001I'd like to call this meeting to order. Uh we have the five trustees present. Are you out there? Trusty Grach. >> Yes, I'm here. >> Okay. Thank you. All trustees are present. Gerald, has agenda been posted according to open meeting law? Yes, it has. Thank you very much. Trusty Blakey, would you mind starting us? >> Thank you. Public comment. Members publicly speak as to state their name for the record will be limited to a uniform number of minutes. Board members may respond briefly to public comments but cannot deliberate on matters that are not listed on the agenda. For matters on the agenda, the board will conduct public comment after discussion of each agenda action item, but before the board takes any action. A summary of public comments will be noted in the minutes. Are there
002any public comments tonight? Okay, seeing none, moving on. Review and adoption of agenda. >> Move to approve the agenda as posted. >> Okay, I have a I better tell you names on this one, right? I have a motion by trusty McFaden, trust second by trusty Bullock. Any public comments on the posting of the agenda? Hey, none. I'll call for a vote. All in favor? >> It is unanimous. Thank you guys. Upcoming board events. Does anybody have any questions on the upcoming board events? Reports by board members. I'm not going to go down through each one. I will just ask if anybody has a report by a board member since we just met for Christmas. Okay. Then we will move on to the new business part about it. Hey, for discussion and possible action approval of
003resolution number 25-04, augmented budget, Superintendent Parsons and Amanda Hammond Comproller. So you'll see in in your packet that we have the um information on the augmented budget um in there the I'm going to refer to the to the main sheet um which is a resolution um you'll see that we have um augmented in more money into the general fund um that comes from and Amanda feel free to correct me if I state anything incorrectly um we with the information we had a higher an anticipated ending fund balance. So that was able to be brought in. So that was good. So that's augmented in there and and looked in that. Um and Amanda has gone through every facet of the budget um to try and clear everything up and make sure that the numbers are accurate
004and um where and fall right where they should. And um so we are on track with the budget. I mean that's often comes out of here where we're at on things. Um but this shows all the changes in there. But I think the one big notice that I had on there was that um the with that ant with the ending fund balance being quite a bit higher than we had expected that is good for us. And so that was able to be put in there and that will help us out at the end of this year also leading into next year for budgeting. Um the other factor that you see on there for the high school houses that because the house did sell and so that that money was factored in there as well and
005so that's why you see that difference there. So, we're glad it did sell and it it did sell at a profit and so we're um it's not about the house even though we want to build more. It's it's been a wonderful thing for a community, but we were so glad it sold and and hopefully the new owners are really enjoying the house our students built. Um and and the rest of was mainly just going through and and working things out and figuring those. I don't know if there were is there any big things that stood out, Amanda, that you want to comment to the board on? Is there questions the board members have? No, I think you covered it. Just the ending fund balance for FY25 came in about $2 million higher than was expected.
006So, that definitely helped us out for this fiscal year and then going forward. And then we did get several more state and federal grants this year than previously budgeted for. So, far looks like we're doing pretty good. >> We're still actively pursuing any of those additional funds that we can get. and trying to make sure that we've utilized um all of the money available to us. Um the good thing is there there were no there's no big surprises, nothing big in here that we had to propose to to make big changes because of unexpected things and stuff for pretty well and and we're right on track with with where we should be. Anybody have any questions? Amber, Julie, you guys have any questions? Are you good? >> I'm good. I'm good. >> Hey, thank you.
007>> I move to approve the augmented budget number 25-04. Res approve the resolution number 254. >> I have a motion by trusty Whitaker, second by trustee Blakekey. Any public on the augmented budget? None. I'll call for a vote. All in favor? I >> I unanimous. Thank you. Can I just state one thing, trustes, before you leave tonight, we do have something for you to sign so we can submit this on time. Um, and so I'll have that information here. So, we'll have that for you to sign before you leave tonight. Thank you. >> Thank you. Moving on to B for discussion and possible action. The board will receive and discuss information from modern educate HR regarding the superintendent search. The board may discuss and take action to approve the characteristics and experience trustees seek the
008next superintendent salary range to advertise the timeline for the superintendent search other matters related to the superintendent search and hiring process. It is myself and Keith Lewis and his team. Um if you guys want to go ahead, you want to go ahead that document sent me and just go the most efficient way you can through it. Thank you very much. There we go. Good evening, Keith Lewis for the record. >> And do you see Dave Jensen on your Dave? There's Dave Jensen. Look at him. He's looking >> Jensen for the record. So, I sent a email uh today to Greg and just kind of outline uh everything I hope to get accomplished tonight. Um we've sent you quite a bit of uh documentation in your packet and so hopefully by the end of tonight um
009we'll have established a a tenative timeline. And the only reason I say tenative is just because things could change within the process. But hopefully coming out of here with a pretty clear-cut uh uh timeline that you want to follow. Um we want to have a conversation what that salary range might be so when we post the position that we can provide that information to potential candidates. We want to get your input on a stakeholder survey. Uh specifically in that too we want to you to consider how young or do you want to interview or survey students at all and if so then at what age uh do you want that to be from? So, we want to have that conversation tonight. Um, we want to talk about the superintendent profile. I was uh able to
010take the profile that you used prior to Darl's uh hiring. And so, we've modified that into a little bit more detail, but we would also have an abbreviated version for that we'd place in the ads. Uh so, we can condense that a little bit, but the uh profile that's a little bit more detailed would be part of the application process that every uh person would see. Um, finally, just if you have any feedback on the application itself or the application process, we certainly uh want to get your feedback. And then hopefully after tonight, we have all that ironed out and we're going to be ready to uh start running as soon as I get back to mind this evening. Um, and one of the things that I'll uh say now so that I don't forget
011later um is that we will be sending out an email to all of you to start arranging those uh interviews uh individual interviews that'll be coming out to you uh either tonight or tomorrow morning and you can give us times that you're available and then we'll schedule a Zoom uh interview. You can plan about 45 minutes to an hour uh for those. Okay. And then uh one last uh thing that Greg has brought to my attention tonight, we might want to review uh the number of candidates that you want to interview. U we've been made aware that your uh the administrator's negotiated contract uh requires you to interview anyone that meets those qualifications and so should you have uh on lot of internal candidates, we could quickly get to that five uh that you had
