06.18.2025 Special Governing Board Meeting

001[Music] Liberty School Board governing Liberty School District governing board meeting is called to order today, Wednesday, June 18th. The time is 4:30 p.m. We're at the Jerry Roby District facility. Five board members present. Board member Schmidt, board member Zimmerman, Vice President Kenyon, board member Shinsion, myself, Michael Todd. Next item on the agenda is the pledge of allegiance. Uh Mr. Can you please lead us? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Members, next item on the agenda is 1.3, the approval of special meeting agenda. Mr. Mr. President, I make a motion to approve this agenda consistent with board policy BEEDB and temporarily suspend the governing board policy with which this agenda may

002be inconsistent. Second. Have a motion, a second to approve the special meeting agenda. If there's no discussion, we'll take a vote. Uh, board member Schmidt I. Board member Zimmerman. I, Vice President Kenyon, I. Board member Shinion, I. I'm also I will show the item 1.3 approved five yes zero no. Next members is item two. Our consent agenda 2.1 is being pulled. Uh we don't have it back from legal review yet. So we're going to skip that. The only thing on the consent agenda will be item 2.2 personal action items. The attachment is in board docs. I make them. Uh sorry I didn't if you're ready for a motion. You're ready. Go Okay. Um, I make a motion to approve item 2.2. Okay. Do I have a second? I second. We have a motion, a second

003to approve item 2.2, the personal action items. There's no discussion, we'll take a vote. Board member Schmidt, I. Board member Zimmerman, I. Vice President Kenyon, I. Board member Shinion, I. I'm also I will show item 2.2 approved with five yes, zero nos. Next up will be item three. Uh discussion 3.1 discussion consideration approval of the trust policy chapter 5 second read Miss Castanos. [Music] How about now? Yep. All right. Good evening, governing board members. Um I'm here today to discuss our second read of chapter 5. You all received the finalized version of this yesterday. Um, so I know that hasn't provided a lot of time for review, but there wasn't significant changes from the last one that you had received on Friday. Um, I will go through these just what we are changing. Okay. So,

004we've already approved quite a bit of the changes. Um, and so I'm just going to go through some of the most pertinent changes um, from this last read. Before we start, is there any questions that you all have for me so far? uh just a question. Um so as we go through them if we have a question or a comment we can address it at that time. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So we can start on page 15. On page 15 um this is within the compulsor or 5-103.A. Um this was throughout the the policies that we've done over the last um two weeks. I've tried to make everything consistent. So this is our first uh mention of the revocation of open enrollment status. During our meeting last time, we had talked about how we

005could possibly revoke open enrollment status and have that language with inside these policies based on the fact that um for tardy attendance purposes and or disciplinary infractions and we wanted a policy around that. after the review from the trust and from our legal team, they are asking that we hold off on putting that policy in place. So, we can adopt it now and then have further legal review before it's implemented or we can go ahead and strike all language around the open enrollment for this read and then bring it back for the re revocation of open enrollment and bring it back um at a separate time. Mr. President, may I You may I feel more comfortable just removing it until we're ready to approve it. Okay. So, just for us keeping track um so that

006we can attempt to potentially approve this tonight. So, if we just keep a list of page numbers of changes potentially. I'm just thinking how we're going to address a 200page document in a motion because right now this is it the last sentence that we're going to be removing under B. Additionally, if the student is enrolled under open enrollment, violations may result in the revocate. Correct. Yeah. And so that is what this notebook is for here. I was going to go ahead and keep track of those page numbers and then I'll mention like which pages and policies that we are um amending. Does that make sense at the end? Okay. So this is 5103 point A and it will be the last sentence in B the disciplinary action. Sorry, can you read the policy number one

007more time? 5-103.A. A I just want to add that I'm also comfortable with just removing it for right now and then address it at a later time with legal review. Okay. So if we move on to page 175-104A procedure homebound or hospitalized students with chronic health problems. In this section, um, we went through and did the distinction between under certification for under 90 days and certification for over 90 days. Because of the language throughout the um, documents, we did go with the appropriate licensed physician. Um, that language and that aligns with the Arizona healthcare cost containment language. It also aligns with federal language um, and aligns with the Department of Education language. And then uh under that we did under 90 days the certification can come from an appropriate licensed health care professional. Um and

008then if we move on same policy under page 18 and it is number I'm sorry it's number five under that policy. Yeah. So number five in this I'm sorry under a number five. So this is having the certification be retroactive but basically because of ADM and how this would affect that we can't make those certifications retroactive. Okay. All right. And then um under enrollment of 5-105 open enrollment page 19 uh we look to remove the word shall and um because that is in the statutory language we have to keep that in place. Okay. Page 20 of the same. Okay, I have a I have a question. So this numbers you know from 19 page 19 to the start of 20 numbers one through four those that's statute. Yes that's the shall from statute. So resident

009students this is open enrollment though. So in this section, this is directly the section was taken directly from statute. So the statute that's listed here, ARS15-816.01 is the enrollment. So this is enrollment. So the district shall enroll any student who applies for enrollment at any time. The district shall give enrollment preference to and reserve capacity for the following. These are the followings that we shall give enrollment preference to. Okay? Because then on page 20 the you know where we list resident students. This is again we're giving enrollment preference to and reserving capacity. Some of these are required by law. But then that last one, students who um are children or persons who have employed by the uh employed by a school in the district that isn't listed. Oh, that's right. Sorry, it's listed in a

010different spot now. Never mind. I read this earlier today. Okay, we're good. It gets really confusing because of the shall and may um and having to have both sections in there. My question for you all will be on page 20 if the enrollment preference res um is in alignment with what you were asking for. The the concern I have is the listed priority area. Yeah. Is the ones that were required. So those are on top. So resident students, students returning to the school from prior year. Like I wanted to make sure that we gave those enrollment preferences. If we're going to have a list of priority areas, we need to talk about all of them, right? Not just the open enrollment status. So, okay. But like McKenna Vinto, we don't have a choice. Correct. So,

011I guess my question is should it be as part of the um ranking because we don't have a choice? Do you know what I'm asking? Yeah, I can see what you're saying, Mr. President. me. You may. Yeah, I think I think it's good to have them all spelled out here just because it's it's already putting I know this is technically under the maze section, but it's also reiterating. We're not going to step over the the ones that are the shells. So, it's just putting them all back in in order. Correct. And then after the fourth one, um there's where the fifth, sixth, and seventh, those are the ones that we could arrange rearrange the orders, but one through four are the requirement. Okay. I was just trying to understand I understand what you're saying, but

012that's not actually what it says because it says that they're listed in order of priority. So if you read that, that means that the first one is more important than the third one. But we know that the McKenna Ventto one you have no choice. So that one would always take pre I mean the other ones too we have to enroll a resident student. So they it's like they have equal weight basically but that's not what it says. It says it's in order how they're listed. So I think that's the issue. Not that we don't know that they're all equal weighted but that's not what it says. Mr. Chris may uh for the ones that we have to like the district gives enrollment that's for the foster care. Where does it say that it's ranked? So

013in the section um on page why they appeared then? Yeah. Where it said the very last section in red well I guess the very last section that's underlined. It says the district gives enrollments preference to and reserves capacity for all the following listed in order of priority. That was based on the discussion that we had on June 7th where we were asked to like give me a priority listing. You're right. We don't have options with the first four. Like these are we will enroll these students regardless of capa capacity, right? But these last three, we do have options. And I I guess I'm a little bit confused because I didn't think that for open enrollment we have to reserve capacity for siblings or even kids from year to year because in another district in the

014West Valley they had kids they said we don't have room for you next year that have been going to that school for a long time and parents cannot take them there anymore. So, but I agree that the way that this is written signifies essentially that resident students have a higher priority than McKini Vento and essentially they're equal. I think in in order of priority has to be for groups of students that we do not have to enroll. Okay. So, what would be the change you'd like to see there? Would you like to see that whole section stricken or would you like to see the first section removed? The first like four removed and then the open enrollment preference is for these students in this order. I mean students in foster care have to um be

015enrolled as well, right? Their school of origin is required. So I mean if a if as you say according to the statute that students returning from a prior year have to be enrolled really the only one that's not required because would be the last one. Uh students who have um a parent on active duty. Isn't that um statute as well? So before we get too deep into like the legal requirements I'm not an attorney. Right. So I give legal advice and our attorney is not here to provide that legal advice in this moment. So all I can do is refer us back to the statutes of the shell and the may um but I can't Mr. President you may so I I think we're like making this muddier than we have to like everything's already

016covered in the the paragraphs above it. We're making it more difficult by trying to list it in preference because it's already separated on who we can and who we must enroll. So, I think we should just leave it as that instead of trying to rank them. I think I agree. I'm I'm okay with that as long as we either, you know, remove the the um list listed in order of priority or just add the um Oh, no. We did the ones with the district. So, I'm okay if you just want them remove. So, that would be under 5-105 open enrollment. We will be removing on page 20 everything that um references the district's priority area or priority enrollment. We're sorry. We're just removing what's in red though, correct? Yes. Okay. And let me just to

017be clear the I'm trying to do make sure we're straight for the U motion at the end. Um so we are going to re be removing the very bottom paragraph that states on page 20 the district gives enrollment preference to and reserves capacity for all the following listed in priority area. So all reference to priority area will be removed throughout this policy because there's going to come up several other times in here where we've got priority areas. Okay, moving on to page 21. Um this is also reference to the priority listing area. So we will remove that. So page 21, it's open enrollment 5-105A procedures. Um, and if we can just remove all sections that um refer to a preference listing in policy 51-05. So moving on to page 23. There are two areas in

018this policy and this is 5-105.A. page 23 right above um where it says revocation of open enrollment. There it was a discussion that we had about transportation fees, right? For students who have open enrollment and being able to charge a transportation fee. We have been um advised that that should probably go through further legal review because um it could provide some liabilities for the district. So that language was removed. So just for clarification that whole last sentence is going to be removed. No, the language is already removed. So if you look at the comment section um the res under the third paragraph in that first comment it says the following edit was removed when transportation is offered to open enrollment. That was already removed prior to you getting this. Okay. So, what I would like

019to see though is the district may provide transportation to stu to students accepted for open enrollment when required by law because this leaves it open even when the district is not required to do so because that was part of the discussion. That's how we got into charging. Yeah. and be this most likely needs to go through further legal review under the um revocation of open enrollment status and we can ask about that transportation piece um primarily because legal is telling us like it needs a deeper dive. Okay. So again, it is the will of the board. So if you all would like to keep that l or to change that language, we can. But I'm just letting you know that uh legal has told us to pause asked us to pause not told us. I

020apologize. Okay. Um and then again in reference to the revocation of open enrollment on this same page that all will be removed and that's 5-105A on page 23 number E or letter E will be removed in its entirety. Moving on to page 275-202, students with disability. Um, we have Okay. So we inserted um we inserted some language about access to education. So that is under you you'll see that under the fifth bullet point down. So I'm sorry sixth uh bullet point down you'll see students ability to access education and that language has been changed throughout Moving on on page 28. It's just a typo, I think, so I don't know if we have to write it, but to access a free and appropriate education, the A is missing. Thank you. Okay. And then looking at

021page 345-203, students with disabilities. Um the trust has offered the intro paragraph um or intro sentence that uh Miss Simmerman had requested. Okay. And then on that same page um we had initially removed this big section um from birth through 21 years of age and because that is um directly in statute they've asked that we keep that there. page 36 of the same policy under um B on the very top of page 36. The district must make reasonable efforts to obtain informed consent. Um we were looking to change that language to shall. However, uh based on the legal review, they're saying they do not recommend changing the language for that. Page 41 of the same policy. There was an edit here uh removing the reference to a child graduating at or the age of 22

