001Good afternoon. The time is now 50:02. The Wisetta Public Schools Board of Education special regular meeting for Wednesday, February 9th, 2026 will please come to order. Will the clerk please call the role? colleagues. Alicia Li >> here. >> Paris Bendy >> here. >> Prior >> here. >> Heidi Kedar >> here. >> Valentina Ays >> here. >> Danestra is present. Nolan Sahony >> present. Thank you Dan. We have a quorum. The first item on our agenda is the approval of the agenda and the consent agenda items. There is no consent agenda tonight uh this afternoon. There are two items on the agenda. Is there a motion to approve? >> I so move. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Will the clerk please take a roll call vote again? >> Colleagues. Alicia Little. >> Yes. >> Paris
002Bendy. >> Yes. >> Sheila Prior. >> Yes. >> Heidi Kedar. >> Yes. >> Valentina Ays. >> Yes. Dan Janestra. Dan Janineestra is a yes. Milan Sahony. >> Yes. Thank you. We have an agenda. Both items on the agenda this afternoon relate to the superintendent search. As you might be aware, the school board has hired MSBA to assist in the search. Also assisting in is Visetta's executive director of human resources, Dave. David Lutz. Barb Don, director of Executive Search Services, MSBA, will present both items. Bob, please take over. >> Thank you, Chair Sony, members of the board. It's good to see you all again. I am here tonight to present MSBA's recommendation for your semi-finalist for the position of superintendent of Hoisetta Public Schools. Before we get into that, I did have a couple of housekeeping
003items I'd like to revisit first before uh we move into the actual candidate consideration. Uh the first thing I'd like to briefly discuss is an update on uh a question that director Parus oops director bend pardon me um asked a question about in terms of feedback from the day in the district. So all of the finalists, two or three, will spend Thursday, March 5th, all day in the district. And during that process, we talked a little bit about the building tours they'd be getting and the executive leadership team accompanying them and also uh different school community groups being a part of a large group meeting with each of them individually and providing feedback to us through an online form. One of the things that um Director Bendy asked about was when would we get that
004feedback? Is it better to get it before or after our board interviews on Friday? And having thought about that a little bit more, my first reaction was you had the luxury of some time to review that input uh before your board interviews on Friday morning. And then I was thinking about a little bit more and I was visiting with executive director Lutz about it and I'm wondering if it would make more sense from a process standpoint for us to collect all of that input and not give it until after your interviews on Friday because we don't want to influence your perception of those three finalists or two finalists. And yet it would give our staff a little more time Thursday night and Friday morning to winnow it down to some high level themes that emerge
005from each of those districts or those groups. Um so that would be a little different. The only thing I think that we were hoping for from you and I'd like to discuss this further is the feedback we get from that large group or from the tours with the candidates. There might be some areas of wonderment. Is that the right word? wonderments that might cause us to think, hm, the board should ask about this on Friday. So, I wanted to check with you instead of you seeing all of that feedback Friday or Thursday night and trying to come up with questions on Friday, if you would entrust that to executive director Loot and myself that if we see an area that needs to be addressed in your interview with these folks, we submit a question or
006two into the round two questions, which we have not selected yet, but that would allow us to build off of the day in the district and not influence you as board members when you hear from them yourself for the first time. How do you feel about that? >> So, thank you. Um, so when I was thinking about that question, that is the exact thought I had that if there is any way for you and Dave to kind of look at the responses and maybe insert questions. Um, so if that's okay with everyone, at least that would be my preference. >> Yes. One comment I would add um is that I think it's a a a really um effective way to to do it in that manner because when you're doing an an interview, you're assessing
007that one moment in time, right? So when you're when when the board is interviewing the candidate, you want to provide, you know, your feedback and your assessment based on that interview you see. And then we'd be able to give the compilation of the data from the day in the district as another measurement of those candidates, right? And then you have the information about any references that are another component of the interview process. So by doing it that way, you're kind of keeping those different things separate and and uh there there's u I think it builds to a really effective process that you can then you know weigh everything on on uh in in its own category and on a whole to make your decision. So I'm actually pretty excited about the concept. I think it's
008a a unique way to do it. And um thanks for that comment and that question cuz that's what helped us start to think about okay we know we want to build in that that community school community feedback when and how is the appropriate way to do it um so that again it's not impacting negatively another piece of the process. So um I think I had um kind of a not a concern but something that I mentioned last time you know having us look at the your inputs on Thursday night and you know depending on how many pages there were that's a lot more work added in addition to the whole day interview on Friday. So I'm glad that this is a solution. I'm really happy about this and and I'm also happy that there is
009an old adage which says too many cooks spoil the food in our case in this case the more cooks we have the better off we are I think because this is a collective um discussion we we think collectively and thank you and and uh Dave for for for your you know feedback I I'm I'm okay with it yeah everybody else looks like everyone is Yes. >> Okay, great. Thank you so much. Um, I appreciated the question again because it it just gave us uh some time to think and process what would serve the the board the best as well as the candidates and the people participating in day in the district. So, >> really quickly, I want to make sure you're the board is supportive of both that process, but then you're also supportive of
