Lockwood educator urges transparent, fair process for interim superintendent after multiple resignations

Jen Hall, identified by the chair as a veteran educator with 26 years at Lockwood, told the board she and many staff are "deeply concerned" about the district's direction after the recent resignations of the superintendent, the business manager, the district clerk and a trustee. "Whether people agree on the reasons or not, this level of turnover should get every one of us paused," Hall said.

Hall urged the trustees to run a "fair, transparent, and complete process" for appointing an interim superintendent. She said an internal assistant superintendent who "worked alongside our superintendent, understood our schools, knew our staff" was a logical internal candidate but was not invited to interview alongside other finalists. "My concern is that a respected administrator who has remised years in this district deserved a fair, transparent, and complete process," Hall said.

Hall also criticized changes she said staff and community members have experienced at meetings: "Public comments are no longer being read. Questions have been cut short or left unanswered," she said, adding that trustees have reported being excluded from important discussions. She framed transparency as more than publishing an agenda: "It's creating an environment where questions are welcomed, information is shared openly, and people feel like their voices matter."

Before interviews began, the board took disclosures from trustees about relationships with candidates. One trustee (Speaker 3) said that Lance Lisonbee and his family are community members and described having a past real-estate listing transaction involving Jim Lisonbee; that trustee said they had consulted legal counsel and were advised that "none of the prohibitions under policy 15 12 apply to this past completed transaction" and affirmed their ability to evaluate candidates fairly. Another trustee (Speaker 4) said they are friends with a candidate (referred to in the transcript as "Lance Olson") and encouraged applications while stating they could objectively review the field.

A staff member (Speaker 6) summarized Montana conflict-of-interest guidance, noting the "bright-line" rules that disqualify voting in cases of nepotism or significant ownership in a vendor, while also saying closer personal relationships can create reasons to consider abstaining even if not legally required.

The chair told the public that candidate application materials, interview questions and evaluation rubrics are public records and would be available consistent with Montana public-records requirements, with privacy protections as applicable. The board also reminded trustees that completed evaluation forms and rubrics will be retained as part of the interview record.

The board proceeded with interviews and the chair said trustees would continue to interview remaining candidates before discussing appointments and any possible action later that evening.