Michigan Department of Education Special Meeting for March 18, 2015 – Interview Deliberations


>>I WANT TO RECONVENE THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION TO DISCUSS ALL THE FINE CANDIDATES THAT WE’VE LEARNED ABOUT AND HEARD FROM. YOU CAN’T SAY ENOUGH THANKS TO ALL OUR CANDIDATES, APPLICANTS, SEMI-FINALISTS, AND OUR FINALISTS, FOR THEIR ABILITY AND WILLINGNESS TO STEP FORWARD AND ENGAGE IN THIS PUBLIC SCRUTINY AND IMPORTANT DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE WE’RE GOING TO IMPROVE EDUCATION, HOW WE GET THERE, AND HOW EACH OF THEM, I’M SURE, COULD HELP US A LOT. AND AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT EASY, AND IT’S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT WHO WE BELIEVE, ON BALANCE, HAS THE COMBINATION OF SKILLS, ABILITIES, EXPERIENCE, AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH US AND STAKEHOLDERS THAT’S GOING TO BE REALLY EFFECTIVE, BUT THAT’S OUR JOB, AND THAT’S WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO. WE’RE GOING TO FIRST GO AROUND AND ASK EACH BOARD MEMBER AND KAREN TO SHARE REFLECTIONS ON EACH CANDIDATE’S STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES, PARTICULAR OBSERVATIONS RELATIVE TO OUR GOALS. WE’LL DO THAT ONCE AND WE’LL PROBABLY DO SOME INFORMAL PREFERENCES AND SEE WHERE THAT TAKES US, AND WORK THAT THROUGH UNTIL WE COME TO WHAT I HOPE, ULTIMATELY, IF WE SEE WHERE WE’RE GOING, I HOPE, WILL BE STRONG BIPARTISAN AND MAYBE EVEN UNANIMOUS SUPPORT. KNOWING THIS IS DIFFICULT– THERE’S CERTAINLY GOING TO BE DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW. APPRECIATING THAT THAT’S WHO WE ARE, HOPEFULLY WE’LL HAVE A BOARD DECISION COLLECTIVELY AND HOPEFULLY TODAY. WITH THAT, CASANDRA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REFLECT ON THE THREE CANDIDATES, WHAT WE’VE HEARD, WHAT WE’VE LEARNED, AND WHERE WE MIGHT GO?>>SURE. SO I’VE SAID IT BEFORE AND I’LL SAY IT AGAIN: I THINK THAT WE HAD A TREMENDOUS, WONDERFUL GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO APPLIED FOR THE POSITION. OUR SIX CANDIDATES THAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD WERE ALL VERY GOOD CANDIDATES, AND THE THREE WE CHOSE FOR FINALISTS ARE ALL FULLY CAPABLE OF DOING THIS JOB, AND I THINK ANY ONE OF THEM WOULD BE VERY GOOD AT IT. SO THIS IS A REALLY, REALLY DIFFICULT DECISION FOR US TO MAKE. JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD ABOUT THE CANDIDATES: BRIAN WHISTON– I STILL THINK THAT THE FACT THAT HE HAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LEGISLATIVE EXPERIENCE IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL. I THINK HE HAS SUPPORT FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, WHICH IS ALSO GOOD. I THINK HE’S A GOOD CONSENSUS CANDIDATE. I THINK HE’S VERY BIPARTISAN. I DIDN’T HEAR ANYTHING THAT WOULD CONCERN ME ABOUT MOVING HIM FORWARD AS STATE SUPERINTENDENT, AND I HEARD A LOT OF THINGS I THINK WERE VERY POSITIVE. SO THAT’S JUST VERY QUICKLY ON HIM, AND THEN WE HAD VICKIE MARKAVITCH. VICKIE, I THINK, IS CLEARLY AN EXCEPTIONAL INTERVIEWER. SHE DID A REALLY GOOD JOB OF BEING CONCISE AND YET DIRECTLY ANSWERING EVERY QUESTION THAT WE ASKED OF HER, AND ALSO SOME PRETTY TOUGH QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER SHE WOULD, IN FACT, BE SOMEONE WHO COULD WORK WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE. I STILL APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT SHE COMES FROM A TEACHING BACKGROUND, THAT SHE HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION, ALTHOUGH I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME PARENTS OF CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS WHO DID EXPRESS SOME CONCERNS TO US ABOUT THAT. I THINK SHE HAS A WIDE BACKGROUND THAT IS VERY HELPFUL, PARTICULARLY THE FACT THAT SHE’S CURRENTLY WORKING WITH PONTIAC SCHOOLS ON EXACTLY THE TYPE OF WORK WE NEED TO DO IN THIS DEPARTMENT IS ALSO A VERY GOOD POSITIVE FOR