010if there is that what we articulate the pattern in the data saying, "Oh, this would be a great interview question." you would allow MSBA and Barb and and working with me to make that recommendation so that you'd have that interview question show up on the the next day. >> I think of that. >> Okay. >> All right. Wonderful. Thank you. That was uh the first housekeeping item. Another thing I wanted to touch about just briefly is I want to circle back to our original conversation about um when we were talking through the vacancy brochure and the salary range that needed to be included in a brochure and that was published as part of this posting. So I wanted to circle back to it because there was a question about inserting uh some sort of incentive
011pay or performance pay into the contract with your new superintendent. And so I didn't I didn't want you to think we haven't continued to investigate that. So we have done a great uh deal of research on it and I think that performance pay incentives can be um transparent and justified. They are extraordinarily complicated however and there are a lot of things to consider in doing so. And what we would end up recommending to you, and it may have been a conversation you've already had at the board table, is that the uh current contract manner, which does not include performance incentive be utilized for the first contract cycle with a new superintendent. And you spend the time over the next one to three years of the contract really investigating why would it um why would it
012be something you're interested in? Uh let's see, what's the purpose of it? What type of performance are you going to evaluate? Um what things can a superintendent reasonably control? Can you tie it to academic outcomes? If so, what kind what evidence would be required? What considerations would be involved? So, there's a number of things we identified and we did a lot of research with um the office of the state auditor in terms of what's recommended and what best practices are and it really is truly individual. I can tell you though that it works well in some circumstances and it works poorly in other circumstances and it really boils down to uh a full board support of the idea and a clear understanding of the expectations of what that performance pay really means and I don't
013know if you will effectively be able to do that with the first contract with this person. So it would be our suggestion that it not be a part of your first contract cycle with the new superintendent. However, of course, it's a board decision. So, and you may have already discussed this at a meeting I was not at, but that is the the other loose end I wanted to revisit to let you know we've done some homework on performance pay. >> Nice question. Uh what would you suggest? Let's say there is certain number and you do first year uh with certain number but then if you would like to if we would like to consider then wouldn't um the superintendent accept it as a lowering down at this point you have to give more uh than
014in pay otherwise like it will sound like you're taking away some money unless the uh superintendent obviously fulfills that goal I mean goals which I setup. How would you recommend to avoid that kind of being in that kind of situation? >> Uh, thank you for asking about that, Director Ays. I would say that if someone accepting a contract with Weisetta Public Schools is aware that the board is beginning to do some research on the possibility of a performance incentive and that that would be a part of the conversation in negotiating another contract and it may affect a salary, a base salary. I think that they would be um open to that. I just don't want anyone to be surprised if you do or don't do it. And it's I mean I have pages and pages
015of things to consider before you decide to do it. So I think just being very open with them and communicate clearly that this is the contract we have now. We are going to spend some time over the next year or two doing research on performance-based pay. This is what it could look like, but we don't know until that time comes. And so I always want school boards to make fully informed decisions. And as we got deeper and deeper into this, we realized that it's very, very complicated. And so we didn't want you assuming it would be a simple thing to add to your contract. It really is not. But I think if you communicate with someone up front, they should be able to uh almost expect it as a possibility in the second contract. I
016think that uh from uh the information I read in we read in summertime Minaton is doing something like that amateur was that information was included. How did they manage or maybe it is conversation for later obviously? >> Yeah. I think the other thing to to talk about so again um not I'm in agreement with with everything that that uh Barb said. I'd also say if you wanted to consider something in the second contract, you could stagger your way into so each contract typically has cost of living increases each year. You could stagger your way into a performance pay by by building your the the increases annually towards a performance pay chunk. So the, you know, you could figure out a way over a three-year contract cycle to to build in different layers of performance pay
017performance pay with the annual cost of living increases being that performance pay. So I wouldn't necessarily think you'd have to automatically lower their base salary in order to build in performance pay. I actually think you could stagger into it across that that cycle with increasing performance guidelines each of those three years of the contract. So, um I think there's a way to do it. Um if it's something that that after having that first contract of experience with the superintendent, um you want to pursue. I think there's also a really good benefit of getting to know your new superintendent. Um, and through that first contract cycle, you'll be able to identify those areas together of, you know, where would you like to see this fit if it's something long-term that that you'd like to do. So,
018um, I I could see a way of staggering into it where you wouldn't necessarily have to pull money out of the base to do so. >> Um, so yeah, and obviously points that you are making sense. um question I have is are there any basic metrics which any superintendent should be or will be targeting for right so yes we're not trying to make it overly complicated but year one maybe there are making it up these are the top three goals that pretty much every superintendent should have right so is there something we can look at it again not overly complicated maybe simplistic goals but again just get into that cadence and maybe it's more complicated than that but again what have you seen in your research? >> So MSBA and MASA have a model superintendent
