Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Policies topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Wetzel County board declines to advance revised personnel policies that would remove IT director

WETZEL COUNTY SCHOOLS · June 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Wetzel County Schools board debated revisions that would remove the technology director from a supplement schedule and expand a lead TSS role; after lengthy discussion about cybersecurity and continuity, a voice vote split 2–2 and the motion failed for lack of a majority.

The Wetzel County Schools board considered revisions on second reading to local personnel policies that would remove the director of technology (and nurses) from the central-office supplement schedule and formalize a supplemental role for a lead TSS (technical support specialist).

Board member Mrs. Fonner moved to bring the two policies (GCB and GCBA/GCBA-R) forward for second-reading approval; Mr. Castello seconded the motion and discussion followed. Proponents said redistributing some director duties to existing staff and elevating a lead TSS would produce cost savings through attrition and allow the district to avoid layoffs. Staff explained the district uses an incident-ticketing system (Incident IQ) to route technology problems and said much routine work would be handled by TSS staff under the proposed arrangement.

Other board members pushed back, saying the technology director is the district’s central information officer and that removing that director-level post could create cybersecurity and continuity risks. One board member said technology is “the brain of your entire corporation” and expressed concern about splitting leadership responsibilities across several employees. Trustees also raised questions about certification requirements for a director’s role and whether qualified candidates currently exist in the district.

With only four members present, the board took a voice vote after discussion and the responses produced a two-to-two split. Because a majority was not achieved, the motion failed and the proposed changes did not pass second reading.

What happens next: The policies remain unchanged tonight. Board members discussed revisiting organizational charts and job postings should the administration pursue an alternate restructuring, and noted any future changes would require further board action and clear role definitions for technology and nursing oversight.