Teachers, trustees at odds

Dispute over superintendent search is latest disagreement|

The search for a new Petaluma City Schools superintendent has become another in a series of contentious issues between the school board and the Petaluma Federation of Teachers.

The disputed issue is the school board’s decision not to use a Selection Advisory Committee to aid in the search for a replacement for Steve Bolman who is leaving the superintendent’s post in June.

“We don’t understand why the district is deviating from its hiring protocol that clearly calls for a Selection Advisory Committee,” said PFT President Kim Sharp.

According to Sharp, the advisory committee is used for district hires such as principals and administrators to ensure broad-based teacher and parent participation in such decision-making. She said that in her 21 years in the district, the school board had only deviated once from that process when hiring a superintendent. That came when Bolman was hired permanently after serving a year as the interim replacement for former superintendent Greta Vigue.

School teachers presented a petition to the school board on Tuesday night asking it to reconsider its position on how the selection process will proceed. The board accepted the petition, but took no action.

Sandra Larsen, the PFT’s chief negotiator in contract talks with the district, pointed out that the district is using an advisory committee in its current search for a new director of human resources to replace Ron Everett, who is also leaving the district in June.

Petaluma City Schools Board Member Troy Sanderson said there will be ample opportunity for teacher and public input, but that the selection process would not be best served by an advisory committee. Sanderson was chair of a similar committee that interviewed candidates when Vigue was hired in 2002.

“We didn’t make recommendations,” he said. “We just interviewed three candidates (chosen by an outside consultant), and reported on what we thought were the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. At the end of the day, I didn’t think we added any value to the search. Public input is not for show, but for actual value.”

Board member Sheri Chlebowski said the board is reaching out to teachers and others to get input on what they want in a new superintendent. “I want to hear from as many people as possible, not just a panel of six people,” she said. “This is the biggest job we (the board members) do. We can’t afford to mess this up. We need to hire a dynamic person who can unite our district.”

Sanderson said the district is seeking to attract a wide range and variety of candidates.

“We want to cast as wide a net as possible,” he explained. He added that to do that, the district must assure possible candidates from other districts that their application will remain confidential.

“It isn’t an issue of trust or confidentiality. That is not what it is about. It is about the perception of the applicants and their feelings of confidentiality,” Sanderson said, explaining that there is a concern qualified candidates from other districts might not apply if they perceive that their application might not remain confidential.

“It is a balancing act. We want to get useful, relevant public participation, but we also want to get the best available candidates. We are reaching out to all the stake holders and are going directly to our employees to ask them for their input.”

The district has not hired an outside consultant to help in its search, and is instead relying on online and trade journal advertisements to attract candidates. Each candidate will be interviewed by the board, with two former schools superintendents helping with the interviews.

The search for a new superintendent comes at a time when the district is already involved in contentious contract negotiations with the PFT, with salary a key issue.

The two sides have been using a state mediator to work out their differences and have two more sessions scheduled for April.

In the last public disclosures, the teachers were asking for a 4 percent cost-of-living raise, while the district was offering a 2.5 percent increase.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.