022uh receiving a regular high school diploma or the age of 22. They are suggesting that we do not delete that language. And then on the same page of 41 at the very bottom you'll see underlined in red the district standard ability achievement discrepancy model that is referenced here. This is the model that is currently being used, but they do you do have the right under the state to have to use two other forms of verification for disability. Um, and that's also referenced here. So, I didn't want to block you all in. Um, so I went ahead and called out what the model is that you're currently using and then left the reference to statute of you being able to use whatever model is most appropriate. page 44 of the same l of the same policy

023um is the same conversation about standard learning disability or standard ability achievement discrepancy model. Okay, Mr. President, may I? You may. Okay. So, I still have a concern with how this is written currently and it I just think it needs a little tweak because the way that I read it is essentially if a student doesn't achieve adequate progress for their age, they could qualify. And I don't think we want to make that statement. So, um, what I'd like to see is a child may, uh, be determined to have a specific learning disability, um, in one or more of the following areas when they show. So, this is like, so we're crossing out kind of the first part and then inserting show a significant discrepancy between ability and achievement. So we are specifically talking about one

024a we're talking about one a and so the change that you're asking for is the child does not achieve adequately for the child's age or meet the state approved grade level standards. So that is the sentence you're asking to Yes. Okay. Because you know there are a lot of students that don't meet their grade level standards. That does not necessarily mean that they have a learning disability. And how we determine a learning disability is a discrepancy. And it's going to give other opportunities B and C to use those other ways. I just think we need to specify that this A is the discrepancy. So, it would cross out that first part of the sentence and then say, uh, a child may be determined to have a specific learning disability in one or more of the

025following areas when they show a significant discrepancy between ability and achievement. And then you could keep going with the rest of that sentence. May I may I ask where this language um originally came from? This came right from the trust, right? Yeah. So the language originally this is the original language of the policy that was written by the trust um when we were inserting the standard ability achievement discrepancy model that's up top. what the trust had or what Jennifer Mlelen at the trust had mentioned to us was that these were the specific places where they need to show the discrepancy. Right? And so the up above says how we determine that the child does not meet the state approved grade level standards for their age. Right. That we determine that by the SLD that's above.

026Yeah. I I understand what Miss Zimmerman's saying, but I'm I'm comfortable leaving it as is. Um I think it kind of covers all that as you said above in the paragraph above it's talking about the discrepancies, but um also their age is very important. Um that I think that needs to remain in there and just just I'm okay with it how how it is currently. Mr. Mr. President, you may I'm only okay with it because it has may it they may be determined based on this stuff. Doesn't mean they're going to be determined just cuz they have a state like don't meet the state approved grade level standards. Mr. President, yes. Okay. So, I'd just like to note for the record that I am in disagreement. I think that that we are opening up the

027district for parents to come back and say that you can qualify my child. They can go through a due process claim like I I have a significant concern with this particular wording. Moving on to page 47 of the same policy. Under E1, you'll see that we've added the governing board will annually establish and approve policies and procedures within regard to the allowable pupil teacher ratio ratio. So, moving on to page 74. And this is under 5-204 students with disability and procedural safeguards. Um, we added in that we'll be using the DIS or the district will use Arizona Department of Education's guideline for determining a surrogate parent. want to make sure is is everybody caught up. Are we all okay? I just want to make sure. Then moving on to page 81 5-205A gifted education programs.

028Um we've added in as detailed in the gifted soap and scope and sequence of the district's website. Moving on to page 96, 5-210, special interest material. Mr. President, can we go back to page 90 real quick, please? Sure. Um, I just want to bring this up. We did have quite a bit of discussion about it being an equ uh first it was a majority percentage and then an equal percentage. Um and I just want to be clear that I certainly want as many parents as we possibly can to serve on a committee. But my concern by by being so specific saying equal if we can only get one parent to serve on the committee. Are we only allowing one person on the district to also serve on the committee and those two people are going

029to re make a recommendation on curriculum? I'm just not sure that I'm comfortable with two people deciding curriculum um or recommending a curriculum to the board. I' I'd like to have a robust comm uh committee and I I just wonder if we could add a caveat about uh how we you know try to include parents or something but doesn't tie our hands. This is a very specific number. Mr. President, if I may may. Um yeah, this was something that I brought up last time as well. I was just concerned about that equal percentage. I would be in favor of this just saying that the parents are included as a voting member and just kind of get rid of majority or equal. Um I I want parent involvement as much as possible, but I can see

030where this can really kind of make it hard for our staff to be able to approve curriculum and go through those steps. I agree with Mr. Kenyon in removing the the line of the wording for the equal percentage and just saying that parents are part of the committee. Um so that as as both uh members of Roman said and Minister Kenyon said we're tying our hands here if we we say they have to be equal. Okay. So on page 90 the revision will stand as uh this is 5-207 page 90 um section A we will remove the equal percentage and replace it with parents are included as voting members. Can you say that again? 5-207 page 90 section A. We will remove the word equal percentage and add um parents are included as voting members.

031So it will read procedures to encourage parental involvement on all selection and adoption committees such that parents um I think we need to take out may comprise an equal percentage um that parents are included as voting are included. Okay. So on page 955-211, class size, the superintendent shall make staffing recommendations annually within the budgetary process that are individualized to the district's adopted ratios or maximum number of students per class. So that was the conversation um around the gifted and educ or the I'm sorry around the uh pupil teacher ratio for gifted and for special education on page 995-212A procedures student clubs and activities activities. Um, in section C on page 99, we had a pretty robust discussion about um, allowing non-curricular student groups. Um, and within that, you all had asked me to draft some

032language um, that might say why a particular group may or may not be allowed within and giving the principal rights to revoke those. After this has gone through legal review and review of the trust, they've stated that we might want to um halt that change until we get some more detailed language um and an opportunity to explain to the board some of the ramifications um equal opportunity options as well for um these non-curricular groups. So they are suggesting that we keep this as the district does not permit non-curricular student groups does not yes right so that's what I'm after having the discussion with um the trust this morning and Jennifer and legal review they're stating that we should most likely look at this and um say the district does not permit non-curricular student groups until

033you all have an opportunity to sit down with an attorney and understand the full ramifications. They were pulling back the language that you added and going back to the original as how it was. So, right now it looks like it was crossed out, but really just sorry, mine is not in color, but in the one that is not in color, it would just go back to everything that's gray is gone and just the solid black would be there. So the district does permit no sorry does not permit non-curricular student groups period that's it right but then when we have all non-curricular student groups must are we going to leave that in even though we're saying we're not going to allow them I would suggest that we revert back to the original trust policy language which

034is this correct leaving it in the district is not permit non-curricular student groups and then the rest would be removed. Yeah. So everything under that sentence would be removed all the way down to D. Is that right? I believe so. Yes. Okay. I feel like this is backwards. I feel like it originally said to have them and we argue not to have them. the last meeting that we had on June 7th, there was um really robust discussion about allowing them in because we didn't want to exclude a chess group. Um but again, because of the other language that was asked to be put in here, we need to have a deeper dive with legal before we allow for them to be in. Ultimately, I think what legal explained is that this is a very slippery

035slope to allow. If you allow one, you have to allow every non-curricular group. Oh, I I agree. So, they're saying you're better to just keep it keep all of them out and then you don't have a problem cuz there could be if you allow one in, there could be a something come up in the future that we haven't even thought of that wants to come in and we can't we can't stop that, right? I'm just confused because if you look at the comment, it says to leave it as it is and with the stuff marked out, that makes me believe that we should read it as the stuff marked out as being marked out. Right. So, I think we got this yesterday and you had a conversation with the trust this morning. So, that that's

036aren't quite aligning with what um is the wording that I'm saying right now. So, I apologize. There was I needed to get some clarification on some of these comments so that I was fully prepared to come in and have this conversation with you today. um through that conversation is where it was like, hey, it might be best to just go ahead and say that the district does not permit non-curricular student groups for now and let you all explore this policy at a later date and how you might be able to allow it with it staying in in the integrity of the district and in alignment um with what the district values. So page 995-212A um procedures student club we under section C non-curricular student groups the district does not permit non-curricular student groups will be

037the wording there and everything else will be deleted. Okay, moving on to page 105. This is policy 5-213A procedure for district sponsored events. Um we added in the students demonstration of good citizenship and appropriate conduct. So that is the language that you all had requested um for the approval of sports eligibility, Mr. President. Yes. Okay. Um just on page 104 um just because we added a third thing. It says students participating in any inter scholastic extracurricular extracurricular activity must meet both of the following criteria. I would just remove must meet the following criteria. Um, and then, um, I just wanted to be clear that, uh, you know, for the public and transparency that we are changing it from a D to a C in order to play sports. Um, and that the district uh, and

038principles will need to be very clear in their messaging to parents and to students at the beginning of the year because that is a pretty significant change. um in order to help support this. As I, you know, thought about this policy um and how it will affect our teams and you know certainly there have been times where teams have had to forfeit because um students were ineligible and things like that. um that maybe the district consider doing a grade check prior to tryyouts of a sport um to try to eliminate some of these concerns that may arise with the change in um I can see Amy's like you cannot exclude them. I can see on your face. Um I was trying to hide it. Um so uh you know I can see that but they

039are going to be held accountable for that grade. So, you know, it's just something um that I think principles are going to have to work really closely with their junior high families at the start of the year to make sure that they understand this change. I I also have a question on that. I don't think this should be limited to just sports. It should also be other extracurricular activities to do those extra things. I don't think we should should just pull out sports. I think it should be all extracurricular activities. And that's just this specifically spells out intercolastic. So I think that's calling it just sports. But my I don't think it's fair that we would remove an athlete from their event, but we would let a non-athlete continue to participate in something. Okay. I

040would in order to make that change, I would need to have some time to go through the policy and see where the most appropriate fit for putting eligibility on uh what are we saying? Eligibility on non-c Well, it wouldn't be non-curricular groups, right? But it could be any after school activities. It says activity in here. It says extracurricular activity, right? But it says intercolastic extracurricular activity. So, I think we're just missing a comma maybe, right? But this this section specifically states intercolastic extracurricular activities, which is sports. I'm just saying that as I look at this, I think somewhere in the policy and we can bring it back. I would like to get this approved tonight, but in some of the other things, we can bring it back and extend that letter C grade to other

041extracurricular activities. Okay? I I don't want that to hold up approval. But we need to get this done and get it to the trust and and move it. So, if you'll just make a note and then we can clean it up with some of the other page 1175-303 student records. Um, from this point forward, you will see a few of these comments that say JM next to them. That is uh Jennifer Mlen. She added some language throughout um that is consistent with the updates in the trust in May 2025, so just last month. Page 126 5-303B procedures. Um, this has to do with the uh opt out policy for Furpa opt out policy. page 1315-304, staff interviews of students and students and searches. Um on our in our discussion on June 7th, I'm sorry, on

042June 7th, the district did not have a current policy for um providing random drug testing, but the board may adopt that policy. Um, and then you'll see further down the page on um, 5-305, some of the copyrights have been removed from things that we made substantial changes on. So, page 133, this is 530. Hang on, we got a question. This is just a clerical thing on 131 uh for the district should be adopt instead adopted. We need to keep track of those for the motion. Correct. Or are we going to not worry about clerical? I I don't I think clerical you can keep we won't need that in the motion. Okay. Unless it's a substantial There's a few of those t-shirts that are very substant. You see? Whoa. But I don't think that's one. We'll