HER. AND THEN OUR FINAL CANDIDATE, SCOTT MENZEL, AGAIN, I THINK HE’S ALSO A VERY DYNAMIC CANDIDATE. HE HAS A LITTLE BIT– DOESN’T HAVE AS MUCH OF A VARIED BACKGROUND, BUT CERTAINLY HAS DONE SOME GOOD THINGS IN HIS BACKGROUND, HAS MADE SOME GOOD RELATIONSHIPS, ALSO SHOWED BIPARTISAN SUPPORT WITH BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS SUPPORTING HIM. I DO APPRECIATE HIS FOCUS ON EQUITY IN EDUCATION AND CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP, AND ALSO HIS SUPPORT OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION. SO ULTIMATELY, I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE THREE GREAT CANDIDATES, AND WE NEED TO HAVE A THOROUGH CONVERSATION, BECAUSE THIS IS A TOUGH CHOICE.>>THANKS. MICHELLE?>>CASANDRA JUST SAID EVERYTHING I WAS GOING TO SAY. [ LAUGHTER ]>>VERY WELL.>>YEAH, AND DID IT BETTER THAN I WOULD. YEAH. I WILL SECOND THAT WHAT I LIKED ABOUT BRIAN WAS THE FACT THAT HE IS SOMEBODY THAT WILL BUILD CONSENSUS, HAS EXPERIENCE IN THE LEGISLATURE, OBVIOUSLY HAS IMMEDIATE, PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF WHAT IT’S LIKE TO BE IN A DISTRICT WITH ALL THESE REFORMS GOING ON RIGHT NOW, IS REALLY CLOSE TO SEEING THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTS OF THOSE POLICIES AND MAY BE ABLE TO BRING THAT INTO THE STATE LEVEL. AND I DON’T SEE IT AS A DISADVANTAGE TO BE AT THAT LEVEL. I THINK IT MIGHT BE AN ADVANTAGE TO SEE AND BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT’S HAPPENING AND– TO INFORM THE HIGHER LEVEL OF EDUCATION COMMUNITY– UPPER LEVEL, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY. I ALSO– I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I THINK VICKIE KNOCKED THE BALL OUT OF THE PARK. I THINK SHE– JUST THE DEPTH, YOU KNOW, HER EXPLANATION OF WHAT TO DO WITH A DEFICIT DISTRICT WAS SO DETAILED– YOU KNOW, “GETTING THE LOAN, THIS AMOUNT, YOU GET THIS MUCH FOR KIDS, AND THEN YOU CAN PUT IT INTO–” I MEAN, IT WAS LIKE– IT WAS CLEAR, PRECISE, HAS PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF HOW TO GET STUFF DONE, AND I WAS IMPRESSED WITH THAT. SHE’S VERY WELL VERSED ON RESEARCH AND VERY GOOD AT EXPLAINING IN A PRACTICAL WAY WHAT TO DO. THAT SEEMS LIKE IT COULD BE– LIKE IT’S ALREADY EFFECTIVE. SO IT WASN’T JUST BROAD-STROKING SOME POLICY. SHE’S READY TO RUN AND ROLL WITH A LOT OF SPECIFIC THINGS I THINK COULD BE VERY USEFUL. AND WHAT I LIKE ABOUT SCOTT IS HE CERTAINLY HAS A FAN BASE. [ LAUGHTER ]>>HE CERTAINLY HAS WON OVER A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND THAT MEANS A LOT. THE ABILITY TO WORK AND HAVE– FORM COALITIONS WITH GROUPS AND HAVE SUCH A VARIED AMOUNT OF FOLKS THINK SO HIGHLY OF HIM, THAT SPEAKS WELL TO ME. AND THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE A TOUGH DECISION FOR ME, SO I’M GOING TO LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE SAYS, AND– NO MORE TO SAY.>>RICHARD?>>THANK YOU. I CONCUR WITH MOST OF WHAT CASANDRA AND MICHELLE HAVE HAD TO SAY. I WAS STRUCK BY DIFFERENT STYLES. MR. WHISTON IS MORE OF, YOU KNOW, “LEAN BACK AND LET’S DISCUSS WHAT WORKS.” DR. MARKAVITCH OF, “I KNOW WHAT TO DO, AND HERE’S THE DIRECTION WE OUGHT TO GO,” AND MR. MENZEL IS MORE OF A RELATIONSHIP CONSENSUS BUILDER, AND EACH HAS GREAT STRENGTHS. I DON’T THINK THIS IS A HARD CHOICE AT ALL. IT’S A GREAT CHOICE, BECAUSE NO MATTER WHO YOU CHOOSE, WE’RE GOING TO GET SOMEBODY WHO CAN DO THE JOB AND BRING SOME REAL STRENGTHS TO THE POSITION. HAVING SAID THAT, I’M IMPRESSED WITH THE SUPPORT FOR SCOTT MENZEL AND THE DIFFICULTY OF EMERGING SCHOOL DISTRICTS. I FORESEE MORE OF THAT IN MICHIGAN’S FUTURE, SO I THINK HIS SKILL SET IS MATCHED TO SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE TO FACE IN THE COMING YEARS, SO I WOULD FAVOR HIM AT THIS POINT.>>KAREN?