The board reviewed options for a superintendent-evaluation tool during a presentation led by Tim, a district staff member who outlined sample models and opened the floor for questions.

"What has been presented is not any type of exemplar model, but just to provide us options in terms of policy governance and other standards based ways to measure superintendent evaluation," Tim said, describing a rubric-based option that draws evidence from monitoring reports, financial oversight, district performance results and community feedback and recommends an annual cycle rather than a single event.

Board members asked whether factors would be evenly weighted and how to reduce subjectivity. Several directors expressed support for a rubric and discussed linking evaluation categories to existing monitoring reports to reduce variance. Superintendent Chris Godowsky and other members referenced the Dallas model as a precedent that weights student achievement more heavily (60% student achievement, 20% financial stewardship, 20% stakeholder satisfaction) and said the district may research that approach further. The board asked staff to circulate older evaluation documents and consider additional options before finalizing a model.

On routine business, the board voted to adopt a draft legislative platform assembled from member suggestions and staff input; a motion to adopt was moved, seconded and approved by roll call. The board also approved the minutes of the Dec. 1, 2025 meeting, approved personnel actions on the consent agenda, and accepted an agreement to resolve an expulsion appeal from Nov. 19, 2025. All motions were seconded and recorded with roll-call 'Aye' votes by directors present.

The board announced upcoming dates: a classified staff visit on Jan. 14 at the CSEA office, a possible brief Jan. 7 meeting to address an oil-and-gas matter, the next regular board meeting on Jan. 21, and a special community engagement meeting planned for Feb. 4.

No formal changes to superintendent contract or compensation were proposed at the meeting; discussion focused on options, evidence sources and a timeline for staff follow-up.