To the editor: Why does the Oyster River community need to hire an expert, to the tune of $15k or more, to inform them of best search practice when we have a well paid administrator with close to 30 years experience of leading successful searches?
And why, as some have hinted, is it so necessary to hire a principal with experience, if the board doesn't value the experience on hand?
Why has the board still not given a cogent reason for rejecting the nominated candidate? If the board majority felt he was not right for the district, say so. And then, please tell us what you are looking for in the next principal. The community has a right to know and to respond with ideas of their own.
Why did the board, at the April 27 meeting, deliberate and decide how to proceed with a new search before listening to comments from the 400 community members who came out to share their thoughts and concerns?
And why did the Board, after spending two hours on the aforementioned discussion, attempt to grant only one hour for public comment in return. At 3 minutes apiece, as requested, were you really only interested in hearing from 20 of the 400 in the audience?
Please, help us understand.
JoAnn Portalupi
Lee
JoAnn,
ReplyDeleteIf you are so concerned about this district, please rerun. You gave up your seat and the majority of folks elected this board. Your letter to Foster's is chock full of intimidation, manipulation, and hypocrisy.
You should know as well as anyone the dangers of breaking non-public silence. When the public uproar about Don Maynard happened, you said nothing!
The difference Durham Resident is that Mr. Maynard is a district employee and as such the Board's hands were tied under the RSA for discussion of personnel. In the present case there is no personnel issue to protect. The public is simply asking that the Board be transparent and truthful about why the turned the candidate down. If it was qualifications, say so. Budgetary, speak up. And when they speak up they should tell the public what it is the current board is looking for in a candidate. Why go through the same process to only vote the candidate down again for unknown reasons? Oh wait, it isn't the same process. This time around the Board subcommittee proposes to pick the community members to ensure that only parents that think like they do will be appointed. I give them credit. At least they are being transparent about their power grab.
ReplyDeleteWait, hasn't it been clearly stated that the committee is Mr. Colter's? Isn't he selecting the participants? Staff, faculty, and community?
ReplyDeleteHow can the board be any more transparent when it's no longer their committee?
In the minutes from the 5/9 meeting the board is picking the community members. They are just calling it Mr. Colters commitee even though it really isn't. The SB also has not posted that they are looking for community members unless you read Fosters or the meeting minutes you wouldn't know.
ReplyDeleteLori, I also have an issue with lack of communication of the district. Other than http://www.orcsd.org/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=214
ReplyDeleteor Fosters, where could the SB communicate? Many community members are not electronic communicators. I see a big challenge and wonder what the answer could be to best benefit all 3 towns/communities.
Upon reading Joanne Portalupi's letter, I have a few questions myself:
ReplyDeleteWhy does she claim that the expert will cost "$15K or more," when an article in the May 10 edition of Fosters says that the Board is still waiting for a bid from the New Hampshire School Board Association? Does she have a crystal ball?
It may be true that our current Superintendent has years of experience in leading searches, but the last one can hardly be described as "successful". Why would the Board want to go through the same process again, expecting different results? Is that not the definition of insanity?
The Board has given a number of reasons for rejecting the candidate. Why can't she accept them?
Why the concern now on the part of Ms. Portalupi for the public's "right to know and respond," when her own tenure as Board Chair was notable for her refusal to answer questions or take any action whatsoever when presented with clear evidence of fiscal misfeasance on that part of District staff? (See posts at: http://oysterrivercommunity.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html for background.)
Please, help us understand.
Well said, Tom. As I remember, JoAnn was in favor of eliminating public comment altogether when she was on the board.
ReplyDelete