012approved last uh meeting. So we may want to look at that and make some revisions to that. Um knowing that new information and what that might entail then is a first round and a second round of interviews if we end up with a lot of uh internal uh as part of this process. So does anyone have a preference of where we start? Okay, let's just dive right into a time into the timeline. I think that's uh will kind of guide a lot of our work. So in uh in your packet tonight um I have put a proposed timeline and again this is just a proposed you certainly we want your input um on that and even with my own team looking at this um the proposed timeline that we have set forth in front of
013you allows for a 45day window for applicants but still would then uh result in the interviews being either March 12th, 13th or 18th, 19th if it works for you. So you're looking mid-March to uh eventually having a candidate selected. Uh the next step in that talks about um the actual uh selection process in the contract and that's more time just by your current meeting schedule. So you would have a the March 31st um is a meet a regular meeting already. Um, and so our goal would be after the interviews to have a contract in place that we could bring to that meeting. But if that if we're still working on that, then the next uh meeting is in uh late April. But again, we can speed all of that up with a special meeting uh
014for the sole purpose of finalizing a contract. Uh so as you're looking at that timeline, um so I assume I'm going to make the assumption that you've probably all read all of this and I don't want to uh go through it with you. So really on some of this if uh just kind of open it up to questions um and we can speed up this process as much as you want on that. So I'll open it up to the board. >> Yeah, I was a little surprised to see that the selection happened essentially two weeks after the final interviews. What is the reasoning for that instead of selection immediately following the interviews? >> So, so again and and that's probably just the verbiage. The intent would be is that you would select the candidate whenever
015we do interviews, but it wouldn't be finalized until you have a con. So really what I was looking at there was that on the March 31st meeting we would hopefully have a contract that then the board would be approving which would really be the finalization of of this process. So that's what that time frame is. But certainly our intent is to bring you to make your job hard number one uh that it's a hard decision uh but that you are able to select a candidate uh whenever we decide those those interviews are going to be. >> Thank you. The question I have is at very end um you have modern educate HR will support transition planning including goal setting and entry planning. Um what does that look like from you guys? >> What that looks
016like is a discussion with the board um in terms of what how much do you want Darl to be involved in that transition. Do you if it's a candidate that maybe is not currently under contract, do you want them to start a month early so that you have that transition period? We're going to work with you also to set those initial goals for the uh superintendent. That's all part of uh what we've uh included in this package. So, it's really just, you know, obviously Daryl will be here till June 30th. Um and anticipated start date is July 1st, but doing that work so that on July 1st uh isn't the first time your newly selected candidate is walking into Fallon and and picking up that we're doing some work to uh make sure that transition
017is smooth. and other districts have um we did Persian and so they contracted with their former superintendent for a set number of hours that they would be available for the new superintendent um for that transition because obviously uh if you you know if you select someone internal obviously they have more in uh history uh with the district but someone coming from the outside uh that historical perspective is very important. >> Anybody else? Julie, Amber, you have any questions on the timeline? >> I do not. >> I'm assuming that's a no. >> Yeah, I I don't have any questions. I I just um wanted to clarify again the the time frame for when you are meeting with the board members. So that will be um we will be sending that out and we will start meetings
018on Saturday the 3 around the corner um and then providing several opportunities during the week as well. So going to be a lot of time slots just let us know when you're available and confirm those. >> Okay. And I'm sorry you cut out. You said beginning on >> the 3 if you're wanting to do something on it that day. >> Okay. Okay, great. Thank you. >> Are we taking action on this or is this just a briefing? I >> think we probably unless you guys give me different advice, we just go through the whole thing and then at the end take action. >> Right. Sounds good. >> All right. I'm gonna have Dave, I'm gonna have you do the next two things. I'm talking about a uh salary range and also the survey. >> You
019bet. All right. So, I am now sharing my screen. Want to confirm that everybody can see it. Is it visible? >> We got you. We can see it. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you. So, what you see before you is the salary comparison. This is only looking at the 15 school districts. Obviously, Wo and Clark County are not going to be comparable studies for us. I do want to express my appreciation to NAS and all of the 15 superintendent. We gave them a pretty tight timeline and they made it. So, what this is, this is current 2526 base salary. And so you can see the school district on the left, what their total enrollment, what your superintendent's work days are, and this will tie directly because you can see some difference. Like in Humbult,
020my contract was 233. Um, but I didn't get vacation days. So it it's kind of a balance when you look at the work days. And then in column L, the number of vacation days, what their base salary was uh in the prior year and what it is currently this year. The other highlighted column is the total package because as you look on the far left, there are some additional compensation pieces that you'll see a little more clearly when we get there and and hopefully it shows up on your um your copy as well. There's things like 403bs. Some of the school districts are providing health insurance for the superintendent spouse. Um there's things like um uh extended life insurance policies. So there's different types of issues like that which bump up the total value. So
021this matrix really becomes the foundation of what I wanted to share with you as we then jump into our next conversation. Um looking at got to find where I've got it. the salary analysis where this goes into more detail of where we are looking at. So when you look at the 15 rural school districts, the median uh salary right now is 187,000. So when we look at where uh Church Hills County Superintendent and Darald I know you're sitting right there um and he shared his information at 167238 is below the rural median the 15 median and it's also below similarly sized and slightly larger districts. So here's our 15 school districts. We've already talked about the median salary of 187. And so when we look at your current enrollment, this is the enrollment we had
