Minnetonka School Board Special Meeting
to discuss filling the recent vacancy left by Dave Eaton's resignation
Friday, February 17, 3:00 -5:00 p.m. at the District Service Center

TonkaFocus Summary

Board members present: Erin Adams, Judy Erdahl, Pam Langseth, Cathy Maes, Peggy Stefan, Bill Wenmark. Dennis Peterson was absent, out of the district at a meeting. Chair Erin Adams reviewed State law, Board policy and past practices; she noted that every Board vacancy since 1971 has been filled with an application/interview/vote/appointment process; an election cannot be held, the Board must appoint.

Wenmark nominates Borowski
Bill Wenmark read aloud his prepared statement recommending the immediate appointment of Paul Borowski, the next highest vote getter in the last election, citing Mr. Borowski's standing as a family man in the community, his non-controversial positions in the campaign, the 2000+ votes he received. He said the will of the majority would not be impacted, it would show a willingness to hear all voices in the community, his fellow Board members would not be losing power and control they believe they gained in the last election. Go here to read the full statement. (Editors' Note: Bill Wenmark and Dave Eaton sponsored and endorsed candidates MaryLouise Bowe and Paul Borowski during the last school board election; their names appeared at the top of the candidate's supporter lists on their campaign web sites. The week before the election, Mr. Eaton and Mr. Wenmark paid for a mass mailing and four newspaper ads endorsing Pam Langseth, MaryLouise Bowe and Paul Borowski. TonkaFocus verified with Ms. Langseth that she didn't seek the endorsement of Mr. Eaton or Mr. Wenmark and was not aware they intended to finance mailings and ads endorsing her.)
  
There were no seconds to the nomination.

Pam Langseth expressed her wish for the Board to decide on the process to be used. She noted that Paul Borowski might be the right applicant, but she felt the Board and community should go through a public process.
Chair Erin Adams asked if there were other nominations. There were none, and no formal contact to the Board or school district from citizens seeking the position, though several individuals had e-mailed the Board to comment on the process. Some Board members said they'd spoken informally with individuals who said they might be interested in serving.

The Board agreed they'd like to see applicants submit a letter of intent, resume and references. They began to discuss the criteria they'd like to see in a new Board member.
Bill Wenmark argued that the most recognizable, valuable criteria was the vote of the community.
Chair Erin Adams pointed out that he hadn't wanted that before; he'd voted to appoint Dave Eaton over the candidates from the last election then, even though they asked to serve.
Bill Wenmark: Not saying we can't so something different. In other cases, I may have considered other things.
Peggy Stefan and Judy Erdahl had reservations about limiting the Board to the appointment of the pool who might apply; what would the plan be if none of the applicants were suitable? Board members agreed the most important thing was to set criteria; applicants could then apply on their own or be approached by individuals from the Board or in the community and then apply; all would be considered at once.
Bill Wenmark: Pretty clear you aren't interested in Mr. Paul Borowski, no one seconded, no reason for him to apply. Who else could possibly equal the standard he met? If people are interested, why didn't they run in the campaign?
Chair Erin Adams: We're continuing to debate a failed motion. Board members may have a fundamental belief that direct nomination is inappropriate.
Pam Langseth: We have luxury to pick the right person. Election is grueling; there may be people willing to serve who won't go through an election.
Judy Erdahl: Don't think being willing to file and run a campaign is the best criteria. The best criteria is a willingness to serve on this Board, to serve our kids and community.
Peggy Stefan: No idea if Paul Borowski is interested; never had a conversation with him, not now, not in the fall when he was running. We have a Board member who resigned after serving 3 1/2 years never having gone under the scrutiny you're talking about. I would not say his work was less than ours.

"Mythical Majority"
Chair Erin Adams: You (Bill) didn't support appointing last time. I object to mythical majority you keep talking about - you are the majority - you vote with the rest of the Board 98% of the time. Are you talking about the candidates you supported? The vote spread was significant.
Bill Wenmark: I supported your appointment because you were the better person. I support Paul Borowski in this case because the vote can also be construed in the reality of your campiagns - my compliments to Cathy Maes, Pam Langseth, Erin Adams for getting out your supporters, a difficult trio to beat right here, you guys turned out an enormous number of people to vote. It doesn't mean the vote spread was negative. There's a new standard - people in future campaigns better have the money, better have the ability to get out the vote.
Cathy Maes: People vote for people, not for campaigns. I didn't second your nomination because I didn't want to go down to a personal level in this discussion.
Judy Erdahl: We want an individual who's truly about kids first, no personal agenda. We've gotten off-track and it's a disservice to kids. Kids are the highest and foremost priority for me.