019contract that we've created together the two associations the administrators association and the school boards association and every year we revisit that model contract so that both associations can endorse and support its use. I can tell you that performance incentive pay is not in the model contract because of the complexity and the individuality of each of the districts that may or may not consider that. Some of the questions that arose as we were doing the research for example um some things to consider would be the purpose. Is the purpose to attract, retain or motivate a superintendent? Uh what performance metrics would you use? Would they be qualitative or quantitative? Would they be evaluationbased, student performance-based, strategic objectives or district goals-based or financial stewardshipbased? Um, communication is extremely important in clear targets. And then the the research
020about the evidence of effectiveness of performance pay um is mixed because the success of performance b performance pay based contracts is mixed or everybody would be doing it. If somehow you were able to include some incentive in your contract that would cause your superintendent to do a better job, everybody would do it. And so it's not that common. So it must mean that it works in some circumstances but not all because if it worked in all circumstances, I would think everybody would want to include that in there. Um, so that was one thing. But I do think there are several models in use. We did have a district that when we come back and do a transition workshop with you, for example, this fall, we'll talk about expectations for that person's first year as your
021superintendent and we'll talk about what goals in that first year will you evaluate them on? What rubric will you use to evaluate them on? Will you have um the uh formative evaluation halfway through and a summitative at the end? Will it be a four-point liyker scale? You know, we really want to make sure everyone's clear on expectations because that first year there's so much to learn that we would ask you not to burden a new superintendent with things that are extraordinarily um sticky or complex because they're learning and very often there's only two or three goals identified that first year. The highest of your high priorities is your performance evaluation metric there. Um we've had it go sideways where a board said, "Oh, we can do this. we'll just put it in the contract for
022a percentage of base salary if they accomplish these four things and we'll use a fourpoint me like scale and they felt very comfortable with it. The time came to conduct the evaluation it did not go well because people interpreted the goals differently even though the measurements were there and that there was evidence of meeting those same measurements. the whole board was not comfortable awarding the bonus and it became a point of contention unfortunately in that person's first year that distracted from the work of leading the district. So until you've done the homework to know it fits and it's going to work well here and everyone's on the same page, I don't even know if there's anything really simple, Director Bendy, to be able to say this is what we could use and it would work.
023There's just too many variables I believe because of course they're going to do their job and they're going to do it well. You'll have a contract. You'll have a job description. That is what they are expected to do. Tying money to that outside of the compensation package you've negotiated just makes it more complex in a year that you don't want a lot of complexity someone's first year here. If that makes any sense. It >> it does. And sorry, one one follow-up question. Is that typical in Minnesota or are you finding it across, you know, the country? Is that the norm? >> Our research was across Minnesota. However, from speaking to candidates from other states, they it is not something they typically are seeing either. >> It is simply unusual, but that doesn't mean it can't
024work and it can't work very very well. We just want to be really certain that it's the right thing for Weisetta before you decide to engage in a contract like that. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, is it reasonable to think about it this way as well? We have a pool of candidates who have already applied and they have feasibly I mean it's possible that they've already taken a look at the contract that we have in place and they know that there is no incentive pay and that this is what it could potentially look like and they're comfortable with that. So, if we're thinking about it like as you were talking about what is the purpose of the incentive pay, I think we've already attracted our pool. I think it's a very good pool. Um, and
025it's where it's at given what we already have in place. Is that a reasonable way to think about it? >> Yes, that's a great point. Thank you. The superintendent contracts across the state are public information and I'm sure candidates would have done their homework before they're interested in any position to make sure it fits who they are and it is not in there currently. So I would assume that they might assume it will stay that way. It's a good point. Thank you. >> And to um build off Heidi who I think made a great point. Um, is it also possible for us to say that if you meet your goals, we will be more open to a more sizable increase in pay, removed from any performance pay, will be more open to a better contract,
026so to speak, if you meet your goals without the performance pay piece. Is that could that also be said? >> Yes, that's another excellent point. >> And would you then to to ask a followup um would you then be a be able to help us within that, you know, time period? I think you mentioned for the performance pay piece, you do have documents that would guide us. Would you be able to help us in that pursuit as well? >> I have passed along much of what we've learned to executive director Lutz and I would then leave in his very capable hands so that MSBA doesn't get imshed in your contract negotiations. >> Yeah. And one comment I'd make on your first uh point, Dan, is we'd want to be careful to make sure that anything
027we do in the realm of performance pay is very transparent. Right. So to say that your next contract will be more significant pending your performance in this this contract, that's performance pay, right? And so we'd want to articulate that um we'd need to articulate that in a process that's transparent with measurable goals, etc. I would say that that you know, you don't introduce the concept of performance pay until you're ready. And when you do it is very clearly articulated within the contract, right? So no, hey, if if you do X, Y, and Z, your next contract will be larger. I would stay away from that type of of situation. What I would say is, hey, after this first contract, if you'd like to discuss a option of performance pay with the board uh for your
