Okay, should be good. >> Okay, seeing that we have a quorum, uh I'm going to call the meeting to order. And um this is a special board meeting. Uh we'll take roll call.
>> Michelle Breen >> here. >> DJ Dunelinger >> here. >> Stephanie Ederman >> here. Randy Heidman >> here. >> Sarah Spear >> here.
>> John Ward >> here. >> Okay. Uh let's do the pledge of allegiance. >> Pledge allegiance to the flag of America. >> United States of America to the republic for which it stands.
One nation under God, indivisibleity. >> That was awkward. [laughter] >> Um, this meeting [laughter] of the uh Briner School Board is being conducted in accordance with Minnesota statutes 13D.02.
This meeting is being recorded. Access to the recording is available on the school district's YouTube channel. Okay. Our next business item is approval of the agenda as presented. >> I'll make a motion to approve. This is
Sarah. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. >> Yep. Second. Motion by Director Spear and second by Director Doninger to approve the agenda as presented.
>> We'll do a roll call. >> Michelle Breen, >> yes. >> DJ Dunnelinger, >> yes. >> Stephanie Eterman, >> yes. >> Randy Hidman, >> yes.
>> Sarah Spear, Sheriff Spear. >> Sarah, you muted your mic again. >> Sorry about that. Yes, >> John Ward. >> Yes. >> All in favor? >> All in favor? The approval of the agenda
as presented has passed. Um, public input. Um, due to this being a special board meeting, there will be no public input allowed during the meeting. Uh, at this time, um, the chair is going
to turn the meeting over to Barb Dorne. Uh, Barb is from MSBA, Minnesota School Board Association. She's been a consultant working with us on our superintendent search and at this point um she will be taking over the
meeting basically uh from a discussion standpoint uh etc. I know this is going to be potentially a challenge today as we have people all over uh the western hemisphere. So please be patient. Uh we
will get everybody's uh uh comments and opinions. So, uh, just, uh, bear with us a little bit on that. There may be some delays. So, Barb, uh, the floor is yours. >> I have a question first.
Uh, Ryan, if I go to a different screen, like to look at these resumes and stuff when we start talking about these candidates, it what is that? Is that okay? Are you still going to be able to see me? How's that going to work? I think when you go to a different screen, you have to uh do like the picture
picture and then we should still be able to see you. >> Well, how do I do that? That little thing in the corner down here. >> Yeah, just just go to a different tab and then it should pop up and ask you how to how you want to open it. So, you
should be able to open it so it stays down on a small screen on your laptop and then keep your big one with the camera on you. So right now you can't see me. >> No, we can see you. >> Yeah, we can see you. >> Yep. You're doing it right. >> Oh, so I can just Fine. Cool. It's doing
it on its own. I didn't do anything. >> Perfect. Thanks. >> Yep. >> Good. >> All right. Thank you very much everybody. And I appreciate you asking about that because I want to remind everyone definitely do not screen share information during today's meeting. Today is the meeting where you're going
to be discussing private data in a public meeting. So we want to be very careful that we adhere to all the provisions of the government data practices act which is that the names of your applicants are private data. So it's great here so much. Uh we have a couple of things to cover and this is the order in which I'd like to do them
but let me know if you'd like to proceed differently. One of the things that we need to talk about are the interview questions. uh that was on the last uh meeting that we had, but there were a lot of suggestions and so you asked to have some time to review those and come back today on the 26th to look those
over and select those. So, the first thing I think I'd like to do and get out of the way is narrow those questions down to 12 to 15 questions in total for round one. If we do that, we also want to be very careful not to read those questions aloud. Uh doing so would give
an advantage to any candidates who might this meeting before their interview. So, if it pleases the board, we're going to try and have that conversation by the number of the questions suggested only. But that's the first thing I thought we could cover and get out of the way. And then I also want to move directly from
there into the candidate selection. And that is when I'm going to be um sharing with the board. The alphabet identifiers are the people that we are recommending as semi-finalists to the board. We feel they align with your leadership profile and the results of your stakeholder summary report. However, keep in mind
this is the board's decision and you are going to be making this decision entirely on your own. Um, but that was just the starting point that we wanted to give you. So, those are the order in which I thought we could do it. The questions, the candidate selection, and then when we're done, I'll read the names aloud only of the people you've selected to interview. Is that okay with
everybody if we proceed in that order? >> Can I bring up another subject? >> Yes. >> I think we need to just make the questions public. John's not going to come back and I don't feel comfortable um if somebody can cheat and get those questions after the first day and they're going to come in the second day
and they'll have time to work on their answers. You you told us before it's not a big deal that some districts do it. Let's just make the questions public. Is that is everybody okay with that? I mean, does that work for you, John? I mean, then it's then it's not it's not giving anybody an advantage or anything
like they could all I mean it'd be nice to surprise them a little bit, but maybe it'd be they'll they'll give us better answers if they can think about it a little bit. Anyways, >> maybe we could go through the packet that I sent to everybody yesterday because in there is the interview schedule and just some really minor
housekeeping things and that's one of the things that we should talk about is the process of um the interviews being live streamed versus a link provided and so on so forth because then I think that question is going to get answered too. >> Thanks [clears throat] for bringing that up DJ. I appreciate it. Okay.
>> So, um if you look at the packet briefly that I did send out yesterday, you've seen all of this before, so I'm not going to spend very long on it. Uh the first page does say round one interview schedule. Um I changed one thing on here on the very bottom. Um it was highlighted, but in your case, we
discussed last time uh that the interviews in order to um ensure a level playing field, the interviews will not be live streamed. However, recordings of those selected to move on to the second round as finalists will be posted on the district website. The only other change I made was I was wondering about start
time. We do have a candidate who has a flight leaving um that afternoon if that candidate is selected as a semi- finalist by the board. They requested very respectfully if we could have their interview begin at 12:00. And so it
would simply mean that we'd call the meeting to order maybe at quarter to 12, 10 to 12 with the interview starting at 12 so they can get out of there in time to make their flight. Is there anyone that would have difficulty being at the the board meeting room by4 to 12 that day? It would just set everything back
by 15 minutes the entire schedule on the second. >> No. >> Okay. So, this will change to an 11:45 a.m. call the meeting to order with the first interview at 12:00 and I'll make all those other subsequent changes. And so I know this candidate really
appreciates it and will be able to then leave uh Brainer before 1:00 to get to their flight. So I'll move all of those back by 15 minutes. And then um similarly round two and I am going to circle back DJ to your question. Round two, the only change I made at the bottom that the interviews
will not be live streamed. However, a recording of the loan finalists interview will be posted on the district website. That's assuming that the board does select someone to move forward with contract negotiations. Their interview would go on the district website as well. >> Okay.
