Fresh perspective needed in school district leadership

I am a candidate for the La Conner School Board, I believe the District can benefit from a fresh perspective within its leadership team.

As a candidate, I thought it prudent to share my opinions regarding issues that have arisen involving the Board, Superintendent Meissner and both the teachers’ union and non-classified union.

Since early May, I have been a close observer of the actions taken and statements made.

I understand the frustrations of all involved – mistakes have probably been made by people on all sides.

I certainly have not been privy to the private communications that have occurred, so my observations are not “cast in stone” opinions.

In that context, I believe the following:

It appears that the Board’s guidelines by which the Superintendent is managed and evaluated were so general in nature that a performance review could give a completely positive, but unrealistic assessment. Much of what has transpired could perhaps have been avoided (or at least muted) if detailed guidelines and more stringent periodic performance reviews were in place.

It is my understanding that there was very limited (if any) direct communication from the teachers to the Board. This compounded the issue of limited oversight mentioned above – the Board’s input regarding the Superintendent’s (and her staff’s) relations with the teaching staff came from the Superintendent and her staff. Not the best scenario for objectivity. I am in favor of each of the elementary, middle and high schools having two teachers (designated by their peers) regularly attend School Board Meetings, with opportunity to give input.

The Board’s continuing consideration of a salary increase for the Superintendent in light of the serious issues with both union memberships was, in my opinion, wrong in the extreme. Some significant portion of a superintendent’s responsibilities pertains to the management of teaching and non-classified staff; the troubles afflicting the District would not indicate a salary increase. Superintendent Meissner deserves credit for recognizing this and refusing any type of pay increase.

Two thoughts unrelated to the aforementioned:

The School Board is strongly encouraged by the State of Washington to forgo commenting as individuals.

I noted that the audiences at many Board meetings were frustrated that they did not receive answers to their questions during the meetings in which they were asked.

It is incumbent upon the Board to avoid immediate comments so that they may meet to discuss a question or topic and then present a “united” comment or statement.

The Board is further limited by the State Public Disclosure Law that requires “open to the public meetings” with advanced notice.

It is the law, and it is correct in order to avoid impropriety or the appearance thereof – but it does not always make it easy when sensitive topics are discussed.

I was taken aback when I saw the community in which I was raised try to condemn/convict Superintendent Meissner in our newspaper. I have diligently tried to get facts from all sides regarding the District and Superintendent Meissner’s issues, yet I am certain I do not know all of the facts. For the public to make statements and decisions based as much on emotion as facts was very disturbing.

My background in sales management has given me experience in both employee relations and conflict resolution. Having been raised in La Conner in a family with deep roots in the area, I believe I have a strong sense of how the community envisions success for the District and toward that end I would encourage public input. It is my hope that better management and communication can prevent a recurrence of the issues that arose earlier this year.

Very sincerely,

John T. Agen