043be fine with that. Okay. Thank you. Page 1335-305, Student Code of Conduct number 21, you'll see bullying and cyber bullying. Um, we went ahead and added in the language that uh board member Zimmerman had suggested. And then page 135 of the same policy, we um in order to describe the use of cellular devices a little bit um more in line with the current technology, we move to personal devices and other electronic communication. So moving on to page 156 5-41 procedures for police interview and notifications under section B. Um you'll see where the trust has updated their language. Then page 1865-49 prohibition of harass or on harassment intimidation and bullying the electronic um communications language has been updated and the cyber bullying and then the bullying prevention. So, all of that language was changed um to

044be in alignment with the student code of conduct language that we just reviewed. And that is the end of the changes for the trust policy chapter 5. Mr. President, um would it be okay if I read the notes of the proposed changes and then make a motion that um indicates, you know, refers to the notes that are mentioned previously? I think that will be fine. Let's give it a shot. This will be a little tricky, but we'll we'll get through it. Okay. So the notations that will need to be changed for chapter 5 will be page 15 policy 5-103.A and we are removing the last sentence in section B page. Do you want me to go? You tell me if you want me to go slower. Good. I'm just typing as well so we have

045them all saved. Okay. Page 20, policy 5-105, removing um the language that uh the priority uh priority order of open enrollment. And then page 21, which is 5-105.A, A remove all language referencing a priority order for open enrollment referencing a priority order or open enrollment. Okay. Page 235-105.A. So it's the same policy just a different page and it is the removal of the revocation of open enrollment which is letter E. That's revocation of open enrollment. Is that correct? Yeah. Okay. I just it seems like you need to add something. And all references to revoking open enrollment throughout chapter 5. Okay. Okay. Okay. Page 90, policy uh 5-207. I believe it's it references a to remove the language that states may com uh parents may comprise an equal percentage and replace it with um parents are

046included as a voting member. Page 99, uh, policy 5-212.A, um, uh, section C, non-curricular student groups, change to say that the district does not permit non-curricular student groups and remove anything that references to them. And then do you do you need the one where we remove the word both or do you consider that a clerical? I think that's clerical. And we can also just say all clerical um edits and errors. Okay. And correct all clerical edits and errors that were mentioned during the June 18th meeting. Okay, that all. That's all that I wrote down. Can we remove all children as well? Oh, that that Yeah, I thought that was a clerical. It isn't mentioned in the meeting, so it Oh, good point. Okay. So, on page 188, we will be rem It might be different

047on here. I'm sorry. That's okay. Um, we will remove um a typo that states all children and that policy number is 5-410. 5-410. Okay, Mr. President. Yes. Can I ask a question about clarification real quick? Uh, the one for on page 104 5-213, did you say D or C in the section for Sorry, tell me the number again. Uh, it's one of 104. It's section 5-213. You're talking page 104. Yes. Okay. So, what's the policy? 5-213. Oh, and I said 212. No, I don't know if you said I thought it was D and I see Mr. Kenyon has C written down, so I wasn't sure what you said. D. You said D. Okay. Gotcha. Okay. Okay. I tried to capture these typing so we can keep track. Let's uh let me read them back to

048you, Miss Zimmerman, and let me know if you if we've missed anything. Page 15, policy 5-103.A is remove the last sentence in section B. Page 20, policy 1-105 is to remove the language that the priority order of open enrollment. The policy is five 5-105. I fat fingered it there. Okay. Uh, so policy 5-105 is remove language regarding the priority order of open enrollment. Page 21, policy 5-105.A, remove all language referencing a priority order for open enrollment. Page 23, policy 5-105.A A will be the removal of letter E, which is the revocation of open enrollment and all references to revoking open enrollment throughout chapter 5. Page 90, policy 5-207.A. Remove language that parents may comprise an equal percentage and replace with parents are included as a voting member. On page 99, policy 5-212.A A section C

049changes say the district does not allow non-curricular groups and remove any references to non-curricular groups. We will correct all clerical errors and additions mentioned during the June 18th meeting. Mr. President, if I may. Yeah, I'm not done yet. Okay. And then on page 188, policy 5-410, where we remove the typo that states all children. Vice President Kenyon, if I could just real quick look at the that page 95-207A. I Yeah, page 905-207A. talking about the parents being included in a voting voting member. Um, just so that I know this seems a little bit nitpicky, but I know how this can be used down the road. We had stated parents included as a voting member. I would like to say voting members with an S just so that somebody doesn't say, "Oh, there's five parents. That's

050one vote member." So, just adding the S in there. voting members. I do have that listed as remove language that parents may comprise an equal percentage and replace with parents are included as a voting member as voting members. Okay, there you go. Yep. All right. Any other clarifications? Did you say remove the Where is it at? Oh, the words both of in chapter 5 2113. I do not have anything in 5213. Is that a part of the clerical error? I don't know. I think we were just considering that a clerical error because it's just the wrong word. It was removing words. Let's look at it's changing it from both uh 104. Is it changing it from both to all? Yeah, it's instead of both of since there was three. I don't know if I was

051going to say both. Just remove both of so it just says meet the following criteria if that's clerical. Okay. I think you should just change it from both to all. Instead of saying meet both of the requirements, just say meet all of the requirements. And then that encompasses if we add anything later. It's all set already. Can I ask that we add to that list under the revocation or not the revocation, I'm sorry, the priority order if you can give me permission to remove all reference to priority order um for open enrollment as well throughout the the chapter. Finally, I'm trying to get this page 104 clarification. So, it's going to be what's the policy? I think it's 5- A 213A. We're going to change section D. Section D. Yep. Okay. Change change the word

052both to all. Okay. Are there any more hearing? None. We can take a motion. Mr. President, I make a motion to approve the trust policy chapter 5 with the edits as discussed directly prior to the motion and it will be effective July 1, 2025. I'll second. All right. Have a motion, a second. Let's make sure you have that motion. You got it all typed the way you want it, the way it was. Actually, the way it was said, not the way you want it necessarily, but sorry about that. Okay. The motion is to approve the trust policy chapter 5 to be effective July 1, 2025 with the noted changes just prior to the motion, which there's a total of uh one, two, three, four, this is One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine

053significant changes and then the clerical errors and additions mentioned. All right. If there's no further discussion, we can take the vote. Board members. Yes. Do you have a question? Yeah. Just one last uh one last thing that I'd like to let you all know before uh be once we get this approved. The trust will need about three to four weeks to get the website up. So you all will have PDF versions of these documents um posted to your website. That way all of these policies are in one place and then by August 1st you will have the um or I'm sorry by the end of July you will have the website for the trust policies and in the meantime we'll ask it to post one PDF on our district website just under the governing board

054so you can we just won't have a link yet to like the policy bridge. We'll have to get to the trust version and that that's what takes the time. So for the short term we'll have a PDF version on our local website for everybody to see. Mr. President, could I ask two things? You may. Okay. The first one, it would just be an ask if we could do the chapters separately for people. I just think it's going to be easier to find something than 600 pages that they're not they don't know what they're looking for. And then the second thing would be um the part that we approved at the last meeting for you to reference those the different policies. So, will we essentially need to um reapprove all of them with those changes when

055you bring them to us? I don't believe so. I mean, I would have to ask legal to make sure. Okay. Um I don't believe that that would need to be like a reapproval because it's really just kind of more of a website thing than it is any substantial changes to the policy themselves. Okay. So, we we do have a motion in a second. And there was a little clerical discussion there. Uh, I think that's fine. Board member Zimmerman, I don't know if you want to include that we also post this to our website uh within the next day or so. So, we can get these get these on there for parents just just to give it the permission to do that temporarily. I don't think it's necessarily needed, but it would it would maybe clean

056it up a little bit if you want to amend it. If you're good with the way it is, I'm fine as well. Okay. All right. All right. So, we have the motion to and the second. No further discussion. We'll take a vote. Board member Schmidt. I. Board member Zimmerman. I. Vice President Kenyon. I. Board member Shinsion. I. I'm also and I will show that chapter five of the trust policies is approved with a five yes, zero no vote. Thank you all for your work on this project. Miss Castanos. Thank you. All right. Moving right along. Item 3.2 is discussion. consideration of the governing board to discuss and consider the approval of securing the governing board school administrators I'm sorry to securing the Arizona school administrators as the search agent to assist the board in a

057search for interim superintendent so members we did get back from legal the approval for them to do an interim search uh we have Mr. Jordan, stand here again. Um, really what we need now is the I don't know if you need any more presentation from, but we need the motion to to sign the agreement uh to allow the Arizona schools administrators to be our search agent for the interim search position. Are we are we discussing it or is he giving a presentation? If you want an additional presentation, Mr. Jord said, "Are you wanting to do another presentation or just I I think you're on. What I have to prepare goes more toward the next uh agenda item." Right. So, the first step is just proving them based off of his last discussion. The contracts remain

058relatively the same, I believe. Did Legal send that to all of you guys? No. Okay, then let's uh Well, that's my question is we we don't know how much it costs. Sorry, I thought that was sent to you already. It was not attached in here. Um, one second. I'll get it for you. Okay, members, we're in session. I'm going to email this all to you right now so you can look at it and see it. And my apologies. I think this one got dropped with some of the vacations. Um, I thought it was forwarded to you. My apologies. It should be in your inboxes. Mr. President for me. So just for everybody's um sake of time, I think we're looking at the very last page of this, correct? It's where the compensation schedule that's that's

059what's in question. That's correct. That's exhibit C. Mr. President, if I may again, you may. So, looking at that, it it looks pretty reasonable. um from what I've remember from the last time we did a search. Um and so I'll give my board members the time they think they need to review it, but I'm ready for a motion if there's no discussion. Thank you. Could I ask a few questions? Okay. So, um just for transparency sake for the public, um the compensation schedule is $3,500 plus expenses. Um and it includes three search meetings. So, does that include um like the meeting we already had in this one or it would only include after we signed the contract, the three meetings would start to count? I don't believe the first one would count. My understanding, uh

060Mr. Jordan, you could say if this one counts your This one would count. That's when we count because once you've right cuz we're going to move on. I hate to do that that you pass this then we will in our next agenda item get to work and that's 3500. I'll just say that that's when I spoke with Dr. Tai about this he said you know you've had searches where things have happened and suddenly there's become an extra meeting or two extra meetings. So he said, "Don't see that happening." But that's where he he added a little more on to what um as a possibility. For example, I had one district where we had four finalists and then two days before the interview with the finalists, finalists number four, number three, and number two all got

061positions in other districts. And they went from four finalists to one. And that called for an extra meeting to discuss and redecide how to handle that situation and so on. Things happen. Any further questions? are hearing. None. We can take a motion. Mr. President, I make a motion to approve securing Arizona school administrators to be the search agent for the interim superintendent position. Second. I have a motion. I have a second to approve item 3.2, which is securing the Arizona school administrators as a search agent to assist the Liberty Elementary School District in a search for an interim superintendent. Uh, last call for discussion. Otherwise, we'll go to a vote. All right. Hearing none, we'll take the vote. Miss Schmidt, I. Board member Zimmerman. I. Vice President Kenyon. I. Board member Shinion. I. I'm also