>> So, in terms of these two interview schedules, it is not being live streamed and we talked about that because you want that level playing field for all of the candidates. So, I want to thank Kelly for her work in um really trying to figure out the nuances of people having access to the recording. If a
board member is participating remotely, it simply requires that the school district provide people with a link if they ask for a link to watch the interviews. So, they certainly could do that. We'd want to put it on the district website. If you are interested in watching this meeting, please reach
out to Kelly's email address and Kelly will send them a link which will invite them to watch it on YouTube. They will be muted. Their audio and video as well will be muted. they simply can ask for that link and watch. And so that is what
would occur. It would not be live streamed if John's joining virtually, but it would be provided via link to anyone who requests it from Kelly. So that gets back to the question of how everyone feels about that process and or if it still affects your decision about whether the interview questions go
public or not. >> So I'll turn it back over to you, Vice Chair Heman, [clears throat] >> to facilitate that conversation. Uh, Director Donlinger, do you have any other uh thoughts on that? Uh, I guess I was kind of confused. If we if we uh
have the questions are are public, uh, why not have everything public then? >> Well, because these people are applying for a job and they some of them they're, you know, they currently work, they don't even know that they applied. So, if we're not going to bring him into the
finals, like Barb says, there's no reason to cause them any angst or anything like that. Um, but the questions just to make it simple and, you know, and fair. Let's just I mean, Barb mentioned it a month ago or two
months ago in in December mentioned that we could just have our questions be public or we could keep them as this, you know, secret society and we'll ask them the questions when they're sitting there. Um, I just think if John's got to dial in, then we should just make them public for everybody. And who cares? I
don't know what the difference really is. >> Okay, >> remember that if John dials in, you are still not live streaming the meeting. So, another candidate, for example, could reach out to Kelly and say, "Hey, please send me the link so I can watch the other interviews." >> So, it's smarter than that, but
>> right, it's it's got some more guard rails in place than simply live streaming. I would still recommend you not live stream because even if the questions are public if you live stream there are candidates that will watch the earlier interviews possibly and even just watching their competitors answer the questions even if they know what the
questions are does give them a leg up. So I'd still advise against live streaming those interviews. Um >> did I say live streaming? >> No you didn't. I wanted to clarify to the rest of the board that it wouldn't still be live streamed. It would be people would reach out to Kelly to get the link and they would then watch it on YouTube. And here's to explain it more.
Thanks, Ryan. >> Yeah, I can just add a little clarity here. So, it's going to be on our YouTube channel, but we can set our YouTube channel to private. So, it's by invite only. So, if they reach out to us, they give us our email, we we send them the link, and then only that email
address can view it. So, it wouldn't be available to the public, per se, but it would be available. Um, we're not going to just live stream it, and we don't have to post it. So we can to to GJ's point, we can make sure that we keep a little bit of privacy to the people that are interviewing.
Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> Yep. Thank you, Ryan. Any other questions on that uh on that topic? Are we going to are we going to review it again though, Barb? Uh finally, or or >> circle back. >> Okay. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Once we get through the questions or at the end of the meeting, let's circle back and see how you feel about the questions being shared publicly or being shared with your semi-finalists or not. Okay? So, we will come back to that. All right. So, those two schedules are good to go. Um, there's a brief
script in here that Chair Spear can use during round one interviews. Um, I think he did this two years ago. Uh, Kevin Boils would have done it, but it's a pretty clear script of how the interviews are going to unfold. Uh, if you have questions on this, you can let me know. Um, we just want to make sure
that when you introduce yourselves as board members to the candidates because we are going to do a quick round robin of introductions, just keep it to your name if you'd like, how long you've served on the board. Please don't share uh personal information about your kids or grandkids going to the district or being a graduate of the district. We
don't want to open the door to the candidate sharing all kinds of personal information with you as well since those are protected classes. So, the introductions is for the full board. Otherwise, I think the chair can read this and if you have any questions on this, Sarah, when the time comes, just let me know. Same thing with the board deliberations.
We want to make sure uh that candidates as you're discussing them in an open meeting because again, this will be open. Anyone can come watch these meetings. Just because we're not live streaming the interviews and deliberations does not mean people can't come. We want people to come to these interviews and to the deliberations.
I'll give you an overview of the EMD results. You've used that before for the most part. the exceeds meets disappoints in each answer that a candidate gives to you. I'll overview that very very quickly and then we just want you each to share possibly something positive you noticed about the candidates's interview
and then you get down to it and see if you can winnow down to who you'd like to bring back for the second round. Sometimes a leader emerges very quickly or two or three leaders emerge very quickly and you have consensus that builds. If you are stuck, the only thing I mentioned down here is that you can
use deficits as a tiebreaker if you have to. If you want to interview three people, for example, in the second round, and you are torn between two of them, you have one for sure, but you're torn between two, you could use uh the point that one person's stronger in an
area than the other as a reason not to bring the other person forward. But otherwise, we prefer you keep comments positive because they are putting their careers out there in a public venue and we want to be very respectful of that. So, the deliberations you can take a look at. Um, not going to dwell on it,
but we'll talk a little bit more about it that day. And then in uh the second to last page here is going to be the vetting process, which will come into play a lot more when I share our recommended finalists. So, I'll review that at that time. And then the last page on first round interviews, I only
put that in there as a suggestion. Whoever might make the motion today to interview so and so and so, please don't use their names. Very important that the motion and the second and the motion passes with alphabet identifiers only.
Then if that motion passes, I'll read the names out loud at the end of the meeting. So that's it for the packet, but let's um let's dive into questions, but then circle back to the question of whether the questions will be made public or not. So thank you for bringing up Director Doner.