028next contract, that would be something that would take place with the superintendent evaluation committee of the board and and in collaboration with human resources, we would do that at that time. So, I I'd probably say my answer to your first question would have been no. Um because one of the the bullets I think in the list that Barb gave was trans you need to be clear and transparent with those goals and how an increase in pay is earned. Um and so for that first contract if we're not having performance pay in it it's just the contract right? if you're not meeting your goals, um that's part of your superintendent evaluation process, which can impact, you know, future contracts being approved at all by the board, right? Or renewed at all by the board. So, that's
029where I would separate that. Um those are two different concepts. one is the more standard concept of here's your salary, here's your goal set by the board, you have an evaluation process by the board. Um, and successfully completing that evaluation process is what sets you up for contract renewal for future contracts. And then the second part is if you are in a performance-based situ for performance-based pay situation, it's clearly articulated not only for the superintendent, for the board, but also for the school community and all of our taxpayers, so they know where those dollars are and where they're occurring, etc. Um, so those are two separate concepts and I would make sure that you're keeping them separate. Does that make sense? >> Okay. Can I add one more piece to that? As I think about
030it, I it's just really important to remember too that whenever the superintendent contract is coming up for renewal, it's always at the same time as others. And we have looked to our superintendent to be our fearless leader. And there have been times when the superintendent has actually taken a lower um annual increase um or had an increase that was aligned with our unaffiliateds. And so it's important to remember all of our bargaining units as we think about um our superintendence increases on a three-year or a two-year basis, whatever that contract is. >> So, as a board, we haven't talked about this um since the last time it was brought up. And I think it it sounds like it is a very complicated um process and there are a lot of considerations and that the place
031for it would probably be in the superintendent evaluation committee um to discuss it and that in the meantime, you know, that we should probably follow your advice to not over complicate the hiring process and also whoever we do hire in this role. Um, I think it would be, you know, it would be good practice to have this conversation with that person. Um, and so I, yeah, I don't know that I wouldn't support putting any kind of compensation package as part of the negotiation process for the hiring. >> Okay. Yeah. You have something else? Okay. So I'm going to answer I think somewhere in your responses to to my board colleagues you you asked what the purpose of this thing is and I think the main purpose in my mind is accountability per pay for performance
032basically to me means you're accountable to what you promised and therefore if you if you perform based on what you promised this is the incentive it's an incentive it's not something that you take out of their salary I think that 280,000 to 200 295,000 basically ally stays and then on top of that if you do such and such things then this is what what we will offer based on approval from the board. The other thing I heard from you was I this might be something I misheard so correct me if I'm wrong. uh you were talking about learning what we we should include in the pay for performance as we go along and I think if that is not already clear for the board as far as what the district needs are and what we
033look for in the superintendent then I think we really need to think again because we know what we want right we have we have parameters that we have set we we have goals strategic goals road map and all those things. Um the only I think last time we we discussed this and we decided that for the first year we will not include the pay for performance. You know my memory if my memory serves me right and then >> I don't think we had discussed it. I don't we hadn't made that decision as a board. >> Okay. We did not. Okay. I thought we >> I recall that it was informally discussed at at a previous meeting. I would uh again the it's the board's call on this. I would instead of saying first year, I
034would say first contract cycle. Yeah. Uh since we're going to have to articulate a a contract cycle. Um again, I think the benefit of of being able to do more research, be able to know your new superintendent, um and and really develop a plan that works well for that individual and for the board, etc. um that can be that can take some time right and so I would say my recommendation would be that whatever that first contract cycle is now if it's a year if it's two years if it's three years our typical rhythm has been three um but that would be my recommendation okay I I I am I have concerns about that I I'm it is not the first time that I will not be you know agreeing with the rest of the
035board it can you know it has happened before so if the if the majority of the board thinks that we should wait for 3 years after at the end of the first contract cycle then that's fine with me. >> I think we're saying we're going to talk about it so it's probably not worth digging into until we get more of that information. >> Okay. >> But we have to decide right before we start contract negotiations whether we want to put that performance pay at the end of the third year or at the end of the first year, second year, whatever. I I would suggest that because um you could also offer a one-year contract, right? And during their first year negotiate another three-year contract with performance pay incentives. What that will do, however, is um
036cause some folks to reconsider the offer because one year is not very long and most superintendents at this level will be looking for a three-year contract. >> Okay. Yeah, that's that's fine. Yeah. Okay. So, we will just do the three-year contract maybe without any any conversation about pay for performance, right? >> Is that okay? >> Yep. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you. I I appreciate the the great discussion around that. Um it just became a quagmire the deeper we got into it. the what and the how and the measurements and the goals and is it qualitative or quantitative or student based or merit-based or performance-based and it just became so many questions that we knew it was a much larger subject than we perhaps had even initially thought. So, thank you for the conversation
037of that and I appreciate the chance to um talk about that before we move on to the gist of the meeting this afternoon. Um so one thing that we have agreed upon before is that round one will be conducted by a subcommittee a subcommittee of the board the superintendent evaluation subcommittee will be interviewing round one candidates on I think it's February 25 26 and 27 uh Wednesday Thursday and Friday and I will be contacting all the candidates this evening and they'll be asking me for uh which dates and times are available so that is something that we're going to briefly discuss with the three people on the subcommittee of the superintendent evaluation group um after this meeting concludes. So, just to remind folks that the subcommittee process will be utilized for round one. You as