Board members continued with a list of traits they'd expect to see in a new Board member, including several listed in Bill Wenmark's statement nominating Paul Borowski.
Bill Wenmark: Important to have someone who's not with you guys on everything, diversity of Board is good if we all have one criteria of being child-centered.
Chair Erin Adams: Would you acknowledge there's diversity on this Board now?
Bill Wenmark: Yes, absolutely.

Philosophies differ
Long discussion about what child-centered means, how it fits district Vision "serving children well is the highest measure of our success."
Bill Wenmark: Is it everything in total context of that person?
Peggy Stefan: Yes. We're here to educate children, aren't we?
Pam Langseth: What's primary focus? Staff/ Curriculum? Kids? It's kids. Every decision made is about what's best for them.
Bill Wenmark: That's the end result of everything we do - is it the beginning? It's a rhetorical, interesting, intellectual question.
Peggy Stefan: It's not rhetorical at all. It's the District's Vision - you were part of writing it. It's the beginning, the center, the end, the whole reason we do this. It's not up to debate, it's not an interesting thing to discuss, it's the center. We're child-focused.

Agreement on some qualities, disagreements on others; Mr. Wenmark wants strong morality
Erin Adams: Difference between politician and diplomat - you can go to the public and force the Board to make a decision. Inherent in consensus building is the ability to work to agreement, statesmanship.
Judy Erdahl: Schools are not a business.
Bill Wenmark: On the list, we're missing strong morality, honesty, integrity, morality. Business experience is important, I respect volunteers but in a home it's a dictatorship.
Judy Erdahl: It's about relationships. If I ran a dictatorship at home, there's be anarchy in three years.
Peggy Stefan: The Board lost educators when Carol and Bob retired; not so concerned with business experience, we have lots here. Board work very different than other things we do; leadership is not dictatorship. We're a governance board, not managers. Consensus building is number one.
Bill Wenmark expressed a desire for another male on the board, "Dads have good ideas."
Chair Erin Adams asked for some guidance from Mike Lovett, Asst. Supt. for Human Resources, on issues of age, gender, moral integrity - what can the Board call for?
Dr. Lovett explained if the goal is to encourage people to apply, putting personal preferences on the list might make it look as if your mind is made up; District 276 is an equal opportunity employer, so some things discussed here might not fit. What you're trying to do is set a reasonable relationship between your criteria and being a board member, personalize it to Minnetonka's vision.
Bill Wenmark: From a Human Relations standpoint, difficult to prioritize this - that's why founders wanted this decided in elections, so again we go back to the election. I'm familiar with election law and it doesn't have any of these things. We're defining here what's normally chosen out there - in homes, with campaign brochures, so no Human Relations application oversees this. We decide, not the public.
Chair Erin Adams: How is strong moral leadership demonstrated? References? Experience?
Bill Wenmark: Easily seen as you interact with people, honesty, integrity of being consistent. Moral character describes why they do what they they're doing, listening to their value system. Sense it; you can tell - they do it, live it, breathe it - stay true to their word. You can move it down our list but I value it strongly.
Peggy Stefan: There's no one here who doesn't value it. How does an applicant show it? We have a Code of Conduct you refuse to sign.
Bill Wenmark: Are we going to judge me now?
Peggy Stefan: I would never say we don't want those qualities but very difficult to measure. We'll follow up on references; it doesn't belong in the requirements.

The Board then agreed on timing and how applicants should apply; details to be on the district web site, communicated officially by the district and in local papers. All 6 members agreed they'd like to see a new Board member with the following qualities: Advocate and supporter of public education and Minnetonka Schools; consensus builder; strategic thinker; steward of resources; proven commitment to district, demonstrated school leadership in Minnetonka.

Chair Erin Adams: I keep hearing this is a luxury for us to appoint someone. But I see it as our duty. There was a breakdown of the preferred process but the law does proscribe our duty in these circumstances.
Cathy Maes: It's an opportunity for the community to see us work.

Meeting adjourned about 5:00 p.m.