So, you each have a packet of questions in front of you. You should have the hard copies that were given to you at the last meeting. Um, I believe each of you are going to review these questions and come up with your top 10 to 15 to settle on for the first round. Some of these might be better served in the second round. Also, doesn't mean that
they cannot be asked. It might just be in the second round instead of the first. That's entirely up to you. I think what I'll do now is turn it back over to the vice chair and let him facilitate uh perhaps a roundroin. I don't know what's easiest. Um, Vice Chair Heidman, if you want people to raise their hand if they liked question
one, question two, question three, or how you want to proceed, but that typically is the easiest way to do it. >> U, would you repeat the easiest way to do it? >> Usually, it's the easiest way, especially if you have people on camera because you can see hands being raised.
Um, it's a little difficult to ask each person to speak to each question because that's going to take a very long time, but you're certainly welcome to have a dialogue about each question if you want to as well. >> So, just do like this, Ren. Go who who likes number two? Uh, okay. One one
person who likes number three, who likes number four, you know, and then we'll just see what how it kind of goes, right? Is that what you're talking about, Barb? >> Yeah, that's what I thought. >> Okay. All right. Um
then we'll u we'll look at the uh opening question. Question number one. Does anyone u uh want that or do you want something different or um John Shell?
>> I think uh question number one is is just a good starting point. I think that's a good question. >> Yep. I vote for number one. Yep. >> Okay. >> Well, number one's got it, Ran. We all voted for it.
>> Okay. Number one will stay as is then. No uh revisions to that. Okay. Uh how many of you are in favor of question two? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on. Question number three.
Okay, >> three of us. >> There's three of us that uh >> my fingers to see what I see. And maybe Kelly, you can count and confirm that I'm doing the right thing. Right. So, that was three. >> Yeah, we have three three people that are interested in that.
So that means right now we're at a tie for this question. Uh >> okay, let's go to number four, Randy. >> Okay, number four. Anybody?
Okay, see nobody. Question five. Zero. >> [snorts] >> Question number six. One. Question number seven. None.
Uh question number eight. Two. Question number nine. [snorts] Zero. Question number 10. Three. Question number 11.
Zero. Question number 12. One. Question number 13. Four. Question number 14. Zero.
Question number 15. I think we got three. Question [snorts] number 16. >> Sorry, did you raise your hand on that one? You're kind of Okay, so we are that one. >> Thank you. >> I thought it was two, but whatever.
>> Uh, question number 16. Four. Question number 17. Zero. Question number 18. One.
Question number 19. One. Question number 20. Two. Question number 21. Zero. Question number 22. Zero.
Question number 23. One question 24. One >> question 25. [snorts] >> Was that four, Barb? >> Yep. Four. >> Four.
>> Yeah. It went to five now. >> Five. >> Went to five. Okay. [sighs] >> Uh, question number 26. >> Zero. Question number 27. Two.
Question number 28. Zero. Question 29. One. Question number 30. Zero. Question number 31. Zero. Question number 32.
Zero. Question number 33. Two. Question number 34. [snorts] One. Question. 35. One. Question number 36
three. Question number 37 >> six. Uh question number 38. [snorts] Zero. Question 39.
1. Question number 40. Two. Question number 41. one. Okay.
Question number 42. One. Question number 43. Four. [snorts] Question number 44. >> Michelle, did you raise your hand on that one? >> No, I did not. >> Okay. I thought I saw something. I just
wanted to verify. Thank you. One. >> Yep. [snorts] >> Question number 45. One. Question number 46 now I believe. Okay. Question number 47.
[laughter] Okay. What do we have? Six there. Can I >> Can I say something? >> So on on question number 43, would everybody be okay if we added mental health to that list?
>> Here's the I I here's one thing I think is that the questions are too long. Um like question 43 basically is four questions. Yeah, >> I already I I crossed class sizes off it because we all know that a bigger the class size is a good thing.
>> But do we need to say three actions? Could we just say what's an action you would do to address student achievement behavior defining enrollment? >> We're not supposed to talk about the question, Michelle. >> Oh, sorry. Sorry. Sorry.
>> That's okay. That's okay. [laughter] >> I knew I was going to screw up. >> Hey And not to worry, [laughter] >> we we can winnow that down as well to maybe pick a few of those or make it one instead of three. And then the only one that back there were nine questions,
which I I would appreciate it if I turn it back over to you, vice chair, to ask if anyone wants those any of the nine questions included. >> What was that but what was that? Um uh there's a very last page that are additional potential questions based on
survey report. So these questions came out of uh the results from the stakeholder survey report that we got from your constituents. So there's nine more questions and if any of those really resonate with you, we can include those in round one as well. >> Sorry about that. >> I like six and eight.
>> I like four. >> I like four and six. Why don't we just do your regular thing, Randy? >> We're on this We're on that page that says additional potential questions and it's highlighted in yellow. Uh question
number one, zero. Question number two, zero. Question number three, zero. Question number four, two, three. Question number five,
zero. Question number six, two. Question number seven, >> one. John, were you just scratching your forehead or did you have raise your hand on that one? >> No, I I don't want that. No. >> Okay, Stephanie was
>> two. Okay, question number eight. >> One. No. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I won't. I won't. >> Okay. Two then. And question number nine. zero. >> Okay. >> So, one thing I might suggest from here,
thank you for that. I know it's an arduous exercise, is to go through and indicate the questions that I think we definitely are going to ask in round one. And I would say with the six member board, possibly we'd look at three or more people that selected the question. Um, I'll start, however, with four or
more. It's not going to be very many, but question one is in uh question 13 is in 16 25 37 some variation of 43
46 6 and 47. >> How many is that? >> That's four. How many questions we have? One. >> I got eight. >> Two, three, four,
five, six, seven, eight. And question 43 could be a couple of questions or we could narrow it down. But eight questions does give you room. You have room for another four to six questions. Um there were a number of questions that had three. So some possibilities are
question three. Question 10, 15. >> 15. >> I got three. How many people wanted? >> Question 15. I had three as well. >> I had three.