062I will show the item 3.2 passed with a five yes zero no vote. Now the fun begins. We're moving on to 3.2 which is discussion consideration of the interim superintendent search next steps in process. Remember this is a uh opportunity for us to work with Mr. Jordad to uh create and discuss the components of the position listing documents uh discuss any special questions we may have. This is a relatively open form at this time but I believe Mr. George, you have a presentation you want to short presentation. First, I must say your previous discussion was was to me anyway, I'm a nerd on policy. It was very interesting and really though was impressive. The the close attention you're paying to board policy and and its ramifications, especially when you're talking about kids and teachers and

063what's allowed and not allowed. I've spent decades of my life living those policies in tense situations and so I commend you for for the attention to that. Thank you. So if we'll look at um we have a number of decisions I'm going to say we because we're involved in this together but I'm not a decision maker. I always say the board is the decision maker. I facilitate and I try to um stay by those guidelines as much as possible. But there's some decisions to be made and some factors to look at in making those decisions and I'll just run you through those a little bit and then we can we can start in I have them right here. Okay. So these are the this is the slide phase I showed you a week ago or

064a little more than a week ago. Phase one, develop the profile timeline and process. That's what we're doing tonight, June 18th instead of it was originally June 17th when I sent it. Number two, posting recruiting in the community survey if used. Probably we won't use a community survey for we're going to have a short uh timeline. 7 to maybe 10 to 12 to 14, depends on how long you want it listed out there. Phase three, board screens and selects applicants to interview. One decision you look at tonight is do you need to do that screening process? That again would depend on how many applicants that we end up having in phase four. Then the board interviews the applicants and so on. Those would would go through as usual. But we'll look now in more specifically

065at one, two, and three and talk about some of these key factors in making these decisions. So key factors would be the application, the simplicity or complexity of it. If if we make a lot of demands on the application, then that need requires more time for people to meet those demands. On the other hand, if you're looking at an interimm superintendent who is going to serve maybe up to nine months, may maybe not based on the discussion I've heard. maybe you don't need as much depth of information up front. And we're also looking at more than likely superintendent, people who have been superintendent who have had that position. Um, and and some of the the other things maybe don't need to be looked at as closely. the number of candidates. If we if we decide

066to interview seven candidates or five or four or three, that affects the process a little bit. If you interview I've interviewed as many, had boards interview as many as eight. When you interview eight people for a superintendency, that takes a whole day. That that doesn't happen at a meeting that starts at 4:30 and you're interviewing a certain candidate at 9:30 in the evening. and you're tired and they're tired and it just doesn't that's so that's something to consider as well. The use of a screening meeting for I'll just uh kind of try to lay this one out for you. Again, if we have a lot of candidates and we require an extensive application, then for the board to screen those extensive applications, if there's seven or eight of them, I've had those kind of meetings

067last it takes 20 to 30 minutes per application. Well, 8* 30, you're at 240 minutes and suddenly you realize that's 4 hours without a break. and and and so that's and is the question that you'll face is that a meeting you need to have if we get four experienced qualified superintendent I spend some time vetting them in advance some of these will be people I know I think most of them frankly will be people I know and have worked with and am familiar with their careers I could screen them and say these meet all of your requirements you really only need to we had seven applicants But my feeling would be you can need to interview four of them and you can find one in the four. If you interview seven, of course, that takes

068setting the screening meeting aside, an interview of seven people or five or four takes a certain amount of time. Again, the decision being made by the board would be I've had boards take a 90minute interview and that's fine with three candidates, but that's still 270 minutes. That's 4 and 1/2 hours. I've had boards use 40 minutes when they're interviewing eight people. They use 40 minutes per interview. That's still 320 minutes. That's still five plus hours. In other words, it's all day for you. So, you have to think about that as well. I'm just trying to kind of throw some of these factors out since we have a a short time frame. And then timely contract negotiations. Sometimes contract negotiations that seem like they could be very simple sometimes then become less simple and you might

069plan on having a superintendent in place by August 1st or by July 24th and then the contract negotiations drag on. So those are just some factors and now I'm going to suggest a couple of options for time frames if you feel that we're ready to move to that or do you want to ask questions about these factors? Go ahead. Any questions? Uh yeah, I have a couple questions I think before we get to our choices. Um, in terms of whether we need a a screening meeting, is is is it possible for us to be sent the names and like where they were a previous superintendent um and kind of your recommendations um or is it really something that has to be done in a meeting? It does not have to be done in a meeting,

070but their confidentiality has to be honored in a discussion like that. And I the board would have to be very cautious in calling up one another and saying, "Gee, did you see this? This one looks really good. What do you think?" And you're violating open meeting law when you do that. So, oh, absolutely. I And I don't mean to to lecture you on that. It's just my job to remind you of if we do certain things, we have to really be careful to be aware of the rails that protect uh the candidates as well as the board. And so I just wonder if if that's something, you know, that the board would consider to just um kind of speed up the timeline since we do want to get somebody in place um if that would

071be something. And then um I think those are my questions for right now if that could have been more more questions may well surface as we go into some of these. But um so I'll show you a couple of options I put together and you may not like either of them and want to go to a third but this will give you a little idea of the scope. So I have I have the gold option here June 17th or i.e. today June 18th we decide the listing timeline the process details and by the 18th or 19th I'm saying depending on how some institutions are closed on the 18th we would like to have that listing ready to go I've done a lot of preliminary work on so I have a draft of how it might

072go kind of assuming you might vote to use us I u I like to be prepared but we would list it. Then one way to do it is to close applications on June 27th. That's not a long time to keep it open. And that is June is a Friday. It's it's about nine days from now. And that's very quick. And that's only possible, I'll say, if you do some things on the application process, such as not requiring candidates to have a reference letter, a current reference letter, because some of these people are retired superintendent. They haven't been looking for such letters for a while. But in lie of that, we could ask, and we we always ask this anyway, but we need three references of people who are ready to speak to your qualifications. That's

073a phrase I use. Meaning, if I call them, they're going to take the call. and return it in a timely manner. Many of these people I have in mind who who have when I say I have some people in mind, we have seven candidates that we've either Dr. Tai or I have spoken to about interest in the Liberty position. They're all superintendent, five from Arizona, two from out of state to have moved to Arizona in the last year or so, but they all have prior superintendent experience. some of them many years, almost all of them many years of superintendent experience and they're interested in an interimm position. I can't speak for all of them. I would say most of them are not interested in a permanent position. I won't say all, but um so they

074would be they would be ready to uh ready to go and ready to interview on a short and do the application on a short uh time frame. Then we could do for example we could close the applications on the 27th and if you this is a this is a fast time track and then we would I would contact which of those this this involves you trusting me to screen them. So you might or might not want to do that. We could interview on July 1st. Again, this assumes all the candidates are able to make it, but that's a little bit before the Fourth of July weekend. We That weekend kind of takes everything out of the mix for the board as well as the candidates. So, I'm left that out. But then by July 2nd

075through 10th, you could have contract negotiations. Ideally, at your July board meeting, you might be ready to vote on a contract and maybe to have a person start. This is a fast track. You could have a person start by July 21st. Let's say just say giving them another week to get started. Okay. So that's fasttrack option that that still conforms to the law that still vets these people. Option blue same first two steps. The board screens applications. We have a screening meeting on July 1st. Then the board decides whom they wish to interview. Then July 7th, candidate interviews and selection. Another 10 days for contract negotiations. Then July 21st, board votes on contract. or you wait till your next meeting but you don't seem to mind and I say this with the humor it's intended

076that you don't seem to mind having extra meetings but which is a little bit unusual but um on the other hand this is important thing that if you want to get someone I mean school starts what the second week in August something like that August 1st August 1st okay well so so that would get a superintendent on board. Depending on how quickly contract negotiations go and the board votes, you could make ideally I guess the superintendent could start even the day after the board voted. But again, that would be something that would be something you would work out with contract negotiations. So, this this first one really says there'd be about one more meeting. That one said there would be two more meetings. Blue says two more. They're both pretty quick. Now, we can slow

077this down a little further if you want to as well. I'm just pressing this quite hard. I do have one factor that I have to bring in that I have a for three years, our family, my brothers, kids, grandkids, we've been planning a family reunion in Seattle. And after a long time of getting everybody to agree on a date, we did agree. And that's July 8th through 13th. And that's why I'm avoiding those days because I'm after three years of this planning process. And I'm the I say with without pride, I'm the oldest one. I think there'll be a one-year-old there as well, but uh I I have to to do that. So that's that's why I kind of ducked around. I also ducked around the 4th of July a little bit because that's just

078that's family time. And well I shouldn't I'm speaking for myself as well as you that's a big holiday where families get together where so and those are again you see the key factors and I mentioned we have se we have seven right now who have expressed interest that doesn't mean they all seven will apply again though that's why a shorter application um is is helpful to people who who apply on a short time frame can during the regular process you would give people maybe six weeks to get an application done then you can go out to people and get letters and you know how it is with letters sure I'll write you a letter three weeks later I need that letter oh I'll get it to you soon another week goes by so that's sometimes

079it's like pulling teeth to get even your friends to write letters for you especially for a position like this Mr. President for me. Go ahead, Mr. Union. Um, yeah. So, I'm I'm glad that there's interest. Um, you said possibly up to seven right now. I've had a couple um interested parties ask me about it as well. I would like to know who to direct them. Direct them to me. What? And email, phone number, what what what are your comfortable do and they can call me. Um I'm my my cell phone. This is my cell phone. Don't don't put it on the public record. Sorry. We'll get we'll have staff send that out to the board. Y your chairman has it so you can he has my email as well. I could I'm on email even

080retirement. What's retirement? But I Yep. I'm on email all the time. It just if you've been doing it for 50 years, you can't break that habit. But that's just maybe not 50, maybe 30. Yeah. Just my years no email. just my um opinion on some of the key factors. I think simplicity obviously is is going to be kind of the key with the understanding that I I personally want this person to have the experience behind them of being a previous superintendent. Um an interim position especially right now in our district I do not think is a a test phase. It's got to be something for somebody who has that experience. uh number of candidates I think probably four or five. I would like to keep it low as possible. Um I do like the idea

081of of being able to screen all the applicants as a board. Um and I know if we're trying to speed this up then that kind of kind of hinders unless we can do something as Miss Zimmerman mentioned. Um, and I do know in previous, um, superintendent searches and it was for the permanent, we had, you know, a binder with everybody's information in it. We were able to go through that and take our time going through that. But we're we're kind of expediting this part of it. So, I had understand that. But and I would provide you at such a meeting I would provide you not only with their complete information and responses but also with a a rubric for a rubric for scoring that kind of tends to one two three or four a four

082being best on all these different parts of it. And so if you follow that then you end up with scores spread out a little bit invariably and you get a sense of who really is what we we're looking for and who isn't. Um and and one thing I don't put as a key factor because we talked about that last week is we're looking for best fit and a transparent process. So that's our our guide our big overall guidelines. So I didn't I didn't list best fit down here but certainly not and I would suggest on the job application saying for the criteria for people superintendent experience because there otherwise you might get a lot of people well I've never been a superintendent but this would be an ideal no it's not an ideal time and

083so if we just say superintendent experience required then those people won't apply. they may well want to apply for a permanent position later on. And I would suggest you do consider it something because there's some people haven't been superintendent but who have vast experience at the district level making the top decisions and are really ready for that next step in their career and some of them are are eager and energetic and really want to do it right. Mr. President, go ahead. Um so a couple things um first um would we be developing the questions when we um interview the candidates? You would be the process that we've used over the years which we found works pretty well is during a meeting that we have if we have a screening meeting for example at the conclusion

