Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Appointments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gresham-Barlow SD 10J board interviews three finalists, aims to appoint March 5
Summary
At a Feb. 12 special work session the Gresham-Barlow SD 10J board interviewed three finalists for a vacant board seat, described a pairwise comparison scoring process for independent evaluation, and said it may review a fourth candidate's video before a March 5 appointment.
The Gresham-Barlow SD 10J board met in a Feb. 12 special work session and interviewed three finalists for a vacant board seat, saying the district aims to make an appointment at its March 5 public meeting. The board used 20-minute, six-question interviews and a pairwise comparison matrix to collect independent, private preferences from each member.
Board leadership explained that members will not discuss their scoring while completing the matrix; staffer Sarah will collect the sheets and hold them until a later review intended to preserve each member's unaided judgment. The board also said a fourth finalist who could not attend in person will submit video answers, which the panel will try to review before the March 20 follow-up if possible.
Three candidates presented their backgrounds and reasons for seeking the seat. Garrett Wood, introduced by the facilitator, described long local ties and volunteer service, saying he's "part of the community" and has served on the district budget and redistricting work. He told the board he intends to bring a collaborative, practical approach rooted in local experience.
Kayla (last name in the transcript as Vermauntas) described 18 years as a small-business owner and marketing professional and emphasized communication with families. "Parents just don't know the things," she said, arguing clearer, targeted messaging helps build transparency and engagement.
Kelly (introduced in the record as Londavazzo) highlighted roughly 34 years living in Gresham and a three-decade career in city government focused on citizen outreach. She told the board that "open and honest communication is always what's necessary for transparency" and urged strategic planning that ties rhetoric to measurable steps.
The board reiterated its appointment timeline and public process: members will complete pairwise comparisons after interviews, return their sheets to staff for safekeeping, and the board will consider all candidates before a public appointment vote at the March 5 meeting. The facilitator told the panel the goal remains to see all four finalists evaluated fairly before any decision.
What comes next: the board will collect members' completed matrices, attempt to review the fourth candidate's video responses before March 20 if feasible, and take a public appointment vote at the March 5 meeting.