>> Oh, my mistake. Sorry. >> Okay. So, uh, 15's a possibility and then 36 and are there any on the very last page? Um,
question four on the back and part of question four on the back does feel like it addresses Michelle's question about question 43. So that that now one thing that I I do encourage you about is having a question in each of the areas for your um
>> that's what I thought we were supposed to do. I have one in each area each thing. >> So if that's the case because um when you look at these I say you could ask question three because that got half the board and that is in an area of leadership profile that we don't have a question yet. So we could add question
three and similarly question 10. Question 10, I think, is critical for all of us. >> Okay. Yeah. >> It's kind of a stretch, though, isn't it? How are they supposed to know what to do with our budget? >> I I mean, if I was in their shoes, I'd be like, well, I I'll have to dig into
it and figure it out. I certainly don't know now. >> No, that's a good point, DJ. >> Uh, just a word word of caution again. >> I think I'm 15 three. >> Oh, yeah. >> Just a word of caution. We cannot spell out what's the question.
Right. >> Oh, yeah. [laughter] >> You're doing well. You're all doing well. So, let's let's say we >> I can get on board with I I can get on board with three. >> Yes. So, can I >> How about question eight? Because I I appreciate DJ's point that it does give
an advantage to someone who's more familiar with your district versus people who are not. Does question eight get at the same kind of question or >> I think so. I think so. >> Okay. Okay. So, if we added question eight, you would then have a question in
each of those areas. >> We're going to do question three then. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Y >> So, adding three and eight and then um do you think question 15 is different enough from 13? They are
in the same sort of area of the profile. Three people did suggest 15 as being an important question. >> I can get on board with that. I didn't vote for it on the first round, but I can I can get on board with that if it helps. >> I like I like um 13. I think that addresses
>> that's it. >> That's in though right now. >> Let me Yeah, 13's good. >> Let me >> Are they similar enough or we won't ask 15? Then we'll just stick with 13. >> Let me ask this question. >> Oh, I see. >> Let me ask this question of the board.
Uh, what do you think about question 15 as being a question that we would use for the finalist round? >> I like that. >> Good idea. >> Okay, question 15 goes to round two.
Great. Thanks for that suggestion. Uh, then the next area, you chose question 16, so that's great. The [clears throat] next area you a lot of people chose question 25. Have one in that area. >> Yep. Uh the next group,
not a lot. Um 26 through 30 and maybe that'll come through in some answers to some of these other ones. So as of now, 26 through 30, let's not choose one because there weren't any there weren't any home runs in that one. The next one though, um 37
had support of all six of you. Do you think 36 is different enough that you'd still like to ask it? Three people were in favor of 36. I I can I can get on board with that. >> Yep. >> Yes, I think it is different. >> All right. So, let's do 36 as well. Uh
the next category 38 to 41. You didn't have any you didn't have a three there in any of those. Um you think 40. >> Yeah, there were >> a couple of votes. >> Yeah, there were two on that. I mean, I
can I can get on board with uh uh actually I had circled uh 39 and 40 and then I just wrote myself a little note. Uh one of these I mean I can get on board with 40. >> I can too. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I can too. I can too.
>> Include 40. And then it would come down to what would you like to do about question 43? So on the very back, question four from the stakeholder report, I think that got three votes. So that could address
Michelle's concern if you ask call it out separately in question four from the back page. That'll help you whittle down question 43 maybe a little bit more. >> Well, >> and there are four bullet points. If you do one in each, then it's a four-part
question with one in each. or do you think you could eliminate one or two of those bullet points because they're being addressed in other questions >> here? >> Well, um >> in my op Okay, thank you Randy. In my
opinion, um the uh first, second, and third bullet points are key issues that we as a board have been discussing on for two years for three years. >> Yep. Um I don't know how you com how we can combine those all into one but those
those are um three areas that are significantly talked about within within our meetings and our agendas. >> I think that the the number of actions is what would confuse
>> Yeah, I agree. >> Why don't we change three to some? What are some things I was just going to say that Randy what are some what are some things you would do in each area? >> Leave it more o leave it more open-ended and I would also
throw support around this question as being one for the finalists. >> Yeah, that's a good point. That's a good point. >> On 43, I like the first and third bullet points. I feel like the second one is a lot like number 46.
We're asking the same. >> Yeah. Yep. >> How about 40? How about 46 in the first round and [cough] 43 as Randy said in the second round in the final round? >> My big thing is that that second bullet
point I want to know the candidate on that. That's one of the biggest issues that teachers have been talking about. >> Yep. [snorts] >> And interestingly enough, the board member that suggested question 46 did
suggest it as a round two question, but you certainly could use it in round one and use question 43 in the second round or vice versa. What would you like to do? >> Let's let's do 46 in round two and let's do 43 in round one. What the heck? and change that change that from
from to some [snorts] I mean either that or do it the other way. I don't >> I can support that. Yep. >> I can too. >> Yep. I can. >> 46 will be a round two question and then 43. Do you want to keep all four of those
bullet points and just say something things or do you want to take out the last bullet point because to John's point the top three have been in your front of the board for a long time. >> I think the top three is all we need. I think we all agree on the class size situation.
>> You did it again. [laughter] >> It's getting scratched out. Doesn't matter. >> Scratch out the last bullet point. Is everyone in favor of that question number 43? Yeah, [snorts] >> I will read the questions at this point.
Could someone Kelly, could you maybe count for me as I read these because this is what I've circled and some of the ones that had three votes are maybe, but we'll see where this. So in round one, question 1 3 8
13 16 25 36 37 40 43 with three bullet points. Uh 47
and maybe four on the last page. >> You got you forgot 46. >> That's going to be for the second round, Steph. >> Gotcha. Okay, >> that's 12. >> That's 12. >> Considering some of them are a two or three-part question, I think 12's plenty
for a one-hour interview. But how are you feeling about that list, everybody? >> Good. Good. >> Fantastic. Y >> they're great questions and I want to thank board members send in questions. I thought those were excellent as well. Um so now the question >> so so everybody is okay with number four
on that second that last page. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> But all right. Thanks. >> Um I will not place them in this order either. I'm going to mix them up so that you got easier questions in the beginning and some tough ones in the middle toward the end and then we end up with that last question. So it'll be in
different order. Uh, but these are great questions. So, how do you feel about them going public? Do you feel like the guard rails that uh Ryan mentioned will keep candidates from asking to watch the live or excuse me, watch the YouTube by invite only? What would you like to do?
