In a special afternoon meeting on Friday, January 18, the School Committee decided to reopen the search for a new superintendent, but to consider only the original pool of applications received by the search committee. Members of the committee voted to take at least until their next regularly scheduled meeting, on January 28, to reconsider as many of the 31 original applicants as might still be available as candidates.
The committee had planned to choose between two candidates for the superintendent’s position at its regular Monday meeting on January 14. However, discussion was tabled after one finalist, Dr. Jessica Huizenga, withdrew for personal reasons. A third finalist, Dr. Judith Paolucci, had withdrawn earlier to accept a job in another district. Of the three candidates recommended as finalists by the search committee, only Scott Carpenter of Lincoln-Sudbury remained as a possibility.
School Committee Chairwoman SusanMary Redinger opened the Friday meeting by summing up a range of options before the committee. She said that the members might simply vote to select Carpenter. They might continue with the present search by re-examining the resumes of the original 31 applicants. They could start the search from scratch again, knowing that they had missed the months of the academic year when the widest selection of candidates was available. Or they could consider another year with an interim superintendent, whether it might be Dr. Joe Connelly, who currently holds the position, or a new person.
Redinger had one key criterion: “I want to end up with a great superintendent for our schools,” she said.
Committee member Bob Sullebarger asked whether the 13-member search committee was willing to open a new search. But Connelly said that the search committee had been officially disbanded once it recommended the three finalists.
“The responsibility is now with the School Committee,” said Connelly. He later added that the School Committee was not bound by the decision of the search committee and had “the option to consider any and all other possibilities.”
Committee members Kirsten Wright and Sullebarger both said they were unwilling to take a vote with only one candidate as a possibility, and other members of the committee agreed to drop that option. All agreed, however, that Carpenter would still be considered as a candidate among others.
Redinger told the committee that several of the original applicants were already finalists for positions in other districts. “We are fighting over the same pool,” she said.
After further discussion, Redinger proposed that the group’s search sub-committee (Redinger herself, Connelly, and committee member Keith Cheveralls) review the original applications and to select those which seemed most promising. They would then forward those names to the whole School Committee for further evaluation. She noted that this discussion would be in executive session because names of candidates are confidential until they are designated finalists.
Wright asked if the committee might consider seeking help from a professional search firm, given the amount of work members had already done on the project. And Sullebarger noted that a professional might draw in candidates who had not responded to the original search. But Connelly countered that the work a search firm could contribute--such as advertising and preparing a brochure about the district--had already been done.
In the end, the committee voted unanimously to take up the original batch of applications and to report back no sooner than the next regularly scheduled meeting, which is Monday, January 28.
Sullebarger said, “The community made it very clear how they feel about the quality of the superintendent that we hire, and the School Committee understands this. The School Committee does not want to compromise on quality.”