022of 3,76. And then we compare it to like districts. Humbult 3245, Lander 1027, Lincoln 855, Mineral 505, and then Carson and Douglas are larger. So the next piece then becomes what we talked about on the earlier spreadsheet. You can see the enrollment. Now you can see the base salary, total value, and how many years the superintendent has been in their position that gets them to this uh base salary and total value. And here becomes more of the detail on what some of the additional benefits that some of the school districts are um uh providing to their superintendent. As you know, I just retired from Humboldt. Um when I retired, the new superintendent, Mr. Kobe Corbett came in at $195,000. That's what the board of trustees in Humbult determined to compensate him at. So, you can
023look at some like districts as we look at districts that are similar. Like I mentioned, Humbult is higher. Lander County is currently at uh 1871 142 with a total value of 196. Um Lincoln's at 168,000 with a total value of 175. And then we get into the others like Carson and Douglas are at 180,000. Um, and there's some uh benefits that will um increase this over time. Like in Carson, there's a 5,000 annual increase. And in Douglas, there's an annual step that continues to move them forward. And Lion County and Elco we know are are quite a bit bigger, but they're also substantially higher. So, as we look at it, the base salary uh is lower than the median of what we're seeing across the rural school districts. And so, when we get to the
024key points for discussion, the question that the board needs to ask themselves at this point is where do you want to put in your new superintendent? You need to be competitive. Uh that's our recommendation. uh when we consider not only internals but externals, they're going to need to have sufficient income that allows them to move their families hopefully and purchase a house in your community. And with interest rates, sometimes that's a scary proposition. So, compared to like slightly like size and slightly rural, um the package in addition to the salary is is modest at best. there's not a lot of additionals um that are being provided to your superintendent. So these might be some discussion points for you. And then as we look um those additional benefits are very helpful as we start to look
025at retention in the long term. So the recommendation is as we start this conversation is at what point do you want to put them in your new superintendent? Um, my suggestion is 167 is probably low. Um, not necessarily the median might be a little out of reach at 187. My recommendation to you is to look at a minimum of 175 to 180 as the starting point for your incoming superintendent and then through the negotiations of the contract provide some type of annual step increase. Um, that certainly can be tied to performance. So, wanted to share that with you and open it up to the board to engage in a conversation on your comfort level and what would be your recommended fiscal starting point that we can include in our recruiting materials. And I'll turn it
026over to you, Mr. President. >> Um, one question on the other counties pled. Do we know their contribution to PERS? Um my understanding is for all the superintendents it's 100% provided by the school districts. It's not a shared cost. >> Um Dave, can you tell me is the 187,000 based on the base salary or the total valuation? >> Base salary. So the suggestion is to have a very limited range when we advertise this. I think you said 175 to 180. >> That kind of how it usually works. >> Yeah. And you can do that based upon experience or your other option is to say this is where we're willing to start a superintendent whether that be 175 or 180. I have one more question that you guys may not have an answer for. So like
027in the last four years, five years about what is superintendent pay increased. I mean, it's it's got to be I'm guessing fairly substantial here in the last I know you probably don't know off the top of your head, but you probably have an idea just from when you did the job compared to >> I can tell you that um I came in at 155 in 20 Douglas County and left at 180. So in that three year we accelerated quite a bit. again based on some of the same data you're looking at is that Douglas uh itself was not as competitive as they wanted to be. Um so Dave I don't know what and Todd maybe you can speak. >> Yeah I I was there eight years I started at 120 uh when I left I
028was at 176. Um, you know, one of the things that I feel like I spent 30 years in Western Nevada and I think some of the issues with that is we we have to recruit against uh sometimes or you know alongside with Wo, Carson, Douglas, Story, Lion, Churchill and sometimes to a smaller extent Persian. So I think in western Nevada for at least us anyways that's a consideration whether it's a bus driver or super. >> Thank you. >> And just to share in my case you know obviously I was superintendent in humble for 13 years. Um I started at 121 um back in 2012 and it it was a different um time. I I would tell you honestly back then in my last five to six years the board took some very deliberate action to
029accelerate my compensation um and I retired at 226 and so that's where when we look at my replacement uh he was started at 195 which still is higher than that median. So there were very strategic actions by most school boards in the past 3 to 5 years to make increases to superintendent salaries and that's very deliberate. Um you you want to keep a successful superintendent in your district and then if you're looking for a new one there's got to be something that truly entices candidates to say I'm interested and it fiscally is worth it for me to consider this school district. >> Thank you. Can I and I would also add I think where some of the shift has also been is that superintendent contracts didn't always have the escalators built in and so you
030were you agreed to a salary and then when the at the board's discretion they would bring it forward. So I think that's the trend you're seeing and and you know would be a recommendation if you you know want to start at 175 but there's still a percent increase with a successful evaluation by the board that you know they there's they have to do something to get it but um that at least they see where that you know that escalation can be rather than just here it is and when you get around to talking more salary which is always difficult. Um there's never a great time to do that. So that may be something you look at. >> And for the record, Dave Jensen, one of the reasons we recommend that is there's automatic triggers for
031most of your other staff. Your classified, certified, and your administrative generally get an annual step increase. Yet often the superintendent does not. That has recently changed uh to where most superintendents have an annual step increase automatically built in. That way the board's already taken action on it. It it doesn't have to become this big public thing. um where you know here it is it's transparent here's what we're going to do just like we do with other groups >> uh Julie G for the record oh sorry I was just going to say um you know to Greg's question that um you know I kind of had the same question but I'm also in looking at the document that was provided this evening um the majority of the superintendent position listed on there are between, you know,
0321 and 3 years. And so I I mean that would lead me to kind of guess that this um kind of trend upward trend and putting Church Hill sort of behind took place over the course of the last few years as many other districts were you know recruiting and filling their superintendent positions because I can't remember just off the top of my head but when we advertised for um the superintendent position the last time around. I think we were within that median range and now [snorts] you know 3 years later we've fallen behind. But I mean, if somebody if somebody remembers that um portion of it from the recruitment, um I I mean, I just would venture to say that we were advised on kind of a a good place to start last time around.