This can be a board decision. It's entirely up to you. >> Well, here's my question. What's the downside of making the questions public? The only downside we've seen is candidates will use AI sometimes to craft a really good answer and memorize
it. Doesn't happen very often and with a caliber and pe caliber of people in your pool, I don't see that happening. It just does give people a chance to prepare in a a way that is not if it not normal if it's a spontaneous type of thing. The only other downside, we did
have a board once that um did it because they wanted people to prepare. So they'd come in with far more thorough answers because they felt that was important. The only thing is a board member commented afterwards, they didn't get get to see how the person was with extemporaneous speaking if they were ever in a crowd and needed to just
answer questions off the top of their their head. They hadn't had a chance to see people do that. So there's there's pros to it also having it shared in advance with people just to get much deeper answers and they're not going to skip anything that they want to share with you. you just run the risk of them researching the answer and it's not
necessarily drawn from their own expertise. It's drawn from the internet sometimes. >> Well, let me let me just suggest this. Um, in round one, um, you know, we're going to let them let them prepare. Let them give the best answer they can. And
then in then in the final round, um, let's let's, uh, let's not make the questions public. Can we do it that way? And then and then let those people let those finalists um have to have to uh speak on their feet or think on their feet. Excuse me. Um can we do it that
way? Barb, >> you can do it however you want to do it. This is a board decision. And some boards actually last year I had two boards that chose to send um ahead of time four questions, four or five questions and keep the rest under wraps. So they kind of split the difference and
sent some questions in advance that they thought would require some more more depth of an answer and then the rest they wanted answered spontaneously. So I can send a few questions in advance all or none. >> I like that. >> I like that idea if you
>> Yeah. >> I like that. >> Let's just I like Jod's idea. Let's do the first round. We'll give them to him. The second round we'll surprise them. That's my vote anyways. >> [snorts]
>> you know, not sending >> not sending the questions at all. Um, I mean, what candidate is going to be able to from one interview to another research all these 12 questions? I mean,
>> the ones that have the second day, >> but even if they did it [clears throat] overnight. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's two days, Michelle. >> Yeah, that's okay. it. I really >> if that was all in a row, if we only had three of them, it was going to be done in a couple hours. Well, >> yeah, >> who cares? But
>> yeah, >> you know, when they got the overnight deal, I mean, they could >> I suppose that's that's an unfair advantage. I um I I don't feel strongly either way. >> What would the board like to do? >> Yep. >> You don't have motion or anything, but by consensus, how does everyone feel?
So, I'll What do >> you think, Sarah? I I don't love them being rehearsed just because it's I feel it's not quite as genuine as them having to answer, you know, on the spot.
And I can get on board if this, you know, if this is how we want to do it. I feel like you can still get a good read on people even if they are rehearsed what that looks like. So, I'm I won't fight it, but it's not my favorite.
>> What do you think, Randy? Um, I want to just make sure the integrity of the whole process is preserved and uh uh making making some of the questions public for
round one and then making some of them private for round two. Um, I'm kind of in Sarah's camp. I can get on board with it, but I guess I would I would like to make them uh non-public
for both round one and two, but I'm not going to I'm not going to die on that hill. So >> what about uh Barb's suggestion about make some of them public and make and keep some of them private in in round
one for sure. Um what what did the rest of board members feel about that? Um because you know at that point that would show that that actually show how much research and time they put into something and also them having to think on their feet quite frankly.
>> I like that John. Um, >> I like giving them, if we're going to go that route, giving them the ones that are we're asking specific to our district that they might have to do a little bit of research to understand some of the challenges. Um, I think that
makes sense to give them those ahead of time. We might get a better answer if they have a little more information. [snorts] Yeah, I like giving them a couple that they can research, but keep some private. We need to see if they can talk
and figure out things on their, you know what I mean? >> Think on their feet. But we can just keep them all private, I guess. I mean, like you, like everybody says, how many people are actually going to call and get the link and dial into the deal? It's highly unlikely that they will go
to that effort. Um it's just not impossible. In looking at the questions, I think question 37 would be um nice to give them some chance to prepare. That's very very specific to Brainer. And I think 37 it
might be appreciated by the candidates to have some time to put some thought into it. It also is not something that you could just Google an answer to very easily. It's one that's going to take some thought. So, if you're going to give anything in advance, 37 might be good. Possibly 43.
Um, but 37 might be the one that's so specific that they're going to appreciate a chance to think about that for a few days. I'll do whatever the board wants me to do. Well, um let's uh
I think I think this needs to be on the record. Um so I'd like to uh entertain a motion uh from one of the uh board members on uh
round one for sure. I think maybe we haven't really talked about round two. Do we want to make some of those private and some of those public or do we want to stay consistent in that manner? Any feelings on round two questions?
>> I like to keep all round two private. >> Okay, Barb, how many questions >> how many questions do you normally recommend for round two? >> More like 10. >> Okay. eight to 10 because they do go down deeper and ask for more specifics.
There is a round two question that is rising in popularity which is something you give them in advance and asking them to present their transition plan and you set aside the first 15 minutes of the interview for them to share presentation, excuse me, a presentation with the board about their transition plan or their first 100 days or
something like that. That's becoming more common and that's something you definitely need to let them know in advance. But they'll have a week between February 2nd and 3rd and the 10th to prepare that. But that's a question that in advance boards are moving toward to open the second round of interviews.
Otherwise, usually round two have been kept under wraps as well. But there's no perfect way to do this. It's really up to you. >> I would make a motion. It sounded like we've got some consensus um around keeping the questions private for round
one. I'll second that. Okay. So, the uh motion by Director Spear is to keep all round one questions private. Is that correct, Director
Spear? >> Yes. Yep. >> Okay. U. So, we've got a we've got a motion and we have a second. Any discussion? >> Okay. Hearing none. Um, let's do a roll call vote.
>> DJ Dunelinger, >> yes. >> Stephanie Edman, >> yes. >> Randy Hidman, >> no. Sarah Spear, >> yes. >> John [snorts] Ward,
>> yes. >> Michelle Breen, >> yes. >> Motion passes. So, round one questions will all be private. Okay. Um,
what about round two? Do we need to do anything different with round two or are there any other other thoughts on round two? >> Yeah, I let me just say that >> Thank you. Let me just say that um I'm
I'm okay with making um you know some some um questions in round two p public because I really think that shows effort research work excitement to maybe be a
finalist and see what you know I just think it shows the difference in the work ethic and and capability of research at these that the finalist would have. Um, and then I wouldn't make all of them public, but
just a few of them and then keep all the rest private. But my main my main purpose would be show me your effort. Show me what you show me what you want to put into this into this job. >> Are you referencing John? Are you
referencing round two now? >> Yeah, I thought that isn't that what we're talking about? >> Yes, we are. I just I just wanted to make sure that we were we were on the same wavelength as far as round two. Yep. So, >> yeah, I'm referencing I'm referencing round two questions. Yep.