038a board selected the questions already that that that subcommittee is going to be using and then they will um have a rubric to define the quality of the answers people may give them based upon um probably a four-point scale or three-point scale. And then they will be coming to the board with a recommendation on March 2nd. The the names are still not public on March 2nd. So please keep in mind the recommendation from the subcommittee will be to move forward candidates B and M and J and we still can't use names until the full board considers that recommendation and eventually perhaps passes a resolution to interview those three alphabet identifier and then that night those two or three names go public. But until then please private data is something that I know you take as
039seriously as we do and I appreciate all of your help with that. Can I have a yes I just want to admit a point of clarification on the subcommittee. There's three members on it and the same three people will be doing all the interviews. So I don't have I I assume we've made sure that all the people on the committee can attend all the interviews. Okay. >> You know if you can't make all of them then someone else should probably >> Yes. Thank you for um clarifying that. Yes, we would want all members of the subcommittee at every single interview. The idea is a level playing field so that all of the candidates experience the same thing, the same questions, the same interviewees, the same location of the interviews and things like that. So, thank
040you for asking about that. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. So, I am going to uh verbally review the vetting process that MSBA utilized to come up with the recommended folks. I want to congratulate you on the strength of your pool. I will share with you a couple of highlights. Um, and then I'll go through how we worked toward creating in our minds those who aligned most with your leadership profile as well as the results of the public engagement summary report. Those are the two things we leaned on most heavily. Uh, so as you know, you did have 20 applications. Congratulations. uh they came from seven different states as well as two countries. Of those 20 people uh 12 of them have previous superintendent experience and that's as a superintendent uh not an associate soup.
041So a lot of experience in your pool and 13 of those 20 individuals do hold doctorates. Uh it's a very strong pool. Again congratulations. Obviously, this is um a desirable position and there were people from uh many states and a couple countries that were interested in it. So, I'm going to disperse this to board members. This is the highlighted list I emailed to you on Friday. I'm going to collect these back from you when we're done and I'm going to shred them when I leave the meeting tonight. So, I'm just going to take a moment to hand these out. I'm sorry. >> You can write on those. Absolutely. I'll be collecting them after uh you make your decision tonight, but you can certainly write on those. Uh so this was in our proposal and we
042talked about it in our interview as well. But I think one of the strengths of our team are the folks that um help us uh conduct pre-ins with candidates, do the vetting, check with references, and so on so forth. and we have five people in the metro area who are former school administrators um and one school board member that go through all of the applications and then compare them to those two documents. So once the application deadline has passed um they all review all of these applications and they spend time on each of them and they will give them um a score on a fivepoint scale one through five. One might be no, five is yes and then all the ones in the middle there. So they do that individually. They take their time looking
043through letters of recommendation, resumeumés, cover letters, all of those things. And then they give them that score and we eventually get together and we meet online. And I have a print out of that list that shows the degree of interest in some candidates more than another. And so it it's a compilation of the opinions of five people. So in that process, there are some that um immediately rise to the top. Strong candidates. Everyone agreed. they all got yeses or maybe yeses. Um there will also be some folks in the pool that perhaps especially with an outstanding pool like yours aren't quite as strong and so those might be in the maybe no category and so there's some folks we don't spend as much time on because they are not as qualified as the other folks
044in the pool. Then we talk a long time about those ones in the middle and try to sort of sort them into areas. Um we end up with a list of folks we feel are very strong that we want to learn more about. So, in your case, we ended up vetting uh 10 people out of the pool of 20 that we thought really rose to the top. So, that did include a pre-in on the phone with each of those folks. Um it included social media sweep for all of the people in the pool and actually not just those 10, but we do a social media sweep of everybody. Um reference checks, although we are limited to calling the references they've provided in their application because their names are private data. So we can't go down
045a a rabbit hole trying to talk to people that might know them. We have to be very careful of the fact that their name is not public. So we talk to those folks, do reference checking, and eventually we reconvene to talk about what we've all learned. Out of that meeting arises those we feel most align, even though I think they're all very strong, with what you're looking for in the next leader. So you can see on the sheet I just distributed to you, there are um 10 people what I call the highlighted list and those are the individuals that we would suggest you consider interviewing those in yellow eventually rose to the top. That doesn't mean that you have to interview those seven people nor that you couldn't interview the folks that are in the
046other highlighted color nor anyone on the list because there are many people on the list as well that you might be intrigued with that we are not recommending. So I'm happy to um answer questions about that. Uh before I read the presentation forms which is a very high level overview of the seven that we have decided to put forth. Are there other folks that you have questions about as to why not a certain candidate for example? I'm happy to do my best to address that in this meeting keeping in mind that I'm bound by data privacy laws also and I will not be able to speak specifically about why not because it might actually reveal who I'm talking about. But are there questions on other the other candidates that are not highlighted on that list?
