Lakeville Area Public Schools — Transcript
Tuesday, September 30, 2025
Board Handbook Development
Superintendent Evaluation Process
Levy Renewal Communication Strategy
Board Member Training
Strategic Plan Review & Future Planning
Board-Superintendent Communication Protocol
Votes (4)
Finalization of Board Handbook
Dissent: Kim Baker initially expressed disagreement with the subgroup approach, advocating for full board involvement based on MSBA recommendations.
The board debated the most efficient and inclusive method for creating a board handbook. Initial suggestions included a small subgroup drafting a proposal, then bringing it to the full board, versus the full board reviewing it section-by-section. Concerns were raised regarding efficiency and the need for board-wide input on critical procedural items not covered by existing policies. The discussion highlighted the MSBA template as a potential starting point and the need to address specific procedural gaps like board self-evaluation and board member resignation processes.
Community Education Efforts for Levy Renewal
The board discussed ongoing and future strategies to inform the community about the upcoming levy renewal vote. Members shared experiences from various outreach events, noting low attendance at some, and proposed alternatives like engaging at parent-teacher conferences, community clubs, and amplifying district social media posts. A key point of discussion was the legal framework governing board members' communication on the levy, emphasizing the need to provide factual information rather than advocating for a 'yes' or 'no' vote in an official capacity.
Establishment of Superintendent Evaluation Process and Goals
Dissent: Discussion points included the timing of goal setting and the realistic pace of achieving district-wide changes reflected in metrics.
Moved by Brian Thompson (as a proposal)
The board addressed the need for a formalized superintendent evaluation, acknowledging that specific goals were not set at Superintendent Bowman's contract signing. Past evaluation methods, including subjective rubrics and self-assessments, were reviewed. The discussion highlighted the importance of incorporating objective metrics from the executive dashboard and 360-degree feedback from direct reports. A plan was proposed for an immediate '90-day check-in' style review, with future formal evaluations to be based on clearly defined, measurable goals developed by the board.
Clarification of Communication Protocols between Board Members and Superintendent
Dissent: Significant disagreement existed between board members on whether the chair should act as a gatekeeper for communications to the superintendent.
An unplanned but extensive debate occurred regarding the appropriate channels for board members to communicate with the Superintendent and make requests. Some members argued for direct communication from any elected official, while others advocated for all inquiries to be channeled through the Board Chair for consistency, transparency, and to prevent the Superintendent from being overwhelmed by individual 'pet projects.' Superintendent Bowman articulated his approach to prioritizing tasks and discerning board direction in the absence of a clear, formal protocol, emphasizing the need to keep the district moving forward.
Notable Quotes (13)
my thought and maybe we had discussed this before was have kind of a subgroup of the board, you know, draft up our proposed um handbook and then bring it back and maybe we could focus on some key areas that we wanted to discuss as a board. Uh my concern would be if we try to go section by section as the full board, it might take a lot of time.
MSBA recommends that we go through it as a group. because you're Yep. ... it helps to go through it as a group and go through all the different things so that everyone has input in the process.
What if we start with that? ... if that's the only thing we got to really hash through as a group, then let's just hash it out and be done.
it is the district's position that we can't be for or against. we can only share. Here's what we need. Here's what the money is for. Go vote on November 4th and you decide if you want to spend that money on that.
I still love talking about keeping us in a steady state for another year. Maintain where we're at. We have a budget in place. It would not require a reduction of that budget. We can keep on the path that we're on with the objectives that we've already set, the goals that we've set.
we made um a rubric based on those goals with exemplary um meets expectations, not meeting ex or halfway, I think satisfactory, and then like not does not meet um based on those goals and then we kind of aligned it to the strategic plan and then we aligned it to our goals as a board and then we had two check-ins um and then the final one was in July when the board each board member submitted their like the the document filling out the rubric with where they rated him.
in fairness to Superintendent Bowman, I'm not sure how you evaluate him. I'm not sure how I evaluate him other than um nice guy and uh where do where do we go from here? And I'm being facitious, but the truth is I without giving him a specific accomplishment to do. I'm not sure how we can do this fairly.
I will march to the tune of the board. And if that's the direction uh that you want to go, I'm not I'm not pushing back on that. I will do everything I can to accomplish that within my uh very aged body.
I think we should do a check-in. I think we should do one within the next two weeks. I think we should do a 360 evaluation uh with with his uh direct reports... I think the evaluation should be uh from the MSBA template without any things from previous um uh goals just because he hasn't been told this is what you need to go do.
I am a little concerned with and I appreciate what you said superintendent Bowman about the list you have that we haven't discussed as a board. I didn't know I could email you things that I want to see happen and then they get added to a list that's investigated. It's it appears that some board members are doing that and so that's not how I I think I would recommend that we do things.
in the absence of of orders I will try to discern because I have to have the staff moving the district in a clear direction. So I do that as I hear what I hear and the emails I get.
as an elected official, it is your responsibility and and and no one should geek in having conversations with the superintendent. period.
gate gatekeeping is not what we were hired to do or we were elected to opinion.
Ordinances & Resolutions (12)
The primary agenda items for discussion during the special meeting, outlining the board's objectives.
A document the board aims to finalize, outlining procedures and operations for board members.
A template recommended for developing the board handbook and for superintendent evaluations.
School district policies that guide how the school board functions, to be reviewed.
Parliamentary procedure referenced for board meeting conduct and training.
The district's long-term plan, scheduled for assessment and review by Spring 2026.
The process and tools used to assess the Superintendent's performance.
A scoring guide used in past superintendent evaluations and discussed for future use.
A financial ballot measure (vote on November 4th) requiring community education efforts.
A tool to create and set targets for district performance, intended to inform superintendent evaluations.
Document related to instructional changes for secondary/high schools, impacting planning cycles.
A potential external resource for parliamentary training.