>> So, you'd like some of them public? >> You'd like some of them public and some private? [snorts] >> Correct. >> Okay. >> We're gonna we're going to pick out questions for round two later, right, Barb? >> Yeah, >> we can probably talk about that then. Yeah. Let's
>> wait for round two until round one's over. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So, we don't need any more discussion uh or any motions on round two at this point. Um how are we going to Well, then um I would beg the
question uh there's no way that we would make a motion for round two. That would have to be an agreement between board members because uh unless we make that part of the I mean, we can't make it part of the agenda for round two. Well, when we get done
when we pick our when we pick our round two candidates and Barb, you straighten me out any time. Then we're going to pick out the questions for our round two, right? >> Correct. I'm going to bring >> that'll be the time we'll decide if we want to have a couple that night. >> So, that would be an agenda item for
that meeting that night. >> Yeah. >> Okay, I'm clear. >> Thank you. >> And Barb, you have you have different questions, Barb, for round two. >> Yes. >> From SBA. >> Yes. >> Okay. If you have suggestions for round two questions, feel free to send them to me just like we did for round one. But
typically, we have round two questions that just dive deeper into the priority areas for the district and ask them to provide more concrete examples of the work they have done in those areas. >> Well, once I once we see the candidates,
uh it's likely that that we may have some other questions that we might got to go deeper in. Uh also, depends upon who the candidates are. >> Yep. Absolutely right. >> All right. Great. Well, thank you conversation. I will have all of those questions input into an EMD form. I'll
send you a link to practice on if you want to. It's a very intuitive process to enter them, but I'm going to bring the hard copies of EMD questions to the interviews next Monday and Tuesday. I want you to answer um or fill out that form in hard copy first because sometimes the first, second, third
candidate, you realize that you were a little too hard on the first candidate versus entering everything electronically from the get-go. And so I'll bring hard copies, but I'll also send you a practice link for anyone who wants to practice on the EMD form before next Monday. So now we're ready to get on to candidate selection. Are you ready for that?
>> Yeah. >> Wonderful. Very exciting point in the search for the Brainard superintendent. Um, first thing I want to do is congratulate you on the pool. You had an outstanding pool of applicants interested in this job. And I'll give you just a little bit of background on the applicant pool. Uh, first of all,
you did have 20 applications in total. Those applicants came from uh five different states. So you drew from outside of the state of Minnesota as well as Minnesota. Of those 20 people, there are 10 that do have superintendent
experience, either current or past. So you do have 10 with superintendent experience and you have seven with doctorates. So it's a it's a very strong pool. We were really pleased to go through it and read the applications. I know that all of you had an opportunity to do that as well. In the packet that I
sent to you and we discussed briefly um I just told you a little bit about how MSBA came up with the list that we did. We have a group of service provider which are service providers which are former superintendent that go through all of the applications. They compare them to the leadership profile as well as the uh stakeholder summary report. We
then meet as a group. Everyone's rated everyone on a five-point scale. When we get together we talk about those who were strongest as well as those who didn't have support to be moved on. There's quite a few people though that were in the middle and the people in the middle that were may or may yeses, we spent a lot more time talking about them
and then ultimately we divied them up amongst the service providers to uh set up phone calls with folks and do pre-ins with those we felt were strongest. We also checked references of those folks. Uh we did a social media sweep of everybody in the pool to make sure there were no surprises. And when we met
again, we did come up with the list which I did share with the board. Again, that is private data. is something that we call the um highlighted list. So I hope none of you have printed that. If you have, please shred it after today's meeting. So what I'm going to do is
briefly read an overview of the people that we are recommending um as semi- finalists in the Brainer pool. If you look at this list, the top recommendations are in yellow. Uh we did have candidate S and in Salamander did
decide to withdraw from the pool. So uh that was for personal reasons. So that person is no longer in this pool. Uh so you have 19 from which to select your semi-finalists. You can choose to interview two or three people or seven or eight. It's really up to you. We do
feel in looking at the applications and in talking to the folks and their references that the strongest people from MSBA's perspective are candidates E, F, G, N, and P. So, I'm going to read
a little blurb about each of them and just uh I'm just going to paddle on for a moment, but these does these don't take long. Each of the people that we spoke with that I'm going to be reading this presentation form are interested and have stated they would accept an interview from the school board if
invited to do so. So, first uh candidate E, this individual has experience as a principal, activities director, and teacher. They're licensed as a superintendent, principal, and teacher. and their education includes a master's degree and bachelor of arts. References
describe candidate E as a visionary leader who clearly focuses on people, relationships, and outcomes. They demonstrate an ability to navigate complex decision-making processes with professionalism, humility, and respect for all stakeholders. References state
that they build teams and collaborate effectively while mentoring staff and administrators. They say that candidate E would bring energy, positivity, organization, empathy, financial expertise, and follow-through to your district. MSBA is recommending candidate
E because we feel they demonstrate an ability to engage broad audiences, build shared understanding, and guide groups toward productive outcomes. They place student achievement and overall educational success at the forefront of their mission as an educator. They are a
leader with integrity, a strong work ethic, and dedication to students, staff, schoolboard, and community, making them well suited to serve as your superintendent. It's candidate E. Next is candidate F. This individual has experience as a superintendent,
principal, assistant principal, and coach. They have current licenses as a superintendent, principal, and teacher. And their education includes a six-year degree, a master's, and a bachelor of arts. References have described candidate F as a natural-born leader who
leads with honesty, integrity, and full transparency. References state that they have an innate ability to stay focused on the big picture in both school district operations as well as strategic planning to reach established goals. Words and phrases used to describe
candidate F as a superintendent include trustworthy, an experienced fiscal manager, a highly personable relationship builder, fearless, accountable, and a collaborative partner with the schools, community, and local businesses. MSBA is recommending
candidate F because they are a highly respected school leader who has used their leadership skills to advance their school district toward financial uh both for forward both financially and academically. F sets high standards for all and establishes a culture of teamwork,
