No formal change to policy or evaluation instruments was adopted at the Dec. 18 meeting.
