Trustees send evaluation to school district attorney
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
POLSON — Trustees of School District 23 and about 30 community members gathered in the Polson High School Library for a special meeting on Jan. 18 to continue the evaluation for Superintendent David Whitesell and to consider an ethics policy for trustees.
Before the evaluation started, PHS Athletic Director Scott Wilson reported on the Montana High School Association annual meeting held last weekend.
Only one item presented to the MHSA passed, Wilson explained, and that was a proposal to adjust the eligibility guidelines for music programs. Music competitions, such as All State and All District, are considered co-curricular instead of extra-curricular.
Wilson, according to Whitesell, received an award for outstanding service to the MHSA at the meeting.
“It was very unexpected,” Wilson said, noting that a couple of awards presented at the annual meeting are a surprise.
The trustees gave Whitesell a 27-page compilation of their comments at the Jan. 9 meeting and continued the evaluation on Jan. 18 after Whitesell had a chance to read the documents.
Again Whitesell waived his right to privacy, and the evaluation was conducted publicly.
Former Polson Middle School English teacher Harold Lair reminded the board that they represent the entire public not certain individuals.
“Check your egos at the door,” Lair said.
Chair Caryl Cox asked that board members provide a two to three minute summary of their evaluation and then list Whitesell’s strengths and areas where improvement is needed. After Whitesell’s response, Cox said, trustees could adjust the statements if they wanted. A sample of the summaries follow.
Trustee Kelly Bagnell said she was proud to be a part of School District 23. There’s been a lot of turmoil.
“You have to lead,” she told Whitesell, “and we haven’t seen that.”
Mentioning the administrative salary matrix, Bagnell noted that Whitesell brought new, inexperienced administrative staff in with salaries almost the same as more experienced district administrators.
“I would summarize by saying for roughly two years, the majority of the board supported you,” Trustee John Laimbeer commented. “... Now for the past eight months there is a different majority on the board ... If we go back over the months, in my opinion, you have showed disrespect for board members, told us part of the story but not the whole story on many issues ... and didn’t honor the employee/employer relationship.”
“ My recommendation would be you share some of your authority, release some of the power and set up a few committees,” he added.
“It’s all about the students,” Laimbeer said.
Trustee Bob Hanson said that one of Whitesell’s personal strengths was to focus the administration on specific objectives.
“I have also noted he has an ability to build relationships with other school executives within the county and statewide.”
“His willingness in the face of persistent harassment to compile and present data ... and his uncommon patience” were two other attributes Hanson mentioned.
Although Trustee Theresa Taylor said she didn’t know why anyone would want to be a superintendent, she said the board wanted a proactive, take-charge superintendent, which Whitesell has done “with remarkable grace at times and at times not so much grace.”
She applauded Whitesell’s efforts to improve the strength of the administrative team.
“Too much emphasis has been placed on the adults of the district and not so much on the kids,” she said, “and I would like to see that focus shifted back.”
Taking a slightly different approach, Trustee Brian Havlovick said he appreciates Whitesell’s ability to make decisions. He also said he had learned a lot about the budget from Whitesell.
By “your actions, your words ... the focus on what’s best for the students ... That is where our focus has got to be,” Havlovick said.
Explaining that the evaluation form is based on the job description on the district’s website, Cox continued with her evaluation. She said the superintendent has fostered division, insulted public officials and trustees and undermined the board’s position.
“Mr. Whitesell’s job is to be an ambassador. He may do this, but if he does so, he doesn’t communicate it very well,” she said.
Whitesell meets regularly with the Polson Education Association and Polson Classified Education Association, and a number of potential grievances have been avoided because of that, Cox said. She also appreciates his streamlining bus routes and his work on the hot lunch program and environmental issues.
“The transportation fund for non-transportation purposes concerns me greatly,” Cox said, referring to salaries and other funds coming from the district’s transportation fund.
Trustee Nancy Lindsay said she has grave misgivings about our district under Mr. Whitesell’s leadership.
“I have reservations about whether Mr. Whitesell has the requisite skills for this job ... skills in collaboration, communication and analysis.”
Communicating fully and effectively, repairing relations with Lake County officials, preparing and executing a plan to pass mill levies, modeling and promoting a culture of truthfulness, educating the board on the budget, and preparing a budget working in collaboration with staff and the board to maximize the district’ resources were some of the other items Lindsay spoke about.
“Yes, it has been a very bad fit from the outset, “Trustee Bob Ricketts said. Ricketts gave examples such as the handling of staff, alleged abuse of his authority, intimidation, creating a hostile work environment, alleged lying and the transportation budget.
During his response, Whitesell said, “I basically have applied for two jobs in the past 11 years: Twin Bridges and Polson. I wanted to be in Twin Bridges, and I wanted to be in Polson, and I still want to be here ... I would love for us to get back on the same track. That track can only be one thing ... it has to be about the student focus.”
“Whatever happens here, I have full faith in knowing, if we don’t have a snow delay, we will have school,” he continued. “We will have some students that are excited to be there, some that aren’t so excited ... Don’t confuse the great things that are going on (in this district) with the personality conflicts.”
Lindsay made a motion that each trustee forward to Chair Cox his or her lists of Whitesell’s strengths and areas for improvement.
The motion read: Further, that the chair forward to the district’s attorney Michael Dahlem, by Friday, Jan. 20 the following:
• The completed evaluations from each trustee presented at the Jan. 9 meeting.
• Whatever lists she has received from trustees of the superintendent’s strengths and areas for improvement.
• A request that Mr. Dahlem prepare, for board consideration at the regular February board meeting, a plan for the superintendent’s job performance improvement, such plan to include a timeline and potential consequences for failure to comply.
Board discussion included a suggestion from Trustee Havlovick that “we form a committee of the board, and we build a team to help this district get on common ground and move forward very, very soon and very, very quickly. We work together and not against one another with our focus on these kids in this school.”
“Goals we already have,” Trustee Hanson said,” Why are we relying on Mr. Dahlem to do everything for us?”
“Outside sources, non-biased, will give us a good starting point and a solid foundation legally,” Trustee Ricketts said.
In the end the trustees passed the motion.
The trustees also discussed a Board of Trustees Code of Ethics, which will be put on the agenda of the next meeting after Dahlem checks it.