cooperation, and accountability between all parties in reaching established goals. They have demonstrated the qualities Brainer is seeking in their next superintendent and is recommended for your consideration. That was F. [snorts] We're also recommending candidate G. Their experience is as a superintendent,
principal, and teacher. Current licenses include superintendent, principal, and teacher. and their education includes a doctorate, specialist degree, master's and bachelor of arts. References [clears throat] have described candidate G as a professional, ethical, honest,
and with high expectations for all. They build leadership team member skills by supporting them to reach their goals. Board members say candidate G embodies the quality you seek in qualities you seek in a superintendent, showcasing exceptional dedication to the work,
financial expertise, and academic success for all students. They are known as tireless, results driven, smart, a good listener, and someone who provides excellent data and information for the board to make high quality decisions and then supports and upholds the board's
direction. MSBA is recommending candidate G because of their demonstrated success as a superintendent who leads with the skill set desired by your district. Their experience in key leadership roles provides an excellent experiential framework for understanding all aspects
of a district. G is a strong community leader has proven budget and financial leadership outcomes essential for district oversight. They can also speak to specific leadership accomplishments as a superintendent which have resulted in strong community support. They instill a sense of con confidence
assuring that the district is capably led with a blend of seasoned knowledge and unwavering integrity. And candidate N is uh their experiences as a superintendent, principal, assistant principal, dean of students,
teacher, and coach. Current licenses are a superintendent, principal, and teacher. And their education includes a doctorate, masters, and bachelor of arts. Candidate N has very strong letters of reference from four different school board members and a direct report. Descriptors from those board
members include a leader with integrity, who is calm, approachable, a strong communicator and collaborator, and possesses a visionary approach to educational leadership. Candidate N is known as reliable, honest, personable, consistent, and kind. They foster trust
and strengthened relationships across all levels in their district. and all board member references indicated they would rehire this candidate. MSBA is recommending candidate N uh because they do have the assets you're looking for in your next superintendent. They are an experienced superintendent who is
admired for their leadership style, breadth of knowledge on school finance, and genuine commitment and care for all students. They lead with integrity, resilience, and the ability to build teams and collaborate to make a lasting impact on student growth. The candidates
references stated that the next school district will be lucky to get this person as their superintendent. And finally, we are recommending candidate P. Their experience includes being a superintendent, principal, district assessment coordinator, curriculum coordinator, teacher, and
coach. Their licenses include superintendent, principal, and teacher. And education includes a six-year degree, a master's, and a bachelor of science. References describe candidate P. uh they can confidently say that this person is an exceptional speaker with a
deep commitment to the success and growth of both students and staff. Board members think very highly of candidate P is both a person and a leader. They are fiscally responsible and take a conservative approach to the budget process. This candidate does a great job communicating is approachable, honest,
genuine, transparent, and not afraid to think outside the box in researching solutions. MSBA is recommending candidate P because they have superintendent experience and have demonstrated the skills and talent needed to be a successful superintendent in Brainard. This candidate has
demonstrated success managing the financial side of school district operations, including maintaining a healthy fund balance while enrollment was declining. Candidate P leads collaboratively with a commitment to carrying out the district strategic plan by aligning schoolboard goals and
building level goals. This candidate will promote a dynamic learning environment by being visible and building strong relationships. Those are the five candidates that MSBA is recommending. But of course, you've seen all of the applications and do not have to take our recommendations. I do
want to mention that if you remember in the proposal, we do guarantee our search services. If the person leaves within the first year, uh either by their own valition or the boards, we will do another search entirely for free. However, it's on the condition that you do ultimately hire someone who has been vetted and recommended by MSBA. However,
you're welcome to select and hire anyone else on this list. So, I'm now going to take questions. Um, Vice Chair Hydeman, you want to facilitate it. I'll happy to take questions on why or why not these people, but keep in mind I'm going to be very vague intentionally because I
cannot give out any identifying information whatsoever and neither can you. So when you discuss these folks, please be very careful not to discuss where they work, where they've worked, even what their gender pronouns might be. We want to make sure that they are known only by their alphabet
identifiers. So thank you for listening. I'll turn it back over to the vice chair. >> Um Barb, would it be u well I think it's appropriate um we can go around and and uh each one of the board members. First of all, do you want to add anybody to
this list? How about this? How about I make a motion that we accept MSBA's recommendations and bring the five candidates forward? >> I'll second that. [clears throat] >> Okay, we have a motion to accept the
five candidates brought forth by MSBA by Director Doninger and that was second by Director Ederman. discussion. >> I feel really confident that we've got our next superintendent on that list. I
think um great job MSBA vetting that list. I'm excited to see all five of them. And you know, I don't I don't have any questions about that group or any others that I would have brought forward. Director Breen.
>> Director Breen, do you have any questions? >> I would agree with Sarah. I do feel really confident. >> Can you Can everybody hear me? >> We can now. >> Well,
okay. I feel really confident um in the five that we have. My only thought is do we want to add candidate E to our list since
yes on our list. Candidate B as in badger. >> Yes, >> we we did uh vet that individual. um did a pre-in talked to references um
outstanding candidate. The reason that they remained on the bubble is that um Brainer is an incredibly complex district due to your size and your financial circumstances and the community issues and it would be a lot
um okay >> I believe for someone in that circumstance to take on and do well. Um, another pool. If you had fewer applicants and didn't have the other five, then for sure I think that would be someone worth visiting with. It's just a very strong pool and I think in
this case it worked against that individual because they're up against some outstanding candidates. >> Okay. I totally trust that assessment. I just was throwing it out there. So, I'm good with the five that were vetted. >> Director Ward,
>> great with the five. You did a great job. Uh, MSBA, thank you. Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. The motion is to accept the five MSBA recommended candidates
to be interviewed for round one. Roll call. >> Stephanie Ederman. Yes. >> Randy Heidman. >> Yes. >> Sarah Spear. >> Yes.