084then the board would give um criteria for questions. I have a a handout that suggests here's some criteria, here's some other ones, but you would say we want a question on academic achievement, we want a question on student discipline, we want a question on financial planning key factors or I would suggest for something like this, we want a question on what would you do as an interterm superintendent in your first 60 days because that's a little different coming in as an interimm than coming in otherwise. things like that. But once you've given me those areas, then I make the questions. You don't see the questions until we come to the interview. The advantage of this is no one can say and there's I can say this without an audience here. Rumors start so quickly and

085if board members have the questions then invariably I've lived this. Someone says, "Oh, sure. So and so that was his favorite or that was her favorite." and and she or he gave them the questions or gave them hints as to what the question this way there's no chance of that because you know the topics of the questions but any good candidate could sit down and say there's going to be questions on these 10 areas or 12 areas you're knowledgeable it's pretty obvious what they're going to ask you about probably what about staff recruitment and retention things like that and a good candidate will prepare prepare bullet point answers for every one of those and 20 more. Um, but that's the process I use for that. Okay. Yeah. No, I can understand that. Thank you. Um,

086yeah, I, uh, agree with Mr. Kenyon in that the, you know, one of the qualifications for an interimm is that they have to have had superintendent experience. And I would add successful superintendent experience. Um, as a caveat to that, um, I, uh, am in favor of, you know, as an expedited, um, process as possible that also maintains the integrity of the process. Um, and I would really like to consider doing a screening kind of virtually uh independently because if you have a rubric and we, you know, completed a rubric cuz I assume again things that would be brought to us in a notebook. Everything is is digital these days. You're not essentially bringing us a notebook or you might, but you know, everything is going to be digital that these candidates are submitting. Could we

087do that screening process? um independently, individually send you our rubrics and then you kind of essentially select the candidates based on the rubric scoring. Um I think it just gives us more time personally to process and to read carefully things that are submitted rather than us sitting in a meeting together and like okay we need to get through this in x amount of time. And again, I believe it would expedite the process in general, which is what I'd like to see. As I stated before, you know, I wanted someone in July 1. That's clearly not going to happen. So, for me, as quickly as we can move is is beneficial to our staff to begin the year. I think we could create something virtual. And again, we would just try to set up some guidelines

088so we are really clear that we're not not violating open meeting law. And whether you what you one thing you suggested that was interesting, you could score them, report your scores to me, and then I could take it from there. Or we could you could prepare in advance. we could get together for a 1-hour virtual meeting and you could because it sometimes happens after people have scored I'll and they say what do the scores add up to and I say before we add up the scores is there a candidate that you want for sure to interview and I will ask them and often of the five board members maybe two or three of them will have the same candidate they for sure want to interview or the same two they for sure want to interview

089and sometimes we don't the scores don't seem to matter as much as you all agreed that of these seven or five or six we looked at there were two that just stood out above everybody else but uh often that's kind of thing surfaces in a meeting but I could go that would just be a couple ways of doing it we wouldn't have to meet at all if you didn't want to I could um and as part of that either screening that happens you know in a meeting an executive session I just want to be clear for uh the public and transparency that all this would be happening in executive session. Um would we be getting those would we have access to their reference checks you know like a summary of them that you said you

090collect? Yeah. I'm hm you know I have to I have to look over we have some language in the application itself where they agreed to have their records checked and I've got to check that language to make sure it says we can share in details what that record revealed um they might not be signing off to reveal they're signing off to get checked I don't I have to hesitate to say they're signing off on that that information would be shared Other than that certainly I in the past I've sometimes called a candidate and said you know this is an issue or I found this vetting your candidacy I found an issue here that occurred in your past and you know the board's going to I have to inform the board that this is a concern

091and and will you want to discuss that in an interview and sometimes they say yes I will other times I say nope I'm going to withdraw But I've had some things people have been fired and there's been a community uproar. Then when you dig down into it maybe uh maybe it was something many superintendent would have done and they were would have been fired but they were doing the right thing. But sometimes sometimes the right thing is rewarded with termination. I've I've had principal superintendents, for example, fired because everybody in the community knew this was a bad teacher. The superintendent in a small community said, you know, if if this person is so bad, what why isn't something being done about it? And the principal said, I will if I can move on this if

092and they move on it, do an improvement plan, do everything legal, terminate that person legally. The board votes five to nothing to terminate it. And then later on it turns out that the spouse of one of the board members that was the sister of this other person and next thing you know the pressure from the community mounts and there's a meeting and the board fires the superintendent. So if we are not I'm just saying that's the extreme thing that can happen. Yeah. No, I understand. I'm I just want to make sure that as a board we're doing our due diligence. So, if we're not able to um see the reference checks essentially, are you going to then come to us with a a general statement about something that we should be concerned about? Yep. Okay.

093And I would rather make that statement in a meeting than to send it um Mhm. send it electronic. You know, once some you send something out, it's out there. And one of my friends in it says information wants to be free. it tends to find its way to freedom as I could reference the previous meeting for example but um yeah if if I may that that's kind of what was my my biggest concern about all these being electronic documents as well with the whole packet that's why before the last company we used had a physical uh book and they basically said you can go through this, but obviously there's no sharing. Nobody's else's eyes are supposed to be on this. It's strictly confidential. You're not to discuss this with anybody cuz some of those applicants

094didn't even want the where they were currently working knowing that they were outlook searching for another position. So, you know, there's there's a lot of different factors in this, but um that's why ideally is pause, excuse the interruption, why ideally an in-person screening meeting. There's a lot of those and then you can you're in executive session so you can really be freewheeling in your discussion about the candidates and I can be freewheeling in my responses where if it's happening online every just great care then has to be exercised. Yeah. and you know mind having a screening meeting. I'm just saying that's a meeting cost to you but if you're getting a leader for 9 months it might be worth incurring that cost. I Mr. President you may I just had a couple questions. I I

095think most of us are on the same page. We want to try to get it done quick as possible. I don't want to speak for everybody but I would hate for us to pick somebody and then they have to start working like 5 days and not even meet the the principles or anything yet. So I think the most time they have before starting date is important. Question I have is kind of like the board screen the whole process. Let's say we say we want five uh candidates, right? Do you send us everybody who applied and then we screen for the top five candidates and then we move forward? So if we say five candidates and only three people apply, then we just skip the the screening and go straight to the interviews. That would be

096a possibility certainly. Um because some of these people I have in mind that I've just suggested I've just said Liberty is going to open an interimm position. They're familiar with Liberty and they said, "Well, I would be interested." Now, when it comes right down to it, if they're taking the first two weeks of July in Hawaii or something, they just might say, "You know what? This timing isn't going to work for me." If we got three and they were well qualified, I think you could go to interviewing them then. Um, but if you get seven, I don't know that you want to interview seven. If you get five, you can. That's where that screening meeting comes in. Yeah, I guess that was my question. Like when we set the number of uh candidates, so do

097you send us everybody that applies and then we whittle them down during the screening session? During screening session, you get every applicate applicant. Unless someone applies who isn't a superintendent, then I would say don't waste your time on that. They didn't meet the qualifications. But but otherwise if they met the criteria in a screening meeting you screen them and we do that with physical paper than in a screening meeting and that takes a it does take a while but then the board can say we every candidate who met the qualifications we looked at their information and we had a crit uh a rubric we scored with the rubric we discussed this extensively and so I I would be in favor of doing an in-person screening. I think it's much more secure. It so easy to

098just have an email get forwarded, whatever. Also, in to your discussion about rumors in the community, oh, this board member got together with their neighborhood or a group of parents and did this. We're tasked with a lot of security, protecting some of these folks who may currently have other jobs but want to want to come this way as an interim. Uh so I I think in person would be best. I'm looking though at the gold plan because I do agree we need to move quickly and we're we're up against the first day of school almost in either plan. But if applications close on June 27th, I I might propose to the board we look at the 29th 30th of June to do uh some screening and then carry on with that schedule for July 1

099for candidate interviews and selection. But we would just take the gold and basically between June 27th and July 1st add a day or two to come into the district office and do some screening. So would that that would your team have I'm sorry. Oh, no. I was just going to say the 30th is a Monday. So, the 29th is a Sunday. That won't work. I've So, maybe June. I was, you know what? I apologize. I was looking at July on the calendar. So, June 30th, June 27th, they'll be done. That's a Friday. Mhm. So, yeah, we would probably come in like uh the 30th. That would be it. And then maybe July 2nd to give, you know, candidates if we and maybe if we just set the um the interview date for the application process

100so that they know if they're chosen for an interview like it's going to happen on this day. Do you think that that would be part of the application packet? Okay. You'll be screened on this date and you should be free to interview on this date. A a concern a quick question. If we close it on what you proposed, if they do it on that Friday, is your team going to have enough time to do all these background screens and everything on them for us to talk about it on Monday? No. That that squeezes us. There's five of these people I've talked to have been very recently superintendent in Arizona and some of them, frankly, I've worked with directly on some various projects, lobbying or other things for for many years. and I would not have

101as much of a concern about what's in their background because they've been in a public position in Arizona for a long time and if there was something in their background it would have it would have come out. Um there's a couple candidates from out of state if they if they what I would what I would do following this meeting I would contact these people that I mentioned. I would do that tomorrow and say, "Are you going to apply?" Because if you are, you know, then I need to do some due diligence. Doesn't mean we'll release your name as having applied, but if they said yes, then I would go ahead and and it it costs a little money to do these things, but the couple who are out of state who, you know, have have

102superintendent experience certainly, but I I don't know them. And I would want if we're going to proceed this quickly, then I would want to have that do that background check, which is part of an in and transparency, that's part of an expense that you as a district gets build for. But it's safety and security and avoids avoiding surprises is to me worth it a little bit of money. But, you know, maybe we would only do a background check on those that we were going to interview. Yeah. Okay. Well, but see if we wait. I'm just thinking about what he's suggesting. If we close on the 27th, screen on the 1st and 30th and interview by the 3rd or 4th, then sometimes it takes a couple days because we use a company, a professional security company.