047Um, I have one. So, I'll just let you know the letter. >> Yeah, >> you can say letter. >> R as in rabbit. >> Yes. >> I think for us it came down to the complexity of your system and the size of Weisetta public schools. um also a strong candidate. Uh no reason not to interview them. No red flags, no concerns over lensure or any of those things. I think it just came down to some dissimilarities between Weisetta public schools and the experience that candidate R has. >> Okay. All right. No, fair. Thank you. >> Yep. Thank you. Can you just share with us candidate S as in Sam? >> Okay. Also very strong. It's it's easy when the pool's not that great and we have five or six people that immediately rise up and
048much easier. But this uh this required a great deal of work. And so S as in SAM, correct? Okay. So for this um candidate again acknowledging uh very strong great experience ultimately there are folks in the pool with similar experience and more depth again in the size of the district that you are. Um, length of time served in positions can be a determining factor and sometimes a longer tenure in a position provides you with the ability to wrap your arms around academics and HR and operations in a way that a shorter tenure does not. So length of uh tenure can be one thing as well. Um but again in a different pool I think boy a lot of these folks would be right at the very top and this is just an extraordinarily deep pool.
049So it's a little bit harder for folks to perhaps break through but I will say candidate S was very strong and we considered them very strongly as well. It was after we came back from our conversations that we had to take 10 and try and sift it out into six and we couldn't settle on six even. It was that good. So, thank you for asking and you are absolutely welcome to interview anyone you would like including R or S as well. >> All right. If there's no questions, I'm going to briefly read the overview of the seven that we are suggesting as semi- finalists. I do want to make a note that when I read this uh you might hear a little bit different tone in the writing and that's because we had five people
050doing this research and they each wrote up different presentation forms. So some are a little more verbose than others and yet uh they are all equally recommended by us. So I'm going to begin and just read a highle overview. Of all the people I'm visiting with you about uh we recommend all seven of them. All of them have indicated a willingness to interview if offered an opportunity by the board. So, I'm just going to assume that for everyone that they meet your hiring criteria and are very, very interested. Candidate A has experience as a superintendent, assistant superintendent, and teacher. Their current licenses include superintendent, principal, and teacher. And their education includes a six-year degree, a master's, a bachelor of arts, and a bachelor of science. First, I'm going to tell you a little bit about
051ref what references told us about this person, and then a little bit about why MSBA is recommending them. Those are the sort of two paragraphs I'm going to read. So, first of all, uh, references state that candidate A seeks a district that aligns with their values, experience, and commitment to meaningful educational impact. They believe that trust must be clearly defined and intentionally cultivated through the development of a co-created trust framework, which then serves as the foundation for all leadership action districtwide. They listen to students and parents to understand what they are eager to learn and then align programming with those desires. Candidate A focuses on accountability and financial stewardship by using district systems to evaluate academic data effectively and to manage district resources responsibly. Continuous improvement is embedded throughout the system demonstrating progress toward district
052priorities. That is what references stated about candidate A. MSBA is recommending candidate A because they were instrumental in fund balance improvement that helped shift shifted the district's overall mindset from scarcity to possibility. This transition has also strengthened the community narrative as a trusted partner with families throughout challenging periods. Candidate A demonstrated extraordinary grit, courage, and persistence. They are an educator with an uppercase E. Grounded in purpose, deep commitment to students and an unwavering pursuit of equitable outcomes. They consistently provide meaningful support and work collaboratively through transparency and strong relationships which begin with listening and understanding to build trust with teams and to build strengthening through the entire organization. Candidate A. We are also recommending candidate C for your consideration. Their experience is as a superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, director of human resources, director of instruction,
053teacher, and consultant. Their current licenses are as a superintendent. Their degrees include a doctorate, a specialist degree, a master's degree, and a bachelor of arts. References describe candidate C as a principled, goal oriented leader who values input and collaboration in pursuit of continuous improvement. References noted that candidate C is a visionary leader and a skilled communicator who is equity oriented and student centered. Candidate C builds relationships and trust through intentional accessibility and visibility. Notably, candidate C has established long community partnerships and lasting coalitions with broad regional impact. They are also a large systems thinker. As for candidate C, we are recommending them because they are an experienced leader who holds high standards for professional excellence. Their work, characterized by large-scale systems change related to both operational and instructional practices, has resulted in improved outcomes for
054students and enhanced engagement from employees. Candidate C possesses the skill and professional qualities this board is seeking in your next superintendent. That is candidate C. This is candidate E. Their experience includes assistant super excuse me, superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, chief operations officer, and director of elementary education. Their current licenses include a superintendent and a principal. And their education includes a doctorate, a master's, and a bachelor of science. References for candidate E share a consensus that they are a visionary, datadriven, student- centered leader. E is also a collaborative systems thinker who can delegate and trust their employees to do their work. They still hold high expectations and provide accountability and support when needed to get the work done. However, they often provide the coaching required to do so. Candidate E values and respects all employees regardless