>> John Ward. >> Yes. >> Michelle Breen. >> Yes. >> EJ Donelinger. >> Yes. >> All in favor? Um, one last point that I have, uh, Barb,
and it was brought to my attention today, and I think it's a good idea, something for us to think about, uh, is how do we involve uh, the directors and the administration team
uh, in the process? and and it was recommended to me and and I'll certainly open up the floor for discussion, but it was recommended to me that we allow uh directors and administration team to become involved if uh when when the
candidates are visiting the the various schools and give them an opportunity to kind of meet and greet them. uh it's kind of an informal process but yet again it it does give them the ability to uh to participate in the process as
well. So uh something to think about uh uh if anybody has any ideas to share now uh that's that that's great. If not uh at least keep that on your radar then. >> That would be in conjunction with round two interviews on February 10th.
Correct. Okay. So, I'll be sending um Kelly some information about district tours. I know that she set them up last time, did a phenomenal job. So, we can build some extra time in there certainly to visit with uh different groups. Um and I think maybe we can talk specifically about it once you've
narrowed down your candidates to whether you're going to have two people back on the 10th or three people back on the 10th. Okay. >> But that option is always there to allow folks to visit with your finalists in more detail. um you did decide after getting the stakeholder report that you were not looking for input from any
groups. You decided against interview committees for example and yet an opportunity to visit with informally talk about education with these folks is certainly something we can add in pretty easily to the the schedule on February 10th. Okay. So we'll revisit that um on
the 3 after you've selected who you're moving forward. So yeah, thanks for bringing that up. I appreciate it. >> All right. >> I do have another question >> for the board based upon Remember when we had our planning meeting, there was one thing we said maybe as far as your um alleart services background checks is
one that you wanted me to revisit as to whether you wanted to do the in-depth national background check on your semi-finalists or your finalists or your loan finalists and you wanted to see who the list was. Um for example, you look at the five that you will be bringing in to interview next week. Background
checks if they are in-depth are $395 a person. Uh they're a national criminal background check, educational credential verification. Uh so it's more than what the district will do as a part of your normal hiring process. You have to do a background check as well. Your HR person will do that. Do you want to think about
it or in looking at these five people, do you already know that you do or do not want to conduct those background checks or check for $395 each? >> Let's let's do it in round two. Anybody okay with that? >> Yeah. Y >> I mean, we're not going to just take one
person around, too, are we? >> No, probably not. >> I wouldn't think. So, it I that's that's my suggestion. I don't know. Somebody else for an idea. Would somebody like to do them all? Does anybody want to do them all?
>> No, I agree with you, Director. Donninger. I think that's a good idea. >> Do you want to do them folks coming back to round two? Two or three people. I think we should. Yeah. >> On the finalist because if we start those the morning of the 4th, I hope we
would have it back by your interviews on the 10th. It's pretty tight, but I would hope we could get it back that quickly. So, I'll jot that down. Okay. Finalists only. And I'll confirm that then next um
Tuesday. Okay. And I want to make sure um DJ that I heard you correctly at at round two um a after round two, aren't we down to just one candidate then or finalist? >> Well, we last time we had three, remember?
>> Yeah. For for the round. But then when we finish the round, that's to to select the finalist, isn't it? >> Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I think I think what we'll do is we'll do round one, which is the second and third, >> and then let's just say we narrow it down to two or maybe three,
>> and then we just do the background checks on those two or three. >> Yep. Yep. >> Instead of doing all five of them. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> I also want to ask you um you know, you we we had started out today with saying that we might have to alter our schedule, a time schedule depending upon
the candidates. Do we still need to do that or >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, thank you for bringing that up, Director Wards. So, this would mean a role um a board being board meeting being called to order at 11:45. >> All right. >> And I want to have a little bit of time just to speak to the whole board to
review the EMD forms, talk about how the questions are going to be asked, what order you're going to go in, and then that first interview starts right at 12 o'clock. So, that's all right. I'll revise the schedule, and then Kelly, if you could put the board will be called to order at 11:45 on the 2nd. on the
third, we can still call to order at noon. >> Got it. >> Okay, great. So, it's it's 15 minutes earlier, but we've been advertising that the interviews start at noon anyway. So, this way you'll have your housekeeping stuff out of the way and your interviews will start at noon. And those are being
recorded. Remember, Ryan will record those. Whoever you choose to move on to the second round of interviews, you will place those up on the district website so people can watch who um your finalists are and how they performed in round one interviews. Okay,
on my agenda, the only thing left for me to do is to read the names out loud. However, is there anything else the board needs to cover before I do that? That's usually the last thing I do because as soon as I do, let the googling begin. So, um I'll contact all of these people, the ones who will be coming in for interviews. I will give
them phone calls today to let them know and to get them signed up for interview slots next week. Everyone else in this pool that is not selected for an interview will get an email from MSBA thanking them for their uh time and consideration and that the board has decided to move forward with other candidates. So, we'll take care of
contacting everybody on this list. >> Okay, Barb, drum roll. Here we go. >> In no particular order, these are not in order of their alphabet identifiers. These are jumbled up so people don't know who we were speaking about earlier. So congratulations uh to the Brainer
School Board. In round one for your superintendent position, you will be interviewing the five following um individuals. Brian Masterson, Dr. James Wagner,
Charles Campbell, Dr. from Michael Nubc and Chip Ranken. Those are your five. I do have a press release which I will finish today and I will get it to Kelly so the board can place that on the district website and
any other communications channels that you want to share that through Kelly. The information will be in your hands hopefully within the hour. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you everybody. That's all I had for you unless you have other business as a board. Just real quick, uh remember future meetings. Yeah,
obviously the February 2nd is uh when we start the uh interview process and then uh uh February 3rd it continues uh regular school board meeting on the uh 9th of February and then we have a special meeting on the 10th uh to interview the finalists. So just kind of
keep that in mind as well. And uh does anyone else have anything? Well, Kelly, are you going to send us out new invites? Um, tell us which day we're starting at 11:45. >> Yeah, I will. I'll I'll get rid of the old ones and I'll send you a new one so
it's not confusing. >> That'd be awesome. >> Okay. >> And then I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> And I'll second it. >> Motion to adjurnn a second. Roll call vote. >> Randy Heidman. >> Yes. >> Sarah Spear. >> Yes. >> Don Wood.
>> And thank you to the board for a good discussion today. Yes, >> Michelle Breen. >> Yes, >> DJ Dondelier. >> Yes, >> Stephanie Peterman. >> Yes. >> All in favor?
>> Okay, we are done. Thanks.