033>> Thank you. I don't think you have anybody remembering that exact document. >> Maybe Trusty McFaden. We have I printed out our um last goarounds meeting minutes and everything and it the salary range advertised was 160 to 175. >> I will share that I'm not against the recommendation, >> but uh I'm I'm I'm in favor of the recommendation. It actually came a little lower than I thought it was going to. I think the Carson superintendent's underpaid if you look at this. I I wouldn't disagree with you. >> Really easy here. >> Yeah. >> Now, keep in mind when you look at Carson City, he's got this accelerator tied to his contract right now where he will see $5,000 increase annually. So, in two years, he's going to be at 190. So, there is some some
034forward momentum for Carson. >> So, I agree. I I was surprised by the recommendation. Happily surprised, I guess. Happily. I don't know what that says about us and where where we are. Um, so I support that range. My my question is do we need to consider the add-ons as Dave quote the quote the document lean add-ons uh that we have if we need to consider something along that and I know in the past the board has not been as thrilled about tying automatic increases to the superintendent because we had strong feelings about expectations of the superintendent and that they needed to earn that. It creates some challenges especially if we're we don't have an effective evaluation tool or just figuring out an evaluation tool. Um so I think that's something that we might need to
035look at more closely. >> I have the same thoughts and I'm in agreement. I'm I'm not opposed to some sort of step or accelerator, you know, after three years of of evaluations at a certain rate or something. >> For me, I was kind of thinking um I was, you know, since I work at the county, I was just kind of comparing a little bit to what we do over there and every year they do try to do like a 2% doesn't happen every year. Sometimes it's like a 1% to 2% um pay increase, which you know just kind of comes up as a you know cost of living type increase and I'm open to something like that. I'm I'm also in agreeance with with the rest of the members. However, I do think that I
036would like to see possibly something about a longevity. Um it's, you know, we've had five years, five years, and and three. Regardless of what the reasoning is, if we can maybe have longevity, it might bring a person here that wants to stay longer. So Dave, I want you to weigh in as I'm listening to the discussion. To me, this would almost be the board is setting that starting range and then you're just communicating a desire in that contract negotiation that you would be open to step increases. We wouldn't necessarily list that right now, but we'd list what the starting pay would be and then celest uh we select someone and then we finalize that contract. Dave, do you want to weigh in on that? >> Yeah, thank you. Dave Jensen, for the record, um I
037would agree with what Keith shared. Um we we wouldn't necessarily post increases as part of our posting, but it would be part of the contract. I would recommend that you don't wait three years for the first movement for your superintendent, but what you certainly can do is tie it to the evaluation. if they're effective or highly effective or however you have uh created your evaluation tool for your superintendent, then it could trigger a certain amount of an increase annually. And if they're deemed ineffective, then the contract says you don't get an increase. So that certainly is within your power. I found it interesting when you look at Lander, his is three with up to an additional 5% based on evaluation. Uh to me that's kind of a huge increase. I was a little shocked by
038it. Um but most of the others do have an annual increase that ties to it. One thing I noticed also is it doesn't appear that Churchill provides a vehicle for your superintendent. So I don't know if that was a choice by Darald or if that was just part of the contract. All of the other districts do provide a district vehicle. Obviously, that's not to go shopping um or to go on a Sunday drive. It would be for business related in between schools for um NAS meetings, that type of of a of a thing. That makes a difference for a superintendent as well. So, I would recommend that you look at that. Um some districts do a buyback on vacation. Um, I'm not sure if that was embedded in Darald's contract or not, but they could
039sell back certain number of vacation days if they weren't used and that's capped. Um, and those are all the kind of considerations that the board can look at for those additional benefits that oftentimes are a selling point. >> So really right now we're looking at the 175 to 180 and then the contract part will not worry about that with any advertising or anything. So, can we kind of the board kind of agree on that's where we're at? >> Yeah. But I and I think the discussion at least helps us even with candidates who may have further questions that we there may there appears to be some willingness um for some incentives. We would obviously not guarantee anything um until a contract, but that at least we have that information in those private conversations. >> Then
040this also provides you, let's say you get a brand new superintendent, they're walking in year zero. that might be the 175. If you get a candidate that's got years of experience as a superintendent, that might be your 180 discussion point. And so the that range really opens up so you're not nailed down to one price and you can consider prior years of experience. Uh, Julie Gutch, for the record, um, I was going to ask that question and so I'm glad that you brought that up because oftentimes on job postings, you know, ranges tend to be a little more than like a $5,000 range. Um, especially for a position in a leadership role where again you may get somebody who's entry level and has no prior experience as a superintendent, but then you might get somebody
041who's a seasoned superintendent with like 10 years of experience or something. And so in your past practice or experience working with other districts, is that $5,000 range what you normally see or do you see a larger range to allow for like the depending on experience? I mean, or or do you post the range saying like depending on experience? >> That's at the discretion of the board. Um, you know, again, I I do point to the median's 187. Um, so you certainly have some latitude if you want to increase that range. Um, one one I just wanted to make sure that we fall within your comfort zone of what you're willing to pay a superintendent. >> Hi, this this is Amber. I was just wondering if maybe we shouldn't go just a tad higher just because
042that 175 to doesn't seem like a huge draw or a huge difference. I guess >> just my thoughts. >> Look at like a 175 to 185. I mean 175 to 1875 whatever the median is. I mean >> I could be tucked into a bigger range because it all comes down negotiations at the end. Really? >> Yeah. Right. I I agree that um a broader range might bring us more candidates and then I I mean I'm just along the lines of somebody that you know if if a candidate were selected with no prior experience. My thought process would be they're kind of starting at the more toward the beginning of whatever this range is versus somebody who's a seasoned um experienced person would be possibly toward the higher end of that range. And you know, I'm
043not even opposed to um dropping the low end a tiny bit considering that we may have people again with zero experience as superintendent applying. So, we can drop the lower end and also increase the higher end just depending on what people think. >> Anybody have an opinion on that? I'm I'm don't know how much we need to drop it. I mean, we have school administrators making around 130,000. Starting to approach that number where why would I take this job when I can stay with my 270 days? Just >> I kind of agree. Oh, sorry. I don't think we should drop it, but I think maybe like 175 to 185. >> I'm good with that. I'm fine with that. Same. >> Yeah. Are we all good with that? >> I'm good with that. >> Yep. >>