103When we say screen this person, then they go through a lot of data checks and generally that sometimes that comes back the same day. If we call get them in the morning, sometimes it takes a another day depending on their volume of what they're doing. But they take great care in doing this because we trust them to take that care. That's why I was thinking some of them were I might might have have them checked in advance just because I don't want to run into oh we're going to interview them but we don't have the data back yet from the security check. So this is a little extreme but if we close interviews on the 27th board likes to have meetings. We've even had Saturday meetings. Do we look at coming in on a Saturday

104to screen and then give you some direction on on background checks if one of these out of state people that you don't know? We could we could get that done first part of the week and then schedule interviews uh like the 24th or 25th, but that' give you a couple days, maybe even the 25th or 26th. Um and that would give you a couple days to do backgrounds on those that you don't know. Yeah. No, I could. Especially if we if we screen one out, there's no reason to pay for a background check on somebody we're not interested in. No. So that that's true, too. We So are you suggesting But you I'm sorry. You uh Mr. Todd, you said the 24th or 25th, but the the applications don't close till the 27th. Sorry, my

105calendar went to June again. Okay. So the So it closes on Friday the 27th. Yeah. I feel like you probably need to give people a week. The 28th. No, the fourth or fifth would be of Well, that's going to be July. That's not going to work either. Well, that's why the July 2nd date that you talked about. Yeah, I think I think probably because of July 4th week, we need to screen on June 30th and potentially interview on July 2nd. I think as you get close to the 3rd, people are off or they're taking Certainly that Thursday, they're taking off. Yeah, because the 4th is a Friday. Okay. So, you were talking about if we close on the 27th, could we screen on Saturday the 28th? Is that what you mentioned? That's a thought just

106to give us the screening process to give you some time to do backgrounds on anybody that we might need to do a background. That would give that would likely give enough time if we notified on June 30th. We could almost always get that back within two days. It's it's because it's mainly done electronically, but these are people who dig can dig deeply. I mean, we can all Google on the surface and find certain things, but they they check with the national national uh crime thing. I mean, they they they dig pretty deeply. the databases that we don't have accesses to. And that's why making an application that's that's um simp simple rather than complex. I mean, sometimes we have four or five essay questions for them to answer. that takes, you know, if you're going

107to write in a 200word answer to an essay question as part of a job application, that isn't something you just say, you know what, I'll just knock that off in 10 minutes here. So, if we limited those questions a little bit, especially based on the fact that these are experienced leaders, then that'll get a speedier return of the applications. And again, this is the whole screening meeting. Oh, sorry. And again, the whole screening meeting is only if we get more people applying than the number of candidates we want. Correct. Yes. Um, since you have this time frame, because I've had issues where, well, only one district where they only had three candidates and when the board met to screen them, they really didn't like any of them. And so then that we had to open

108it longer and recruit more. But then this is a little bit unusual in that there are certain people who don't want a full-time job anymore, but they think, you know what, doing this as an intern for seven or eight or nine months, yeah, I could do that. It'll help people out. And I'm already getting bored with retirement, but I don't want to commit to like my life to the district. And these are most of the ones I know anyway. They're they make a commitment. They they make a commitment. So if I'm I'm what I'm hearing then is close apps on the 27th, possibly screen on Saturday the 28th. Say if we started at reasonable time in the morning, probably within two or three hours, if the application is a little shorter, we could we could

109handle that. Then I'm hearing possibly Tuesday, July 1st. The other option is if you're closing on the 27th, and I know this really jams you, but basically we could have a meeting on the 27th at 5:30, you would have hopefully everybody except for maybe one last straggler. And we could we could do the 27th and then keep everybody there Saturday open. I might say I might normally I say five o'clock or something then I might say noon on the 27th. We have to have it. So I have time to we're going to have that physical meeting. So I have time to get people can get the paperwork in order and right personally I'd prefer Friday night over killing a Saturday that kills a whole weekend but it's it's up to everybody else and just to

110avoid all of that and give you time. Do you think it's possible to do it on the 30th and then interview on the 2nd? So there's a day in between. That's it's possible by my schedule. I think I have a dentist appointment on the second and this would be a great reason not to not to enjoy a dental appointment. Um question I would say would possibly might be and again applicants would know this in advance. This is when we're going to do this. Normally if someone's coming, no one's coming from out of state. We're not listing this out of state. So it's not like someone suddenly has to make flight arrangements the weekend of the 4th. They all live in state here. Most of them I'm thinking they all live in Maricopa County. So it's

111not a issue if we say in advance on in the application paperwork at the end I have standard statements which say it's due by this date there's going to be screening on this date and so on after the screening interview we will notify we will make public who the finalists are and I don't know if you do do you use the west valley view do they take a great interest in as in your district you mean for posting positions for No, I wouldn't post in the West. I'm just saying if I'm going to be dealing with a reporter or the public at all. There's there's a few around the valley that will call from time to time. West Valley View is one. There's a couple others as well. I dealt with the West Valley View

112all the time. I was at Saddle Mountain for years as a superintendent and they had me on speed dial sometimes for good news. My my only thought when I suggested the 27th or 28th is that gives you all the 30th to hit the background check in the morning. So it' give you the 30th, the first and if we interviews the second or third, it gives you two and a half days versus I don't think we want to go to the third in all frankness. That's a Thursday. People will be dashing out of town, right, Mr. President? Yes. Um, I'm I'm just putting this out there only so that everyone is informed, but um I am out of town from the 24th to the 29th. So, if we did it on the 30th, I could be

113here in person. If we did it on the 28th in the morning, I could potentially call in, but on the 27th, I don't think I'm going to be able to because I'm going to be on the East Coast, so it's a three-hour time difference. Um, I also realize that this needs to move and so that's fine. I just want to put that out there. Um, and I am, you know, not personally offended in either way. Whatever the board needs to do, they need to do. Um, but this all came up post everything and we already had things planned. So, I'm trying to work around as best as I can. But does inform you that the um, we're not doing this search. The Washington Elementary School District is looking for an interimm starting right now. They're

114looking at a very aggressive timeline as well. I don't know that I know a couple of the people I talked to would not be interested for various reasons in that district, but there's some others who potentially could be. I didn't ask them about it, but I'm not even talking to them about it. If they don't find out about it, oh well. Miss Zimmerman, thank you. Or I'm sorry, Mr. Thank you for your information. Um, we I mean I certainly would like to have you involved in the process. So, Mr. President, maybe we move to the maybe we do the 30th, but again, that'll be for the board to decide. Miss Zimmerman, go ahead. Um, I will also need to be virtual for this. So if we can consider how to allow that to take place

115because I certainly want my voice part of this discussion. My my biggest concern on any of these is the electronics and in the past we had some legal advice that we should never do these resumes out electronically. No, I would probably try to figure out I don't want to overpromise and underdel, but my feeling it would be I would have some kind of delivery these these however many applications there I would that I would have them delivered to you. A lot of concerns. It's the chain of c it's the security of the of the stuff. I have a physical meeting. All their paperwork won't I take all that back goes in the shredder. Miss Zimmerman, when are you back? I I will not be able to be present like I am out of town. I

116mean, when when do you come back from being out of town? Uh I'm going to be Guan for a significant time. Okay. So, we're really we can work on that, you know, at a different time behind the scenes. How to if I just listen or uh I don't know if there's a program that will allow me to just pull it up for the time being, you know, in a meeting in a Google in a Google meet like somebody share their screen. So, you would not be able to um have papers delivered to you either then. I'm not going to be in the state of Arizona. Okay, that's the answer to that. FedEx is one overnight. No, but then that's just the concern he brought up with the chain of custody. I mean, we could we

117could make this happen electronically. I guess it it would be because I'm hearing that two of you possibly would need that. Well, if we did it on Monday the 30th, I will be back in person for that. It's just if we tried to do it over the weekend um that I won't be back in town yet, but on Monday I will uh be able to attend in person. Great. I understand that what I was that's what I was trying to ask. I know you'll be back Thursday. That's what I was trying to get from Miss Zimmerman when she'll be back so we can look at trying to have everybody in person. I'm not comfortable with letting these resumes and this is too much. It's just not standard that these get released out out of the

118district office. There's there's Would you be back for the final interviews? No. Okay. At least if under this projected timeline. Correct. And again, I don't want to hold up the district process, but um I think the interviews are fine. They're, you know, you can set up a Google uh a Google Meet. We've certainly had plenty of people be virtual for meetings. Um, but I understand the concern with the documents. So, no, you would you would Yeah, I would say too there wouldn't be those concerns with someone remotely participating in an interview, right? A little because you're here hearing and seeing pretty much what they hear and see. So, Mr. President, if I may, you may. So, what I'm hearing is um the 27th we close applications and then to hopefully have Mishmmet here present, the

119screenings take place on Monday the 30th and then on the 2nd, July 2nd, that Wednesday, we would be looking at candidate interviews and selection. Is that kind of the timeline we're looking at? That's possible. As I'm looking at this and I'm hearing Mr. Jordan speak, you've got some people that you've already spoke to about this. I indicated that this was a possibility. Are you interested? And Dr. Tai talked to a couple of them as well and they said yes, they had interest. So, what if we sped up the They should be getting ready to go. If they're interested, you're going to start communicating with them. Now, what if we did the timeline to end 12:00 noon on the 25th and we had a screening meeting on the 26th? Would everybody be able to make that

120one? Oh, you're out. You're out on the 26th. Yeah. Sorry, I'm out. I'm out of town from the 24th to the 29th. Mr. President, may you may Yeah, I I it sucks, but I think what Vice President Kenyan said might work. Um I felt bad that Miss Zimmer might miss the screening section, but to keep the ball rolling, I think might have to go that route. I mean I would still participate and like listen to the discussion and um you know have the potential to um uh again virtually. Yeah. Yeah. Find a way to project the document or something like that. Um Miss Camarado will be back. The people we got to talk to about Yeah. Um, so, um, I still plan on attending virtually. Um, either way, I just wasn't sure if projecting it

121was an issue with like potential screen grabbing and stuff. I mean, I think in executive session that is protected anyway that we can't discuss. So um the security of pretty good assuming they don't even know this meeting is going outsiders guess they know this meeting is going on because it's posted they're actually watching it online people can watch all of our meetings online executive session not one reason right because then you can have a frank discussion all right let's uh I think maybe it's best to go with the the plan that outlaid. I will make contact with legal first thing in the morning and make sure they're good with that as well. If we need to change it, we'll call virtual meeting and get it changed or we can just we can just make the

122change necessary based off what legal saying, but I think that's going to be or could authorize you to do that. Um, so what what dates are we tenatively talking about now? We've surfaced a lot of them. I want to make sure I have it right. I think we have June 30th as a screening and July 2nd as the interview. Let me just ask the board. How many do you wish to interview? Mr. President, if I may, you may. Uh I I think four or five is the number I'm landing on, but that's just a opinion. Mr. President, I'm also looking at four myself. Okay. No, I was going to say three to four. Yeah, the first number that jumped in my head was three, but I'm I'm good. You know, three, four, kind of right

123in there. One of the things too is a lot of times we can't do these during the day because these folks may be doing something else. I also don't know what your work schedules. We can do them during the day. I think that's that's fine, but everybody's got a work schedule as well. So, I don't know if they want to take a day off work for this or if we want to do it in the evening time. Um, before we move on, do we settle on four? I think it sounds like four is the magic. We got four to five, four, three to four. So, I was kind of four to five myself. So, either one. Four is probably Everybody likes four, Miss President. Yes, I'm okay with them being um in starting in the

124early afternoon, whether it be, you know, 4:00, 4:30. Um if you interview four, I'll I'll just give you some suggested information depending on how long you want to do the interviews. That makes a big difference. You want to do four 45minut interviews, that's one tentative schedule. Four 1-hour interviews, that's another one. You need a little break between each one just to clear your head and, you know, not long, maybe five minutes even, just if you're just going to power through. But that's something the board could decide as well. You can probably get seven questions reasonably answered in 40 to 45 minutes. you can get 10 questions answered in 60 minutes. Now, some people will finish those 10 questions in minute 59. Others will be a little earlier, but just as some some thoughts about the

125the time. I think the last time we did our interviews and we blocked hour and 15, so we had the transition transition time. here. So four of those would be five hours. Five hours plus not counting discussion some discussion afterwards on that my experience sometimes that discussion is substantial right I think we're looking at probably seven eight hour day Mr. President. Yes. Uh did you feel like an hour was too long? Do you feel like it was right? It was we were pushing an hour every time. Yeah. as as was stated. Uh and one of the other things to consider as well is they each will have their own time to be here for their interview. Um and so you know we you could have somebody and we have had where we had an hour

126block for them and they answered all the questions very quickly. We had time left over but we couldn't start the next one until the next person's time. And I could ask them to be to be here 15 minutes in advance, let's say, just I've done that, too. Just especially when they have to drive. When I've been in Winslow and they're driving up from the Phoenix area, I've said, you know, plan to be 15 to 30 minutes early just in case there's traffic issues. So, I I don't think you need to tell them that. That's part of the interview process. Early is on time. On time is late. You've got to tell them to be early for a job interview. I don't want them. No. Okay. No. I I mean they should be thinking of myself