055of their role in the district and is considered an accessible, strong communicator who is respectful in interactions with people even when they may disagree. MSBA is recommending candidate E because they are a mission-driven systems thinker whose experience enables them to understand systems and engage stakeholders in creating and realizing a student- centered vision. They are a charismatic leader who is forward thinking and leads with intention valuing and respecting the various roles employees play in realizing that vision. Candidate E has high expectations and provides strong support to all. They are also a focused uh focused transparent leader who has high expectations. That is candidate E. Uh, candidate H has experience as an assistant superintendent, principal, dean of students, head of schools, assistant professor, consultant, and teacher. Their current licenses are as a superintendent, principal, and teacher. Their
056education includes a doctorate, masters, and bachelor of arts. Candidate H colleagues describe them as a dynamic student- centered leader who builds trust through attention to relationships and who has had a profound impact on organizational culture. References use words and phrases such as courageous, tenacious in the pursuit of equitable outcomes and instructional excellence. Adaptive, culturally aware, and responsive and responsive further describe candidate H. Finally, Canada H is described as being an inspirational coach and mentor who sets standards for highquality learning environments and who lifts others to higher levels of performance. MSBA is recommending candidate H because they possess the skills and attributes this school board is seeking in their next superintendent. They are an experienced leader who builds shared vision, uses data to ground strategy, and ensures inclusive and collaborative processes to improve outcomes for all
057students. They are a conscientious leader who prioritizes the whole student and works tirelessly to remove all barriers to student success. That is H. We're now to um applicant candidate K. Uh they have experience as a superintendent, principal, and assistant principal. Their current licenses include as a superintendent, principal, and teacher. and their education includes a doctorate, a six-year degree, and a bachelor of science. References describe candidate K as energetic and visionary. They have been innovative relative to student success academically and in preparation for postsecary options. They are said to possess a brilliant mind and a passion for what is best for students. Candidate K has demonstrated the ability to make critical assessments of the needs of students and challenged all stakeholders to provide a better future for next generations. Candidate K is a capable, hardworking, and
058dedicated educational leader. MSBA's recommendation is because candidate K has experience, documented past successes, and knowledge of educational strategies. In addition, they have significant experience with community building, leading innovations that are measurable and experience with bond construction issues. Candidate K also possesses an international lens which provides a unique perspective on educational issues and experiences. Is candidate K. Candidate L is being re recommended. They are have experience as an assistant superintendent, executive director, principal, and assistant principal. Current licenses include as a superintendent, and a principal, and their education includes a doctorate, six-year degree, and bachelor of arts. References describe candidate L as a smart is smart, innovative with great vision. Uh they oh they hold strengths as a teacher leader sorry they hold strengths as a teacher leader and in addition they are well organized value people's
059voices and are a great listener. Candidate L has documented successes at multiple levels for raising academic excess for all in reducing achievement disparities and in harnessing technology for the benefit of students across all grade levels. MSBA is recommending candidate L because they have experience, documented past successes and extraordinary knowledge of educational strategies and initiatives. In addition, candidate L has experienced has experience as a principal and department supervision leading innovations that are measurable and have familiarity with the most up-to-date academic innovations. much of their educational experiences are directly applicable to Wisetta public schools and their district level experience bodess well for serving WPS. And last but not least, uh candidate T. They have experience as a superintendent, assistant superintendent, director, assistant director, and school psychologist. Their current licenses are as a superintendent, principal, special education director,
060and school psychologist. Their education includes a six-year degree, and a masters. References describe candidate T as someone who is known for accelerating systemwide progress and driving collective improvement across the district through a datadriven lens. closely analyzing student performance and system indicators to identify areas where the district can can improve and to determine what is required to reach the next level of excellence. They set clear standards for the team through intentional guidance and relationshipbased support. They strategically build trust and support through communication, commitment, and collaboration, strengthening alignment across stakeholder groups. Their leadership style has made them highly sought after by other districts throughout their career. Candidate T demonstrates a student- centered and purpose-driven leadership style. This is MSBA's recommendation with commitment to equitable outcomes. Candidate T's leadership style is characterized by strong listening skills and their
061ability to synthesize multiple viewpoints and translate them into effective strategies. They not only understand diverse perspectives, but also build mechanisms that ensure plans are executed efficiently and improvements are sustained. As a steward of district resources, candidate T is deeply committed to advancing board priorities and ensuring alignment both horizontally and vertically. That is candidate T. That was a lot. I just read an overview of seven extraordinarily capable school administrators and there are more than that in your pool. So again, congratulations on the pool. I'm going to turn it back over to Chair Sony to facilitate a conversation. Please do remember that. Where's my list of what we can and can't talk about? Um, please do not use names, where they work, no mention of their past or current employers, no references to the size of their
062districts, no mention of geographic location, no gender identifiers, and no asking specific questions about something you saw on social media. This is where it gets tricky. Discussing private data in a public meeting is not easy. But I really want to thank you in advance for your help with this. This this is why we are able to share um all of the application materials with board members because boards have been very good about keeping these names and their identities private. So thank you. >> Thank you Barb. So, is this the time now to get the recommended action approved or is that >> uh usually now someone says whether they agree or disagree with the list we're providing or if they have questions or want to add someone else into the mix and eventually >> can that