044You have a plan next. >> All right, Dave, go ahead on the survey. >> All right. So, the next thing I'm going to open up, if I can find it in my screen, is the proposed survey. Where is it? Sorry, I have so many open tabs in here. There we go. So, as we prepare for the stakeholder survey, um before you you've got a draft, as Keith indicated earlier, obviously we want to push this out to the community, your parents and your staff members. The question for the board of trustees is, would you like to involve your students? Uh certainly there is some value to that and if you would like to at what age point would you like to have involved? Uh we don't necessarily recommending just opening it up all the way down
045to kindergarten. Um but you know some of the districts the Persian county they started at 14. So this is our introductory focus um that uh stakeholders will see it identifies that they're going to be anonymous. We're not going to identify anybody in their uh names as we provide this data to the board of trustees. It truly becomes that open opportunity for the community to say this is what we feel we need in our incoming superintendent. So once we get through the introduction they'll move to the next slide and now we ask them to identify themselves. You'll get a number of candidates or indivi I'm sorry not candidates number of respondents that fall within each of these different groups. So you have the opportunity to say see where these responses are coming from. We then move
046into the questions that are along the liyker scale. And so when we get to that liyker scale we rank them from five to one. One being not important to five being very important. And you can see the qualities of the next superintendent and those go as you can see asking about integrity and ethical leadership, communication skills, trust, uh working collaboratively with you as the school board, transparency, commitment to student achievement and approachability and visibility in your community. So your community your stakeholders will say this these are the important things for us um and these are the less important ones. So this gives you that feel of what type of a candidate your stakeholders believe need to come in for your consideration. The next question now starts to look at what prior experiences should your candidate
047have. Um same liyker scale one to five. Should they have prior experience as a superintendent, as a teacher or a school administrator? Would you like to see those that have experience in rural or small districts? Should they know financial planning, budget de development, and fiscal accountability, labor relations, facility planning, student safety and crisis management, and experience working in Nevada or similar regulatory environments? We then jump into the next question. How important is it that the next superintendent demonstrates the following leadership approaches? The ability to make difficult decisions, willingness to engage with stakeholders, navigating political, fiscal, and community pressures, respect for the distinct roles of you as a board member and of the superintendent, and a commitment to datainformed decisionmaking. We then look and we're asking the stakeholders only to choose three responses in this question.
048So choosing three, what would they believe that your new superintendent should focus on in their first two to three years? You can see academic achievement and student outcomes, staff recruitment and retention, financial stability and long-term planning, school safety and student well-being, community engagement, facilities, career and teched, and early childhood and elementary education. Once they choose their three, this is an optional question if they would like to provide a narrative of why those three selections were their top three. We then move to the next part. next. It's not letting me move to the next part. So, I'm going to exit out of this one and come back down to here. So, these are open-ended questions. So, we're going to ask our stakeholders first desired characteristics. What personal qualities or leadership traits do you believe are most
049important? What types of professional experiences should the next superintendent have to be successful? How we define success? What would your community, your stakeholders like to see after three years to determine success? And then if there's any advice that your stakeholders would provide to you as board members. That would then be the sum of the survey. And then we just exit out with a thank you for them taking their time. And then again res reminding them that their responses will be anonymous uh but they will be compiled and shared with you as a board of trustees to assist you in that process of selecting your next superintendent. That is our uh draft of the community survey the stakeholder survey and I throw it back to you Mr. President for any discussion or comments that the board
050may have. Anybody have any questions or want to go with the student age or any of those categories? >> I think it looks good and I I think 14 is a good responsible age to take some take some stake in your district. >> I agree. >> Thanks. >> Okay, so we're all good with this one. Okay, we can move on forward. Thank you. Just a quick note, you What is your survey policy? Is it passive? Do we need to prepare anything to send out? >> No worries. We can send it. >> That'll be facilitated through the district. Uh uh your >> Yeah, we [clears throat] can we can do that through our public information officer. won't turn that off since I'm still talking. Okay, we're making good progress. All right, let's go ahead and move
051on to your uh profile, superintendent profile c um candidate profile. And again, I'm going to ask the same question. I'm going to assume you have read it. And to what degree do you want to go through it? Um or do you just want to clarify it? I can go section by section if you'd like. um or if there is you like what you see or things that maybe we've missed that you want us to make sure we add. So the the first thing I did when I opened this up is went back and researched last time we did this our last profile if you want to call it and then also our meeting notes from when we had this discussion a few years ago. Um, so I'm glad you you did the same thing. It
052summarized a lot of the same qualifications and candidates that we're we're looking for. One thing I did notice that was different is past we gave information on the district and I I don't know if your guys' professional opinion if that's a value to have in the application so they know what they're applying for. >> Yes. And that definitely um that's a great catch. That will definitely be part of our process is that we will not in addition to here's the profile, we're going to be also selling Fallon Place to live and Church Hill uh County School District, you know, your mission, your vision, making sure that all that is communicated. That will be in the application packet itself, but we'll also be creating a web page for you. Um that will include, you know, if
053you have any kind of promotional videos that you >> Yeah, we we have some pretty good district type videos. >> Yeah, >> we'll definitely uh include all of that in there. Um and I'm in my current job as uh executive director of Visit Carson Valley. I know Jane Moon very well and I know uh having traveled with her a little bit uh she's got some great videos on Fallon itself um as a great place to live. Uh so we're going to do it from two standpoints. Not only you want somebody to want to live here and especially with your policy uh requiring that, but also one of the highlights of the school district itself. So that's definitely part of that, Joe. Other than that, I think it looks good. Anybody have any questions on it?
