My first instinct is that of course I would go back to a public superintendent search. I'm curious to find out why exactly the last two processes were done privately. Of course, even if there are valid reasons for a private hiring process I think right now the board would have to carry out any superintendent search in the open.
My first instinct is that of course I would go back to a public superintendent search. I'm curious to find out why exactly the last two processes were done privately. Of course, even if there are valid reasons for a private hiring process I think right now the board would have to carry out any superintendent search in the open.
I should also say that addressing the question of superintendent searches implies that the district will be hiring a new superintendent soon. I don't think that is the case.
Thanks for answering Chris. The reason the Board gave for conducting a private search in 2019 was that you get better candidates--some good candidates may not want it to publicly known they are seeking to move.
Of course that logic failed on two fronts in 2019. Devon Horton was flying all around the country to participate in public searches in 2019 (Grand Rapids in March, Rochester in May. Indianapolis in June). Just a couple months later, however, you have the board president Suni Kartha send an email on behalf of the board out claiming they couldn't name the finalist pool because they wanted to respect "the confidentiality requested by the candidates."
A couple weeks later when Horton was hired and they released his name it became clear that Kartha was lying--unless you want us to believe that Horton said, "I'm cool with everyone knowing I'm interviewing in Grand Rapids, Rochester, and Indianapolis. But Evanston? No way! I request confidentiality."
I maintain that if we had had an open search in 2019 and that the finalists were brought in for public scrutiny, either Horton wouldn't have made the cut or there would have been outcry about his lack of experience and dodgy financial background.
Kartha's statement said to me that they knew this guy had some baggage, and didn't want to be held to account.
Then last year we get ANOTHER closed search and we get ANOTHER hire who had limited experience and her own baggage from her time at CPS.
Were Horton and Turner *really* the best candidates we could get?!? When Murphy and Goren were hired in an open process, the public got the chance to see multiple people with good backgrounds. Maybe they didn't hire my preferred candidate, but at least we could see the choices and get a feel for the decisionmaking process.
I think a closed process erodes public trust in the board. Especially when you can do simple google new searches for "superintendent search" and see that districts that DO public searches are attracting people with much superior resumes than our current superintendent. It makes people ask, "what the hell is going on?"
Also, to your last point about hiring a new superintendent soon. Remember Horton left mid-contract, so that was not on the radar for the last election.
Turner's contract expires on June 30, 2027. So if you are elected you very much will be faced with a hiring decision. That may mean giving Turner another contract or it may mean going in a different direction. Either way the board will have to make a decision and I think having a commitment to re-establishing an open process shows a commitment to transparency.
Thanks for giving some context, Sandy. I think we both suspect that there may be some space between the board's official statements and their actual motives from 2019. As frustrating as it is I'm starting to accept that there is a lot about that era in District 65 decision-making that I'm just never going to know about.
Fortunately I don't think I have to know absolutely everything about what went on behind closed doors back in 2019 to see that the district is appropriately run now.
As for whether I think Dr. Turner is the right superintendent for the district now? I don't think there is one ideal candidate. My experience with Dr. Turner is limited but from what I have seen, I think she is capable of overseeing the district. There are two things that lead me to that conclusion.
The first is the meeting she held with board candidates to give an overview of the district, her own background and how she envisions the working relationship between the board and administration. I found the experience to be informative and reassuring, particularly the portions of the meeting where cabinet members of the administration gave information about their departments. Dr. Turner did not have to hold that meeting. She could have been printing out resumes. I could hardly blame her, based on some of the public comments that some of the candidates, including me, have given at board meetings. The fact that she met with us at all shows me that she is operating in good faith and that there is the possibility of a rebuilt, trusting partnership between the board and administration.
The second is the members of the cabinet staff. Dismissing Dr. Turner would probably mean further shakeups of central office positions. I know we just got through a long news cycle of trying to cut down a bloated central office staff but you have to have someone in there. I think the people in there now are at least good enough that the stability of maintaining the current administration is preferable to the chaos and uncertainty of a top-down replacement of everyone.