127I was always I was sitting in the car right if they're not that person data a half hour ahead of time 45 minutes ahead of time. So Mr. President looking at that um I think I'd be okay with starting at around noon then this would be around noon on the July 2nd Wednesday July 2nd. That would give us a pretty good amount of time. Does that work for everybody else? It should. Okay. Board Schmidt Zimmerman. Yeah, I should probably be able to make that work. I'll make it work. Okay. So, we'll do July 2nd at noon. Starting at noon. Okay. Do you need any What's our next step for you? The screening. The screening meeting then is June 30th. Has that been decided or is it Yeah. Sun? That's Monday, June 30th. June 30th. What

128time do you guys want to do that one at? How long do we think those normally kind of depends on how many we have? Yeah, that and that takes if you review each application carefully. Even if I shorten them a bit, that's takes 20 to 30 minutes a piece. I've had some boards, maybe you want to consider this, most boards score them individually. I've had one board that had a very successful search and they all had the paper in front of them, but they they together went through each one. They scored their things separately, but because sometimes one person has taken 10 minutes per application and someone else has taken 40 minutes per application, then everybody's finished except one person and they could wait a half hour or more for that person to finish. I've

129had that experience. So depending on that would assist if Miss Zimmerman were present that would assist her virtually doing reviewing each candidate together not necessarily discussing it but just in that case they discussed it actually too but um that's just another different format it doesn't violate any uh legal requirements But then you would have each applicant's information up on the screen looking at it together. Just some people read more quickly than others. Some people are more interested. For example, do you want the application to include their transcripts? Normally that's something we require. That's they're very sometimes they're very lengthy because you're talking bachelors, you some cases a couple masters and a doctorate. And most people don't, to be honest, don't find those that illuminating because the these generally are people who have been successful educationally.

130And you're you're looking at a lot of A's and B's. You're not looking at oh D minus in school finance. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, so if we omit that, that speeds the only reason I would admit that is if someone's going to request an official copy of their transcript. It takes time. First week in July, those public institutions are not going to be the end of June, they are not going to be real responsive. Um, yeah, if I if I may, uh, when you mentioned transcript, I kind of chuckled because requesting a transcript can take a long time, which seems crazy because everything is digital now, but it still does. Um, and personally, I don't feel like I need to look at someone's transcripts if they've already been working successfully as a superintendent. Their grades

131in their undergrad are really insignificant to me at this point. Um, maybe if it was a first job out of college, I'd be curious at their level, but later on I would not need to see that. So, I'd be fine with removing that and being able to speed it up a bit by removing that. See, we could speed it up also by removing the requirement for letters and saying, you know, we want and I would do those initial calls. We want three people who can be readily responsive to a phone call. I had a a kind of a question about the references. So, you know, there was a a comment made earlier about, you know, they may not want their employer to know. Um, but I do think their most recent work experience is important

132and something we require like as a district that we are able to contact your current employer. And so I, you know, I I understand that they may not want to, but at the same time, I feel like that work experience is important. And finding out things like, oh, they're on FMLA or something of that nature. We need to know that information. So typically what's been done with that is we don't not we don't do a background on their current employer until such time we're ready to offer them a position and then we would say we're interested in offering you this position pending your reference from your current employer because at that point they're ready to leave and they have a job with us if their employer says goodbye you're looking somewhere else you're gone we

133don't want to put somebody out of a job in the process of doing this one but many of them Oh, sorry. I don't mean to interrupt. Interject just briefly. Many of them thinking at least five of five of them are retired and so they're their previous employer would be whatever district they were in. I don't think they would have a big issue with that. There are two superintendents out of state who are currently now employed as like assistant for HR or something in state here. So, I don't know how they would right. And and that's just the ones you know about, but we don't know if we open this up. We might get you know we might not get anybody I wanted. So typically we do that last final check upon uh an employment offer

134is your some of them will have their current employer as a reference. I I guess my concern is if we go through all of this and get through the you know contract negotiations and then it's kind of like we don't you know the discussion well you don't want to have a background check that you don't have back yet because you don't want to interview them if something comes up. It's the same thing for me with the employer. if you don't do the reference check of their current employer and you go through the whole process, you choose them, you go through all the contract negotiations and then you contact them and then their uh concern arises and we're at square one. I mean, every job interview I've ever seen says has a box that says, "Can

135you can we contact your current reference?" And as I've interviewed many people, it always says no. And then they typically write upon job offer, but they don't necessarily want their current job to know they're they're looking. So, and and yes, there's been a couple times where I've hired people or plan to hire somebody, they had excellent background checks from the previous two or three employers, and when we called their current one after we said, "We're ready to make an offer to you," their current one said, "Not a good choice." And then we did kind of come back to ground zero. But I think you scare some people off if they're going to if we're going to contact their employer now, especially in Arizona where there's right to work issues and and those things and and

136maybe even one of these current candidates is doing a different job outside of education and you know they're retired, they're they're doing whatever, they're happy with that. They don't want to lose it, but they are fearful of that if the employer knows they're out searching for another job. We do we do have a spot in the application which says finalists names of finalists will be released to the public, right? Often there's no public really to release them to necessarily. Sometimes there's no newspaper panting for that information, but but that lets them know if you get to be a finalist, we could be contacting anybody. Would would those names be in the agenda for us conducting interviews? They would be once you've at the end of the screening meeting once you've decided whom to do then

137um they would be in the motion there would be a motion in public to usually yeah I would that motion sometimes I've held it over a like to the next day to put the you take the minutes but don't release them till the next day so I have a chance to after the screening meeting to call these people and say they want to interview you your name's going to be released and so then the next day I I I usually like to give them a heads up. Yeah. I mean we do broadcast our meeting so that wouldn't be possible. You know what I mean? If we make the motion it's going to be live. I've had people do that. We make a motion to ratify the decision we made in executive session and those minutes

138will be available with the information the next day. Sometimes you can say that and just right again for me it I want it to be transparent. So either I would want the names in the motion or the names on the agenda for who we're interviewing. So I think we can let what my plan is follow's advice on that. They're the ones that are going to know best. So we'll follow what legal tells us to do if we're going to name them or we have to name the finalist. That's a law. When we name them we'll follow legal's advice on that. We'll be the best. I could if you took a 10-minute break or something or 15 minute break, I could just call them, right? If they're in the application process, they're going to be I

139could just call and say, you know, you've been they want to interview you. Are you willing to be interviewed? We're going to release your name. Yeah. And then go ahead, take a little break after all the screening. Come back in 10 minutes and I would that would probably be enough time for me to call however many you have left. Okay. We'll I'll consult with legal handle that so you're aware of those options, Mr. President. Yes. So, we're still looking at a time for the 30th. Um, Miss Schmidt, you're going to be Is there a specific time that works for you? I know that's kind of when you get back. I get back on Sunday. So, uh, it will be anytime on Monday, but um, I do have a day job. So, um, you know, early

140afternoon is fine. I would not like to start at like noon. Um, you know, 3:30 is fine, 4:30. I whatever be kind of our normal times would be great. Um, but again, I can try and work around whatever I need to. Oh, yeah. I need to be after at least 12:30, so early afternoon work best for me also. If you did 3:30, let's say you're screening five or six applications, you I think you would want to get started by 3:30 just so you don't screen four or five and like, oh, and then somebody gets not as much consideration because everybody's worn Does 3:30 work for everybody on June 30th? Okay, we'll plan on 3:30. Mr. President. Yes. Uh, so at that screening meeting, is that where we will give you the like themes for questions

141for the interviews? Okay. I mean, I could do that right now if you wanted me to, but sometimes you want to tailor that to who the candidates are as well, but I'd prefer to have time to think about it. Mr. President, if I could ask for another clarification. Yes, sir. So on the requirements for the applicants, I I've heard pretty clearly we want district superintendent experience. Then we also put some other things in there. Usually current Arizona superintendent certificate or ability to attain one. Doctorate degree from an accredited university preferred or required. I think preferred most boards go with preferred they which says you know what that might become a difference at the end if somebody has it and somebody doesn't but five years teaching experience in a public school system are we going to

142get to administrative experience is that just one of the Oh then three years principal or building level administrator experience and and then district superintendent experience. So that's a box that not everybody can there might be some people interested and they can't check that box of superintendent experience. Okay. But and it's up to the board of course I I think it's necessary that someone actually have taught because and been principal means if you've been a principal you know what reality is. I mean, so remember, do you have a question? Yeah, those those requirements sound good to me. And then the only the one that's required of all of those is fingerprint verification from the state of Arizona. The fingerprint card, which you don't have to have any of those other ones to be a superintendent in

143Arizona, but you do have to have that by the law. I think another one that in Arizona given the way funding is done I think we need somebody who has a strong financial background as well education finding however you want to word it. I mean, school district finance is different than everything else. So, I I think it's important that they understand it, but it's completely different. That's they've been a superintendent unless they were a just delegated to everybody, which I would not recommend. You have a good business manager, but you better know enough to ask the right questions. Okay. What more do you need from us, Mr. Jornstad? So, we can deal with the questions after the meeting. Uh after the screening meeting, I will put together the the position listing. Normally for a non-interm

144position, I would also put in a lot of information about the district, their schools, the number of students, the demographic information, and so on. We're not really because often you're trying to sell a district to people out of state, to people in state, to but I don't see that that's what we're doing here. We're really looking at a a very narrow group. So, I won't um put that in. I'll put in a couple general statements about the district, but a good candidate. If they don't know about those that information, they will search it out and get informed. One more thing I think the candidate should be familiar with is title one, title one schools. Um, Mr. President, can I ask a question? Go ahead. um on the you know option gold plan that we've kind

145of tweaked a little bit. If if for some reason the contract negotiations move quicker, could we um you know reconvene a meeting and uh vote on the contract and then allow them to start sooner? Yeah, that would be something in contract negotiations. I think you would you would talk to the person and say, you know, we can we'd really love to have you start. We're you're nearing the the cost final decision. You know, you're not disagreeing. We'd love to have you start July 14th. Okay. Do you need a salary range for this? That's it. Yeah, that's my other one. Salary range. And are we are we There's a couple ways of looking at that. Are we seeking salary range as if it were like for an entire year or you just basically then say the

146salary range is 150 to 180 or something like that or do you want to say I I've got some suggested information. Okay. So I I what I have down here is the salary range for this position is And I have it blank there. The actual salary for the successful candidate to be determined during contract negotiations will be based on experience, professional preparation and duration of the interimm superintendent service. If you went with something maybe we can just put a general range down and that can be worked out in conference information. But if you assume you might have a new superintendent prior to July 1 might be something in con we say something like to be salary range of this or such and such a month then you serve so many months and I' I'd personally

147uh would be in favor of doing something per month so that it gives us the flexib ibility if we find someone um that we're not paying two people. Um that would be my preference. The other decision you'd have to make is I put I usually put this statement in the district offers a competitive benefits package that will be finalized during contract negotiations. Doesn't promise health insurance or anything like that, but it could include that or it could not include that. It People who are retired often have those kind of arrangements made already. Oops, Mr. President. Vice President, go ahead. Yeah, I think I think pretty much all that stuff is going to be determined during the contract negotiations. Um, so what what are you looking for right now as for seller range? like a minimum

