Why is our new Indianapolis Public School Board twiddling their thumbs and doing nothing about finding a permanent successor to Dr. Eugene White?
In 22 weeks, IPS’ 2013-2014 school year begins. Common sense would dictate that the system would have a new superintendent on board by then. But in the 51 days since the board announced Dr. White’s retirement, they’ve done literally nothing to start the difficult, cumbersome and tedious process searching for a new superintendent of schools.
When the majority of the board decided to part ways with Dr. White, they should have been ready then to proceed with how they were going to select his replacement.
Despite the veneer of new attitudes and outlooks by the board, especially their three new members, in talking to folks who’ve talked directly with board members, it’s apparent that instead of a board operating on all cylinders, the IPS Board is bitterly divided and unsure of their direction, while committing numerous rookie board mistakes.
The board majority was within their rights to want to retire Eugene White. But once they made that decision, they failed to immediately come to consensus on how to search for a permanent replacement and bring the IPS community into the loop to garner consensus on the qualities of the next IPS head.
Interviewed back on Jan. 17 on our WTLC-AM (1310) “Afternoons with Amos” program, IPS Board President Diane Arnold said the board would “begin immediately to meet as a board and begin to talk about the process of searching for a permanent superintendent.”
Arnold also said then she “anticipated” that there would be opportunities for the community to weigh in on the qualities IPS’ next superintendent should have.
Forty-nine days after that interview, the board’s just now ready to post the job vacancy. There’s been no movement toward creating meetings to hear from the community about the qualities of a new superintendent.
More ominously, the board has done nothing about hiring a firm to help with their search. They don’t have to hire one. But not having that help forces the board to wade through scores of resumes and credentials themselves. That would further slow down the hiring process.
In her interview, Arnold said the board was looking at different types of superintendents; not just a traditional educator. But the board hasn’t educated the community about possibly hiring a businessperson or a non-educator as superintendent. There would be much pushback from the IPS community if that were to happen without extensive community meetings and feedback.
There is a law moving through the Legislature that would make it easier for IPS to hire that type of person. But that law, if passed, wouldn’t take effect until May at the earliest, or more probably in July. Too late to have an impact if the board wants a new IPS leader in place by August.
Also, six of the seven IPS Board members have never been involved in a superintendent search.
IPS can’t afford another Esperanza Zendejas debacle when the board chose an individual with a lack of experience working in a major metropolitan city school district where African-Americans are a significant force.
The IPS Board needs a superintendent with experience working in a large, diverse community in a major media market – someone with experience running a school system or a business where a significant percentage of the customers or students/parents are African-American and other minorities.
If a businessperson is selected, they should have experience running businesses or enterprises of upwards of $250 million.
And the individual should have a demonstrated track record of passion for children, learning and education.
It’s gonna take the IPS Board longer than five months to find Dr. White’s replacement.
So, Diane, Annie, Samantha, Sam, Caitlin, Gayle and Michael, you’ve already wasted seven weeks! Quit playing around and get down to your No. 1 job – finding a new superintendent. Meet all days and Saturdays if you have to, but it’s time to get on your J-O-B!
For the sake of the district and most importantly, for the sake of the students.
What I’m hearing in the streets
Forty-five years ago, when the concept of UniGov was introduced, debate was hot and heavy as everyone had an opinion. The business community, movers and shakers were loudly supporting it, while our African-American community and some conservative whites were bitterly opposed.
There were plenty of stories in the Recorder and Herald, the Star, News and Times, and reports on TV and radio.
Today, the most radical change in UniGov since its creation has passed the state Senate and moves to the House.
The change eliminates the four at large City-County Council seats, 18 township board seats and bars the council from any oversight of deputy mayors and department heads. The most controversial and unconstitutional provision gives the unelected city controller authority to control the budgets of constitutional county elected officials like the sheriff, auditor and coroner.
You’d think such a radical change in the governance structure of the state’s biggest city would be the talk of Indianapolis.
It isn’t.
When the bill came before a Senate committee, only super-lobbyist (and mayor behind the curtain Joe Loftus testified in favor). No one else did. Not even Mayor Greg Ballard, even though he’d get near dictatorial powers.
Indianapolis Star columnists Erika Smith and Matt Tully, who write about everything else under the sun, have been oddly silent about this proposal as have Indy’s TV newscasts.
At a press conference last week, I asked Gov. Mike Pence his views on the radical plan. He said “I haven’t had the opportunity to study that legislation.”
The city’s movers and shakers of Indianapolis’ Central Indiana Corporate Partnership, (CICP) the 21st century version of the leadership which pushed UniGov 40 years ago, is incommunicado.
A spokesperson told me by e-mail that CICP doesn’t “take a pro or con stance on legislative issues” they don’t initiate.
Frankly I don’t believe the governor has no opinion or that Indy’s corporate titans are tongue-tied. Either both groups are lying or they’ve abdicated leadership on one of Indianapolis most critical issues.
See ‘ya next week.
You can email comments to Amos Brown at acbrown@aol.com.
