By Stephen Floyd
The Silver Falls School District Board is defending its decision to hold closed-door interviews for interim superintendent, saying this improved the quality of candidates and the process itself.
After voting June 4 to extend the position to Winston-Dillard School District Superintendent Kim Kellison, board members said it was important for the public to know why the process was confidential.
Board Member Josh Ort said many candidates have jobs with other districts and could face retaliation if their current employers learned they were looking elsewhere. He referenced advice received by the board April 22 from the Coalition of Oregon School Administrators (COSA), which said public interviews would likely lead to fewer applicants.
“We had to respect the candidate pool that we had,” said Ort. “I want to make sure people understand that there was no intention at all of us trying to hide anything. It was our attempt to get the best candidates we could, and we did.”
Chair Jennifer Traeger added that most of the candidates specifically requested their information remain confidential.
Under Oregon law, public bodies are allowed to enter executive session to interview candidates for a chief executive officer position under certain conditions. The position must be advertised publicly, and the body must adopt hiring standards and procedures in open session.
The board took these steps April 22, including the approval of COSA to help lead the search for an interim superintendent. The position was publicly posted April 23 and executive sessions were held May 7, 21, 22 and 28, after which the board publicly announced their finalist June 4.
During this process board members acknowledged there would not be normal opportunities for public input given how little time they had to find an interim. Former Superintendent Scott Drue resigned suddenly March 13, and a contract for Interim Superintendent Joe Morelock expires June 30.
In addition to candidate confidentially, Board Member Tom Buchholz said open interviews can limit the ability of parties to speak plainly and have a “back-and-forth” conversation.
He said, when the board needs to discuss sensitive topics to evaluate a candidate such as personnel issues, they are often legally prevented from going into detail in a public setting. He said candidates are equally barred from speaking publicly about specific experiences they have had with similar issues.
Buchholz also said, when candidates are interviewed in public, there’s added pressure to say the right thing rather than give a genuine answer.
“When it’s all in public everyone’s just talking your favorite buzzwords and you’re not really able to get down into it,” said Buchholz.
Board Member Phil Weisner noted six of the seven board members participated in reference checks for the candidates and no one person was a choke point for this task.