063can that come during a discussion. >> Okay. So, maybe I can recommend to move move second and then when we do the discussion they can they can >> discussion. Sure. However you'd like to do it. Every district is a little different. >> Thank you for asking. >> All right. Sounds good. Thank you, Bob. So the recommended action board colleagues is to approve extending an offer for first round interviews for the Visetta public schools superintendency to the following candidates. Candidate A, candidate C, candidate E, candidate H, candidate K, candidate L, and candidate T. Is there a motion? I so move. I second. >> Moved and seconded. Is there a discussion? >> So, candidate T, I'm wondering if the rest of the board might have similar wonderments about this candidate. Um, I don't even know if I
064need to say what it is. If you does anybody else wonder about this candidate? Okay. I might have to be a little bit more specific then. >> When you say wonder, are you saying whether or not we should extend an interview? >> Yeah. I mean, I guess it doesn't hurt to interview, but I I do have some >> reservations. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thanks for asking. And please do not be specific. I'd appreciate that. >> Okay. >> Do you think that you could connect with Barb about this one? Yeah. >> Well, I I didn't know if other people were feeling similarly. >> I think I know where you're going with um but I'll hold my questions back because >> I think you should talk to Barb. Um, >> I guess Sheila, I
065would say, um, I would consider that individual to be someone I'm still interested in, but I hear what you're saying, and I don't know that it would be enough for me personally to say they shouldn't be in there. >> Yeah. And I think I agree. Uh, >> I'm sorry, what was the last thing you said, Alicia? >> Um, I I wouldn't consider my wonderments to be enough to not present an offer to round one, >> right? I think we will have an opportunity in at least two rounds which will clarify or at least it'll give us some more inputs if you will as an individual right and as a leader. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead. Um so I asked about candidate R and I found similarities uh with other one of the other
066seven candidates. So is that something I should take directly with you offline? Um again some of the parameters you already clarified. Um I felt candidate R could very well be in one of those criterias. So I was just wondering again rest of the board members should R be considered for interview or there are any other aspects that you feel maybe not up to the mark. So again I'm not suggesting that we have to just wanted to be open and fair. So, just wanted to ask you that >> I can I mean it's hard because I think we all have that did not that individual not float to the top for me um personally. So, unless that's something different. That's kind of how I looked at this is I >> pleasantly surprised that the candidates that
067I had highlighted did make the top seven and so then I went from there and went a little bit you know deeper maybe but >> that's my only feedback. >> Yeah. and all of my candidates actually they made to the list. Uh so again I just this was one that sort of stood out. So again I just wanted to make sure but again I totally agree if there is nothing significant from any other board members I'm okay with what we have. Just wanted to check. Yeah. Yeah. >> Um I I am happy and accepting with the um recommended uh slate of candidates put to us. Um I think they bring strong credentials. >> So I I already asked you questions about candidate S. Was it S? Yeah S initially. But I overall I think I'm
068I'm good with the seven that were recommended by MSBA and I'm hoping that my board colleagues will also agree with that. So, okay. So, I'm going to read the recommended action again. Recommended action is to approve extending an offer for first round interviews for the Visetta Public School Superintendency to the following candidates. Candidate A, candidate C, candidate E, candidate H, candidate K, candidate L, and candidate T. This is a roll call vote. Colleagues, Valentina Ays, >> yes. >> Dan Janestra, Dan Janestra votes yes. Alicia Little, >> yes. >> Paris Bendy, >> yes. >> Sheila Prior, >> yes. >> Heidi Kedar, >> yes. >> Melan Zahony, >> yes. The motion passes. Thank you, Dan. So, anything else, Barbara? >> No, but thank you very much. I appreciate the careful discussion. It is it is not easy
069to do this but you did a very nice job. Uh what will happen next is I will reach out to actually all 10 of the folks that we vetted at length and let them know personally uh if they are or are not going to be interviewing in Weisetta and then uh we'll be discussing with the subcommittee the dates and times of each of those interviews because there will be seven. And so um we'll bring that back to the board when we have that schedule ready to go. But congratulations. I I feel like you have your next superintendent in this mix because it is such a wide variety of experience and approaches. It was just the six of us on our team have spent hours and hours and hours dissecting the people in this pool and
070we couldn't be more excited for you. So congratulations. I'm looking forward to next steps. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So this concludes the weather public school. >> Oh I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Just very quickly be I want to thank you so much. I mean, I jokingly said coming in that I mean, it's been really engaging to look at all of these applicants and I appreciate the time and energy they've all put in and yes, to see all of the different personalities coming through. Um, you know, I just I'm so glad we have such a great pool, but I also appreciate the amount of hours it must have taken your team to really go through all of this and give us those really much. >> Yeah. And it's very methodical. That's the best part
071about it. It's the process is very rigorous. again you are leveraging data at every step of the way including um you know the community feedback and so on. So thank you. This is really great. Um some of the comments you shared did resonate as we were looking at the profiles. Um so that makes sense. So that gives us more and more confidence. So thank you for all your help and support. Okay. All right. Thank you Barb. So this concludes the Visetta Public Schools special regular board meeting. Our uh next meeting is the regular meeting at 7:00 and the time now is 6:03. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Nay. The motion carries. The Wisetta Public Schools Board of Education special
072regular meeting for Monday, February 9, 2026 is adjourned.