Replying to you and Sandy below her second comment. (EDIT. oops, I thought Sandy and Penny were the same person at first. I see now that Sandy is replying to Penny. Sorry to confuse you two. Your names look similar enough at a quick glance. Also your icons are identical on my screen)
My first instinct is that of course I would go back to a public superintendent search. I'm curious to find out why exactly the last two processes were done privately. Of course, even if there are valid reasons for a private hiring process I think right now the board would have to carry out any superintendent search in the open.
I should also say that addressing the question of superintendent searches implies that the district will be hiring a new superintendent soon. I don't think that is the case.
Thanks for answering Chris. The reason the Board gave for conducting a private search in 2019 was that you get better candidates--some good candidates may not want it to publicly known they are seeking to move.
Of course that logic failed on two fronts in 2019. Devon Horton was flying all around the country to participate in public searches in 2019 (Grand Rapids in March, Rochester in May. Indianapolis in June). Just a couple months later, however, you have the board president Suni Kartha send an email on behalf of the board out claiming they couldn't name the finalist pool because they wanted to respect "the confidentiality requested by the candidates."
https://dailynorthwestern.com/2019/11/12/city/district-65-narrows-search-for-superintendent/
A couple weeks later when Horton was hired and they released his name it became clear that Kartha was lying--unless you want us to believe that Horton said, "I'm cool with everyone knowing I'm interviewing in Grand Rapids, Rochester, and Indianapolis. But Evanston? No way! I request confidentiality."
I maintain that if we had had an open search in 2019 and that the finalists were brought in for public scrutiny, either Horton wouldn't have made the cut or there would have been outcry about his lack of experience and dodgy financial background.
Kartha's statement said to me that they knew this guy had some baggage, and didn't want to be held to account.
Then last year we get ANOTHER closed search and we get ANOTHER hire who had limited experience and her own baggage from her time at CPS.
Were Horton and Turner *really* the best candidates we could get?!? When Murphy and Goren were hired in an open process, the public got the chance to see multiple people with good backgrounds. Maybe they didn't hire my preferred candidate, but at least we could see the choices and get a feel for the decisionmaking process.
I think a closed process erodes public trust in the board. Especially when you can do simple google new searches for "superintendent search" and see that districts that DO public searches are attracting people with much superior resumes than our current superintendent. It makes people ask, "what the hell is going on?"
Also, to your last point about hiring a new superintendent soon. Remember Horton left mid-contract, so that was not on the radar for the last election.
Turner's contract expires on June 30, 2027. So if you are elected you very much will be faced with a hiring decision. That may mean giving Turner another contract or it may mean going in a different direction. Either way the board will have to make a decision and I think having a commitment to re-establishing an open process shows a commitment to transparency.
Thanks for giving some context, Sandy. I think we both suspect that there may be some space between the board's official statements and their actual motives from 2019. As frustrating as it is I'm starting to accept that there is a lot about that era in District 65 decision-making that I'm just never going to know about.
Fortunately I don't think I have to know absolutely everything about what went on behind closed doors back in 2019 to see that the district is appropriately run now.
As for whether I think Dr. Turner is the right superintendent for the district now? I don't think there is one ideal candidate. My experience with Dr. Turner is limited but from what I have seen, I think she is capable of overseeing the district. There are two things that lead me to that conclusion.
The first is the meeting she held with board candidates to give an overview of the district, her own background and how she envisions the working relationship between the board and administration. I found the experience to be informative and reassuring, particularly the portions of the meeting where cabinet members of the administration gave information about their departments. Dr. Turner did not have to hold that meeting. She could have been printing out resumes. I could hardly blame her, based on some of the public comments that some of the candidates, including me, have given at board meetings. The fact that she met with us at all shows me that she is operating in good faith and that there is the possibility of a rebuilt, trusting partnership between the board and administration.
The second is the members of the cabinet staff. Dismissing Dr. Turner would probably mean further shakeups of central office positions. I know we just got through a long news cycle of trying to cut down a bloated central office staff but you have to have someone in there. I think the people in there now are at least good enough that the stability of maintaining the current administration is preferable to the chaos and uncertainty of a top-down replacement of everyone.
Why do you believe that the current superintendent is the appropriate leader for the district right now?
Replying to you and Sandy below her second comment. (EDIT. oops, I thought Sandy and Penny were the same person at first. I see now that Sandy is replying to Penny. Sorry to confuse you two. Your names look similar enough at a quick glance. Also your icons are identical on my screen)