054I I mean, I read through it. I have nothing to add. Everybody good with it? >> I'm good. I'm good. >> Perfect. Thank you very much. All right. >> That's so unfair. >> Whitaker, are you okay? You [laughter] look like you had something to say. >> Y'all are making this too easy. [laughter] I remember long discussions about this several years ago. So, I appreciate it's an indication to me of a couple of things. Number one, we've got we're working with great part partners, but number two, board has a clear mission and vision that we've been consistent with now for a number of years, which we didn't however long ago, and we really were working from ground zero. So, so that's encouraging, and I'm I'm grateful that the board is unified in this decision. I'm grateful,
055too. I was really nervous coming into this, not just today, but last meeting, and I'm like, "Oh, okay. This this is doable, right?" >> Well, thank you. Thank you for making our job so easy right now. >> This will obviously be part of the packet because this is clearly important. Uh it's on the front of every one of your agendas. As I've researched, I've seen this everywhere I've looked. So, uh obviously that will be communicated well uh to potential candidates. you're making it just as easy. So, um, all right, let's talk real quick. Uh, let's go to article 183 and just have that conversation real quick. Uh, so you did take action in the last board meeting um to uh for us to bring up to five candidates uh before you. Now giving given the
056uh contract language I'd like to have you um have further discussion would look at this in terms of uh you know obviously we don't know who internally will apply seriousness of those uh that do apply uh and so but we do need to make sure that we factor this in so that you're not stuck to five that are all internal if they're all other outstanding candidates in the pool. I will read it to you just so that everybody's on the same page here. Administrators eligible for CCAA membership shall be afforded the opportunity to interview for vacant director or superintendent positions. They have the lensure or experience for the position they complete the full required application for all applicants. basically if they get online and do the application I mean the lensure is already there I
057guess the only one you could really look at is experience and that's kind of a that's kind of an interesting one to look at what what is administrative experience and so I do think we have to somehow expand this because we could have five applicants and maybe that's a good thing >> trustee for the record. Sorry, >> I just had a question on that. So being that we don't know how many internal candidates um we would have apply and with that contract language um is there a way that we can almost separate it out and just say something like up to I'm just going to make up a number but like up to three outside candidates and then that way we're not cuz like we're going have to interview the internal candidates who apply. And
058so then that way we're not like setting a specific number because we don't know how many of them are going to take up those spots. So then could we just say like up to three outside candidates and then that gives us room that like maybe there's only like one or two outside candidates that we even want to interview. But you know, I don't know. Can we do something like that? I I'm not so sure that I like the up to um are you saying up to within the five or >> Well, what I'm trying to say is like like to Greg's point like let's just say that that you know we put it out there like um we're going to interview like up to five candidates and let's just say that we get five internals
059then that takes up all five of the spots that we said that we were going to interview and our hands are kind of tied because we said you know because we have to interview internal candidates. So my question is um can we word it in such a way that um then that way anybody who is qualified internally and applies is obviously going to get their interview and we've left oursel wiggle room to then select up to like three outside candidates to add to that. And then we're not like at a at at any set number because again we don't know how many internals are going to apply. >> Is this a number we have to set right away or can we wait till applications close and you guys can come back say okay you had
060four internals and this many externals. Where do you want to interview it? >> This is definitely not a decision uh trusty McFaden that we have to make tonight. Um, it's again something that we can see what we're looking at. We're going to be we're going to ask to be on your agenda for every meeting as we go through this process so that we can at least give you an update of where we're going uh what's happening in the process uh in a public fashion. Um, we could do that. The other thing we could do is just resend that up to five and leave it more open. And again, you've hired us and trust us to bring you the most qualified candidates. end up with a bunch of internal and we end up with a bunch
061of really quality external, then maybe that first interview looks a little different. Maybe that's not as uh detailed and it's more a a screening to where uh you then narrow it down to a second interview which is then maybe a little bit more detailed. So, we could do it different, but we don't necessarily have to make a decision tonight um because we're that's down the road uh before we have to make that decision. Uh, Mr. Jensen, do you have anything you want to add or Mr. Hess? >> Dave Jensen, for the record, I was just going to say exactly what Keith just said. I don't see this as a decision tonight. As we start to gather those applicants, we're going to keep you informed. We'll get a feel for how many externals and internals uh
062within the next several weeks. And so then the board can make that decision. I do like that idea. I hate saying that we're going to limit ourselves to only three external applicants. So I would myself I would prefer to keep that number at the five qualified external applicants and then I guess we're being told that we have to interview all of the internal that's and then I guess if we're doing 10 interviews we're doing 10. committed to doing >> I I would hope an internal applicant isn't qualified. We don't have a bunch of them put in. That would be my ultimate hope is that we don't have a first year VP decide that they should be the next superintendent. We don't know that till they come in. >> And sometimes they do it for experience,
063too. So, um, they may not know they're they may know that they're not going to get it, but they do that for the experience. So, we we just don't know that potentially they could. They meet the minimum qualifications, they automatically get an interview. And so, I mean, that's that's very likely consideration. >> Is this relatively, Darl? Is this new or was it in place when you're >> I think this is in place. As we're sitting here talking, there is one thing I do notice as we think about the required qualification eligibility. I know that on when we hire for assistant superintendent or director positions, um we have a requirement that we put out that we post um about certain number of years of administrative experience that we've required and that there there's nothing with and