148maximum or that's what we often use, but we're we're usually talking about a whole year worth of of service. So, it varies from I've had small rural districts where it's been much lower. And I've had larger districts or more challenging districts where it's been like 150 to 180, 140 to 160, 130 to 150. It really depends on and what the district is used to paying and and if you're in a competitive environment where you're really competing with qualified applicants. I don't think we're in such a competitive environment right now. I mean, people either want an interim position or they don't. And so yeah, my my thoughts are are similar with Miss Zimmerman, but is I would like the idea for the contract to be for the one year is the length of the contract. However,

149it's basically um you know, if if we end up severing it earlier, they get paid for the months. So whatever that looks like obviously would be worked out in contract negotiations but I think the range is going to be focused on the year. Okay. So what's what's a comfortable range for you? What do you think is a good range for the district our size district without having um well for example with Blige listing which is there may be a little smaller but they're rural but they're they were it was very competitive that was like 150 to 175 I think. Um Winslow small district not really comparable to this one. Um, I did Prescuit a couple, gee, two and a half years ago already, I guess. There we said 130 to 155, but I happen to

150know that they got a candidate they really liked and I think that they ended up paying closer to 160 because they during contract negotiations that they were really happy with the person they got. and Presca would be somewhat although they're they have they're unified so that brings a whole different scope of then you're dealing with high school issues which is a com a complex factor. Yeah, personally I like the 130 to 155. That's considerably lower than what we've paid in the past and we've been told we couldn't get anybody for that before. I think we're going to need you to help us a little bit. I Let's see. So that's so let's say 10,000 a month would be 120. $180,000 a year contract is turns out to be 15,000 a month. You could go 150

151to 180. I I think the in Maricopa County it's more expensive and I I have no idea what you were paying your previous superintendent. But that's why I wanted I wanted your professional opinion without giving you that information. I mean you've got Lichfield around you. You've got um the the Talison districts both of which uh both union and elementary pay fairly well. um Littleton that they were paying around 180 190 their their superintendent that they had for 10 years or plus just retired but just trying to look at a study that came out to see somebody ASVA used to collect that data and they really did a good job of it but the last few years they've had very few they just haven't had the responses that they used to get you know when you

152say the average is this and 30 districts responded out of 200. Well, that average doesn't mean much then. I used to know what everybody made when I was head of ASA because they would call me for advice on that. But I I've been out of that for three years, so I'm not quite as and for a interim position versus a permanent, where do you typically find that the wage ranges? you're paying them a shorter amount of time, but you want to pay enough to entice someone who's retired to say, "You know what? I could work for six or seven months and really add security to my retirement years." And so that that's why I was thinking about what what you what did you say was for $180,000 that $180,000 a month is is uh $15,000

153a month. Um, but I think that's the contract we offered our superintendent about six or seven years ago. Okay. Um, so no, that was the previous one was making that much as well. Mhm. you well you want it to you want it to be a range that's enticing enough to retired people as I said um that's why I don't the bottom number has got to be 150 or more but this again depending on experience all these people have the experience they've all if we get the people we're looking for they've all been teachers they've all been principles they've all been superintendent since been successful. Some of them were they were the ones I'm familiar with who worked in the valley these last few years. They were probably some of them were from a little larger

154districts. They probably were earning around 200,000 added in benefits and things. Sometimes the salary itself looks lower, but then there's certain benefits, annuities, and other things which our superintendent contract that was signed on September 13th of 2021 had a base pay of $177,210. That's after she worked for us for four years. I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that's the current cost of the day. Um, and then there were annuities. I'm pulling up the previous one from that as well, or the one after that. The interim that the board signed for the previous superintendent was 180. 180. Yes. That number would be attractive to people if you said 180. You want to give a range or would you rather say approximately. You want to say a range then I I think a range. I think

155let's go 150 to 180. No, I agree with that. then they know they're getting if they do 180 they're getting the top of the range which there's a certain psychological feeling and if you offer 150 to some of these people I don't know all of them I know some of them I they they would have to think about whether it'd be they really want to jump back into the I'm going to say the fire because it's a fire can be a good fire but sometimes you can get singed pretty well Is there a board consensus? Yeah, I would feel comfortable doing a range and 150 to 180 with the knowledge that, you know, we're probably getting people that are going to be on the higher end since they are more experienced. Um but but having

156that wiggle room there at least to to open it up. Mr. President, did I sense hesitation on your part? No, I think that's fine. I I'm concerned at the 150 mark. I think to echo your comments, that might be hard to entice somebody out. That's just the going rate and it's since these last contracts were negotiated costs have gone considerably higher in Maricopa County. So that's that's my you get what you pay for sometimes. Yeah, I was going to Would you feel more comfortable saying 160 to 180 or 160 to 185 so that the range is slightly different? Yeah, I think that might be a little better. I mean, it's not really that significant of a difference, but you know, it's like when you list your house and you listed for a little bit less

157than the the big the whole number and it looks better to people. But yeah, it's a mental thing. I I mean, I just know what the job entails and $150,000. No, I know there's people that are watching that are going to say, "You're crazy even considering paying that much." But this is not an easy job. And those people don't know what we have a lot of expectations and and it's 247. It literally I've I've lived that. It is 24/7 because you can be home on a Saturday afternoon and get a phone call and you look at the who the call is coming from and you're like, "This is not good." No, your maintenance director is calling on Saturday afternoon. Not to chitchat about how your weekend's going. Not to tell you there's a broken faucet

158somewhere. No, that's to tell you like power's blowing out for our main high school and we have to cancel school on Monday. Mr. President. Okay. You may. Yeah. I I'm I'm not stuck on 150. I just don't want to go any higher than 185 and just kind of throw a range so we have wiggle wiggle room, but I'm not stuck on 150 to 180, but I like to stay around 180 is the max. So, I'm I'm hearing some of you interested in 160 to 185. I'm fine with that. I would say I'm fine. Maybe talk to Mr. Ty or Dr. Ty tomorrow and make sure he feels that's going to pull people in. because he's more up on what the current pay is because when you're in that he's that's the job I had and

159you're really involved in all of that much more intimately. So if if he has significant concerns, should I give you a a call and let you Yeah, I think you should. I mean, I I don't want We're on a tight deadline, so we need to reconvene quickly if that range is not going to work. Okay. and and even if you talk to some of the candidates, I'm sure you're going to start maybe even calling them tonight or tomorrow first thing and say this is coming open that number. If that's not working, then we need to reconvene quickly. Mr. President, yes. Um I would just ask that you know if something comes up that if you could please email the whole board so that we're all aware of things that are happening. Um that would be

160super appreciated. think I have the information that I need. No one objecting to trimming the application a little bit. Not so it's okay. you want essay questions in the application. I mean, it's a lot easier for a candidate to apply without doing them, but what's your opinion? I think you want one sample of their writing. Normally we we have two or three or some districts even want four, but but we could list it down to something like why are you a good fit for the Liberty Elementary School District interimm position and then you get to see how they write, what they think about. Yeah, I think that um before you said one, that was where my head went. like one question that, you know, is going to get us our best answer from them. Um,

161I agree with you. Being able to see somebody's writing, I think, tells you a lot about them, um, and their their ability to communicate clearly, uh, which is a huge task for this job. So, I think one question is probably fine. I liked the one that you gave as an example. It gives them an opportunity to discuss themsel and why they could see themselves here and how they could help us. Um, so I would be all for the one question that you gave. I give a 200word limit and the software stops them at Yeah. Also, I appreciate the the word limit because being able to say things concisely is also a critical. Okay. So I think I have my marching orders. My next steps will be communicate with the potential candidate is develop this position

162profile completely with your information. Call the candidates potential candidates but we'll list this as quickly as we can as well. So when we list it, it'll go out in this case instate. It'll go out to the 1500 members of the Arizona school administrators which is includes about 200 current and retired superintendent. And then it's amazing how that word split spreads as well, but we'll use a few few other professional organizations as well. It'll be up on our website, which frequently gets looked at because our website is where people go to see those listings, what's out there. And we list not only superintendent positions, but we could put it on the Department of Education. We haven't had the the issue with that. It's not really an issue is I can't ASA is not allowed to list

163positions on the AD website. That's more helpful for people out of state who don't know where to look. So, they go to the Department of Education. It would have to be listed by Liberty personnel. We can do that if the board wants it. We can definitely have that done. You'll have to point us in the right direction, I'm sure. But we Yeah, I would send you a file and Okay. Well, no, you know what? On that, you know, get you you listed a court. They have a you they ask you questions and you put in We can have our human resources department post there if you think it's valuable. If it's not, I don't think it's valuable for an instate group that you We're not looking for out of state candidates, are we? No. I

164mean, I wouldn't turn one down if it showed up, but there's a whole just because of what you said about education finance earlier. It's not only complex, but it's different in every state and drastically different. Somebody who comes in as an interimm, it takes them a year to figure out the Arizona education finance system. And you you don't have a year. So, I would say that's not worth bothering with. Okay. We'll take your I'm comfortable taking your advice on that. Everybody else? Okay. All right. Nothing else for you. No. Okay. Members, I set this on the agenda as an action item. If we needed to take action, I don't know that we do. He has his marching orders. If you feel comfortable making a motion to approve the direction we've given to ASA and Dr.

165Jornstead, then we can do that as well. I don't think it matters either either way. Yeah. President Todd, I I kind of typed out a motion here. Okay. So, I make a motion to approve ASA to proceed with the Liberty Elementary School District interimm surge as discussed in this meeting. I'll second. Okay. The second was by Zimmerman. Yes. Oh, sorry. Okay. Thank you, Board Member Zimmerman. We have the motion, the second. Uh we'll take a there's no further discussion, which I can't imagine there is at this point, but perhaps we'll uh call for the vote. Board member Schmidt I. Board member Zimmerman I. Vice President Kenyon I. Board member Stencion. I. I'm also I will show that that item passed with a five yes zero no vote for item 3.3. Thank you, Mr. Jstead. Thank

166you. Appreciate your confidence. members. Next is 4.1 board comments on agenda topics and items for future consideration. Anything that we didn't catch in the most recent um Mr. President? Yes. I have two things. Um I'd like to have the board look at the discipline matrix to uh ensure that it aligns with the new board policies. Okay. And I'd like to bring back the open enrollment transportation policy, please. Okay. open enrollment transportation policy. Correct. Correct. Okay. I apologize. I don't have the number. That's okay. We don't expect to know them by heart quite yet. By the next meeting perhaps, but not this one. Um, okay. Anything else from anybody members? Uh, I received a phone call today from a board member over in uh the Buckeye High School District. Um they we talked and once upon

167a time the Liberty District and high school board would meet about once a year in a joint meeting just to discuss different things and and what could they do to help us out, what we can do to help them out. I would like to ask you to consider that we can bring it up for a future agenda topic. But uh it's kind of interesting to do a joint meeting. Two boards come together. They both have to call their meetings together. But uh that has happened many years ago and some people who are in the community for a long time remember it and that discussion came up today. So um unless anybody's opposed that, we'll probably get that added to an agenda item here in the future and uh um and discuss that in a little

168more little more detail. Otherwise, we have our upcoming board meetings. Um mainly the well, we've got a couple more now that are coming up, but what we had was July 14th for a regular board meeting. Um, and then we're going to look for a June. What are we doing? June 30th now. And July 2nd. Yep. June 30th at 3:30. Yep. And July 2nd starting at noon. Okay. We'll get both of those added as well. With that, if there's nothing else for item 5.1, we'll show our meeting adjourned at 7:17 p.m. [Music]