Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 5/9/2023
EASTHAMPTON — After agreeing to move forward with an interim superintendent during its April 25 meeting, the Easthampton School Committee met again on May 1 to discuss how to proceed with naming an interim. During the meeting, the committee ultimately agreed to work with the Massachusetts Association of School Committees to narrow down finalists and conduct interviews.
The decision to search for an interim superintendent came after West Springfield interim Superintendent Vito Perrone had his offer rescinded by the committee and the second candidate, Ludlow Director of Curriculum and Instruction Erica Faginski-Stark, withdrew from consideration for the position.
To begin the workshop session, the committee had several options to weigh, including how long a term to offer an interim superintendent, whether or not to offer a full or part-time position and how to go about the interview process.
“I feel pretty positive that if we offered one year and we were happy, we could easily move to two or three. But if we want to calm things down and have some stability in the area, then we can go for a two year,” member Cynthia Kwiecinski said.
Citing a short timeframe and potential new members on the School Committee after the election in the fall, member Marin Goldstein said offering a longer contract to an interim could be a “slippery slope” to a new superintendent.
“To me this is very clear we went through a process, things happened in that process, we weren’t happy with the end of that process, we are now looking for an interim superintendent that is then going to have a superintendent search,” he said. “The amount of time that we have to make a decision that we like this person and want to keep them going further, I don’t feel is very long and I don’t think that’s the best expectation that we should set ourselves.”
Goldstein said he wanted to see a one-year contract and superintendent search as opposed to a multi-year contract, depending on how interviews with the candidates go.
Committee member Ben Hersey said he was in favor of the one-year contract.
“I think it makes sense to create a space for someone to get settled in, but it would be good to start this process again fresh sooner than later,” he said.
Kwiecinski said a part-time position would be difficult to do.
“There’s too much to do, there’s budget, there’s teamwork, there’s all of the responsibilities with policy and with meeting with your administrative team, never mind all the other issues that go on and the School Committee meetings. I just don’t think it works for a part-time position,” she said.
On top of a potential part-time position, the committee also discussed potentially having the interim work four, 10-hour day weeks or potentially offer a remote day depending on travel time, which many of the members were hesitant to do. Goldstein said he was hesitant to offer the job to anyone coming from the Boston area or further away.
“No one is going to be moving here for an interim position, they’re going to be commuting and I think that we should put an hour distance from our district as a maximum, that gets us past the Worcester area, it gets us to the 495 beltway area, but it doesn’t put somebody whose all the way in Boston and then commuting all the way out here,” he said. “That’s not going to set up our community for the best person in this role.”
Mayor Nicole LaChapelle said she was concerned about a part-time interim superintendent.
“I worry about the four day a week because there’s so much going on with the school district. If it’s Friday then it’s possible the interim doesn’t work on Friday, there’s a Monday holiday, then that’s four days away, that’s my concern there,” she said.
Kwiecinski agreed and said she wanted a full-time interim.
“I really think we need a full-time interim, I think that was the expectation when we went through the search committee and I’m really not comfortable with changing that expectation, and I don’t think the community would be happy with that,” she said.
Another wrinkle in the discussion was a potential waiver for a retired superintendent to come in and still collect retirement, which MASC representative Liz Lafond said would not be an issue.
“It looks like you have four candidates from the Western Mass. region here and all of them would need that critical shortage waiver. My understanding with talking to a number of people over the past couple of days is that it should not be a problem at all since you have gone through the search process and have not been able to find a candidate,” she said.
In terms of offering a second year to the potential interim, Lafond said that another community had done something similar.
“They hired for one year with an option for a second-year renewal by March 1, with agreement by both parties,” she said.
When asked about how to conduct smaller scale site visits compared to a permanent superintendent interview, Lafond said a typical amount of time was at least a half day.
“Any candidate that you want to talk to at this stage of the game would appreciate having some time in the district to meet folks, talk to folks and to understand where everything is. We always give candidates coming into the district – tell us who you would like to speak with – and we’ll do our best with the district to schedule it,” she said. “That will also tell you something about the interim candidates coming in, in terms of who they want to speak with.”
Lafond also suggested having at least a 75-minute interview with the interim candidates.
“I think the questions would be different than you asked of your full-time candidates, they would be more around the individual’s experience and coming in and being able to provide that stability while you get to you next phase,” she said.
Lafond recommended having candidates be interviewed and conduct site visits on separate days before allowing some time for the committee to think about the options as opposed to deliberating and deciding immediately after the final day of interviews, which the committee did for the permanent superintendent interview process. Alongside agreeing with these recommendations, the committee also agreed to offer a hybrid and livestreaming option for the interviews.
Kwiecinski also clarified that the candidates’ names would not be released until they agreed to an interview.
Ultimately the committee tasked Lafond with reaching out to the four potential candidates to see if they were interested in submitting a resume. The committee also agreed to host another workshop session on May 8, during which the committee went over resumes before scheduling interviews with any of the potential candidates. The actual interviews are slated to begin the week of May 29.
Laurie Garcia resignation
On April 29 former committee member Laurie Garcia announced that she was resigning from the School Committee in a post made on her Facebook page.
“I cannot begin to put my feelings into words as I scrolled through six years of posts from the start of my first campaign until now. I will remain proud of the amazing accomplishments we achieved together as a unified School Committee, with varied members in my three terms,” she wrote.
Some of those accomplishments include the Walk, Bike and Roll events, Fund our Future campaigns for the Mountain View School, navigating through the coronavirus pandemic and the district’s We the People teams.
Garcia, who was a strong proponent of naming Perrone the next superintendent, also discussed the stand she took in support of him.
“I am extremely grateful for the numerous supportive messages I have received from so many who are thankful for the stand I have taken during these dark days and weeks for our district,” she wrote. Please take the time to scroll through the past with the hopes of bringing light to our students – our future!”
Garcia joins former member Shannon Dunham, who resigned on April 15 due to a health issue. Both Garcia and Dunham voted for Perrone every time a vote was taken to enter into negotiations with him.
During the workshop session, Kwiecinski explained that the committee would be working with the City Council to fill the two vacancies, over the course of three meetings, with a timeline to be determined.
“Our first meeting will be for us to meet jointly with City Council and simply go over what we’re going to do for rules and procedures. We’ll know more about the timeline then,” she said.
The committee next met for another workshop session on May 8, coverage of that meeting will appear in the May 18 edition of The Reminder.