064I don't know if the board wants to do that. I know that is something that we've had there on this it has just teaching experience is required and the eligibility holds a license. I don't know what the board's however the board wants to go with that but that is one one factor there too um that the board could consider as well and what you're looking for and what you want to identify with that because I know we have had that situation we get when we when we fill positions any position and and in leadership positions too we we often have a lot of applicants that don't meet our minimum requirements and what we do then is we we go through that and if we we don't feel we we've got good applicants, we can we
065can go back and look again, reevaluate. But, um, that's where we've usually gone with those. And so, I don't know if we want to be any different with this one or not. It'll be completely up to the board want to have a requirement like that in here or if this and this is I believe very close to what was used before when I was hired um on that. So, that's only one thing I I I think of that is different than what we normally do with the other positions. Would that be a Charlotte question to see what our boundaries are with the the verbiage inside the negotiated agreement? >> Negotiate agreement states it meets the qualifications. [snorts] >> We set like five years of administrative experience. >> I think that's a great idea. I think
066there has to be some administrative experience. >> I agree with that. I And I think that five is a great number. Any three. Does that sound good to you guys as far as >> firm >> five years experience? Does that make sense? >> Yeah, I Yeah, I think at least five. If you're talking superintendent, you want them to be a little bit more seasoned. So, I think five would be a good number. >> I think that's a great way to start whittling. I Yeah, that's a great idea. I would say at least five for a district our size. At least five. Anybody else have any comments on this one? >> Then that that takes care of the language in the contract that you must meet our minimum requirements. So if that's in there, that's a
067minimum requirement. >> You do you care if it's public or private? Sorry, but >> that's something to consider. I don't think I do. I don't think that one bothers me. It's going to be pretty rare, but we'll we'll add in at least five years of school administrative once you approve that motion. what my note is that into the application. All right, moving right along. Just the only other two things was just the application process. again uh questions um actually on the application what their uh cover letter needs to uh entail again will be more for us on our end since we're going to be seeing these and bringing candidates forward to you. We think the questions are appropriate for to get to candidates that fit Chill County School District. Um this application is similar. I
068I have added some acknowledgements especially we want to make sure that they're acknowledging that they know they have to live here. Um that's an very important uh thing. Uh so we'll make sure that they're acknowledging that we make sure that they uh are waving their uh statutory so that this process again can move forward upfront. They know that uh their name will be released at a certain point uh in this process. Um so again I think those acknowledgements uh are appropriate. So any other feedback on the application itself or the process itself um that will go out. >> Hey this is Charlotte. Can you all hear me? >> Yes. Hello Charlotte. >> Okay. Hi. Uh I just had uh I I I thought I'd let you know yes I have been here most of the
069meeting and listening in and uh my my one observation here and I I uh this might be a good time for me to make this point. the the trustee who felt most strongly about requiring the superintendent to live in Fallon is no longer on the board and it's been a number of years since that was uh put in place. So, if the board had any appetite to reconsider, I it might be a good question to ask you if um in your professional opinion, do you think that that requirement is going to be an impediment to getting quality candidates? >> Who wants to go first? I I'm torn on this because I certainly and and I know all three of us lived in the communities of which we led and I know how valuable that is
070that that presence that being there uh being able to drive home quickly after a game. So that's the side that I really believe strongly that living in the community is important. Um I think it helps longevity. Um if somebody is commuting and we talked about this all the time in Douglas County, we have lots of teachers living in Reno and driving and that's good for only so long and then they decide that's a long drive and they look elsewhere and so for longevity again I think it's a requirement. I don't know your housing market yet and I think that's the key is what is the housing market like? you're taking some strides in the sense of offering a more competitive salary um which helps with that but again you know your housing market a little
071bit better than I do and that's always a factor um and given you know your proximity to Fernley and Lion County um where there may be more housing available. So Dave Todd you're certainly uh able to weigh in. >> I can weigh in on a little bit um as well. I totally agree. I think, you know, someone being a member of the community is is super important, whether it's WashU or Clark or any of the 15. With that being said, when I stepped down um years ago, someone that uh works very closely with uh Superintendent Lewis and uh myself for a year, um our goal was to throw the biggest net available. And in order to do that in western Nevada, we felt like if temporarily if you live in a W show or Carson
072or Douglas or something like that, Story County is sort of right in the middle of that, that gives us our biggest net. There might be a way to do it to where again the housing market when we did that search uh in Lovelock, not too far from here. Um there was at the time almost no inventory um for housing available. So there might be a a want to look at sort of a timeline by which uh they could move into Churchill County as well. So that I agree with Keith. That's a that's a difficult one because you want to be a member of the community, but you also want to throw the biggest net you can out. Uh Dr. Jansen, do you have any comments on that? >> Yeah, thank you for the opportunity to
073weigh in and I appreciate Charlotte bringing this up because I think it's an important conversation piece. My perspective is one of the goals through this process is to build community confidence in the board and the district. Um, and when somebody comes in, takes revenue from your school district, and then leaves your community, I've seen where at times that erodess that trust. Um especially when you consider a community like Churchill, Humbult, Lander, Persing, uh where there's there's not that uh close opportunity like Todd left in Story County where there that folks could live and get up there with a relative ease. But I look at it from the community confidence that that board members uh that superintendent's vested in the community. I've always been an advocate uh if possible that the superintendent reside in the community.
074>> The other thing I think you have to consider is right now it is your policy and so whatever your time frame is, you'd have to change your policy. Um which is not usually the quickest thing. If you do two readings, >> I'll just say it. It sounds to me like >> it sounds to me like the the Maybe not asking the question of do we want them to live here, but how long are we going to let them take till they get here might be what the board wants to focus on. >> I think it does say six months, isn't it? >> It does say six months. >> I I guess I'll go first on this one. I'm a pretty firm believer that I want them living in this community. I I'm still We
075will hear about it. They don't put that out there. >> I agree. I I 100% believe that the six month timeline to move here and and I do respect the housing market issue. I think it was a little worse maybe two years ago. Um you know I know a couple people looking for housing right now and there are openings out there and they prices are kind of coming down. So I'm I'm 100% they have to live >> I agree. I think they definitely have to leave live. Sorry Joe but yes I agree they need to live in our town. Yeah, I I couldn't agree more with what was said on this and um I six months is hopefully ade adequate for the applicants. >> I would agree as well. Six months I think is sufficient
076time, especially if they're really wanting to come work in our district and to help benefit our students, then they'll do what they need to do. >> I agree as well. on the application. >> Charlotte is happy on it, >> right? Any other input on the application or the process? >> Uh, yeah, we never clarified how many were applicants we're going to select and where we are on that. We got as far as that, okay, we're going to have a minimum qualification, but are we going to leave it at five or are we going to I I like the idea and I some mentioned um of you reviewing let's see how many internal and then coming back and saying here's our recommendation. >> Yeah, I I think that's kind of where I took it is that
077we were going to kick the can down the road a little bit. Um maybe something you want to rescend. I don't you know if you want to leave it more open or we can just do it at a later date whatever works for you. >> I just wanted clarification that that's where we are. >> Right. That's that's how I understood. >> It wasn't clear on that. So I appreciate >> and that's not something we're going to publish in any of our you know that there's only five people being we that's not going to be any part of our advertising. >> Okay. >> So what pertinent information needs to be in a motion? All right. I've been taking notes. >> I can't make one. All right. >> You're you have decided that the timeline is is
078as presented. You've uh suggest uh the survey is as presented in agreement at 14 plus. Um you have indicated that you'd like to look at a salary range of 175,000 to 185,000. Um, you have uh requested that we add at least five years of school administrative experience to the qualifications for the position and uh and then accept accepting the application the application process as is. Keith >> was did we also present the candidate profile? I believe that was approved as well. >> Yes, as is. So with the five years administrative experience, would that be five years of administrative experience or school administrative because you you could have a combination of school and district level administrative experience as well on that and and unless um want to make a differentiation be one or the other or
079either or admin or just administrative experience. I'm good with just administrative. I don't think we need to make this any more complicated. >> Garald, are you thinking there's a an end around on that? How we word it? >> No, you when you said back you said school administrator. >> Yeah. >> And I was thinking all any administrative experience because it could be at the school or it could be in in different departments and different things depending on Okay. So, >> make sure it's it's worded experience administer. Yeah. Okay. So, I'm going to give this a shot and we can amend it. Make a motion to give Modern Educate HR the following directions. Um, we approve the candidate profile as presented. The timeline is presented. The survey is presented with a salary range of 175,000 to
080185,000. And also adding a five-year administration experience to the application. I have a motion by Trusty McFad and a second by Trusty Whitaker. Did it sound like we got all that right? Okay. So, is there any other comments or public comments on motion? Okay, seeing none, I'll call for a vote. All in favor? I >> it is unanimous. Thank you very much. Thank you guys very much. >> Thank you. It's a pleasure meeting all of you. We look forward to working with you. No, >> just one quick final comment. Um first of all, congratulations for finding $2 million in your general fund. That happened in no other district, no other of the 16 districts found that. So, congratulations on that. The other thing too is look very forward to uh um interviewing um every single
081board member. I have a feeling that uh you know we've been able to work with Daryl Parsons for a number of years and I have a feeling when you discuss the exact type of person that you're looking for. You're going to describe our good friend Daryl. So um very much looking forward to those. The other thing too that I think is going to play so strongly in Church Hill's favor is that you ask around NASBY, Google it, you do whatever. The first thing a superintendent looks for from the outside is what is the stability of the board. The fact that you guys are the most stable board in the state. You you you could certainly argue that I think it's going to open up a pretty good net for some outside people. So congratulations for
082all the work that you've done as well. You should be congratulated on that and I think you're going to see in the quality of the candidates. >> Thank you. Look forward to working with you. Our former Ted Hunter said that very first thing to us. He he always said um you're not just interviewing a candidate, candidates interviewing you. So it it matters >> me. That is true. [laughter] >> Thank you guys. >> Okay, we will move on to number 10. Discussion of possible action regarding future items as requested by the board of trustees and clarification requested items. Does anybody have a BM tonight? Seeing none, we will move on. >> Okay. So, public comment members of public speaker are asked to state the name for the record and will be limited to a uniform number
083of minutes. Board members may respond briefly to public comments but cannot deliberate on matters that are not listed on the agenda. Are there any public comments? Okay, then this meeting is adjourned. Have a great new year. We'll see all you guys next year. Happy new year, guys. Thank you.