>>IT’S REALLY HARD TO SIT HERE, KNOWING THAT I HAVE ONE FOOT IN ONE OFFICE AND A FOOT AND 90% OF THE REST OF MY BODY BACK IN OTTAWA COUNTY, AND WANTING TO WEIGH IN ONE WAY AND NOT BEING ABLE TO. SO WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT I WAS SURPRISED TO HEAR THAT WE HAD A GUBERNATORIAL PREFERENCE FOR THIS POSITION, AND ONE OF THE THINGS I DO WANT TO SAY IS THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY KIND OF INDICATION OR INSTRUCTIONS ON WHO I SHOULD BE IN HERE ADVOCATING FOR, SO I WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP. I WAS ASKED TO COME AND LISTEN AND UNDERSTAND HOW THE CANDIDATES WOULD RESPOND TO YOUR INQUIRY AND QUESTIONS, BECAUSE YOU’RE GOING TO CHOOSE ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALS IN SCANT MINUTES, AND REGARDLESS OF WHO YOU CHOOSE, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO CARVE OUT A WONDERFUL WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT PARTIES AND PEOPLE. I DON’T THINK IT’S MISUNDERSTOOD OR LOST ON ANYONE IN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE THAT YOU’RE ELECTED TO REPRESENT 10 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND THEIR 1.5 MILLION CHILDREN. AND WHEN I LOOK AROUND THIS ROOM TODAY, THERE’S ONLY ONE PERSON THAT MATTERED, AND SHE WAS SITTING IN THE BACK ROW, AND HER NAME WAS PATRICE. AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT THAT THAT’S WHAT HAS TO DRIVE US ALL, EVERY DAY, TO WORK, IS DOING WHAT’S BEST FOR PATRICE AND HER 1.4 SOME MILLION COHORTS, IS THAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO WORK WITH EACH OTHER AND HOW TO RESPECT THE WORK THAT WE BRING TO THE TABLE, KNOWING WE’RE GOING TO DIFFER FROM TIME TO TIME. I AGREE THAT THE CANDIDATES BRING DIFFERENT SKILL SETS TO THE JOB. I DO THINK WE NEED TO– I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE CANDIDATE WHO YOU THINK IS BEST SUITED TO BUILD THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND RE ENERGIZE A COLLECTIVE VISION FOR THE COMMON INTEREST– IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMON GOOD. THAT’S WHAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT THE CANDIDATES.>>THANK YOU. EILEEN?>>TAKING THEM IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY CAME, BRIAN WHISTON IS A NON-TRADITIONAL CANDIDATE. HE HAS STRENGTHS, BUT ALSO WEAKNESSES THAT COME WITH THAT PICTURE, BECAUSE HE DIDN’T ENTER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION UNTIL THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. BRIAN HELPED ME EXTENSIVELY WHEN I STARTED ON THE STATE BOARD OF ED WITH POLITICAL INSIGHT AND INSIDE KNOWLEDGE, WHICH I VERY MUCH APPRECIATED. BUT THERE’S A VERY LARGE LEARNING CURVE BETWEEN LOCAL DISTRICT ISSUES AND THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT RESPONSIBILITIES, DESPITE THAT EXTENSIVE LOBBYING BACKGROUND. FOR DR. MARKAVITCH, SHE’S SORT OF THE PHYSICAL EMBODIMENT OF THE TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL EVERYBODY WANTED TO HAVE. YOU KNOW, VICKIE JUST HAS THAT PRESENCE ABOUT HER, AND YOU JUST WANT TO TOUCH IT. IT’S GOOD. AND SHE HAS IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE OF ORGANIZATION OF PERSONNEL. BUT WHEN I ASKED HER DIRECTLY, SHE DIDN’T ADDRESS HOW SHE WOULD USE MDE’S RESOURCES, BACK CHANNELS, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, BOARD CONNECTIONS TO CHANGE HER EXTERNAL COMMUNICATION STYLE. AND THE REASON THAT CONCERNS ME IS BECAUSE SHE DOES ACKNOWLEDGE IT’S CAUSED CONFUSION BETWEEN HER ACTUAL AND PUBLICLY PERCEIVED POSITIONS ON IMPORTANT ISSUES. I ALSO THINK THAT WE’VE WATCHED OVER TIME THE CONDENSATION OF TIME WITH WHICH YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO ISSUES, DISCRETION WITH WHICH YOU HAVE TO DECIDE QUICKLY WHETHER OR NOT IT’S YOUR VIEW OR THE BOARD’S VIEW, WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST FOR CHILDREN, ALL OF THOSE ISSUES THAT IT WOULD BE MORE DIFFICULT FOR HER REPUTATION AND PAST TO DO THAT PART OF THE JOB WELL. SCOTT MENZEL, IN MY EYES, IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO WAS ABLE TO ARTICULATE A CLEAR APPLICATION OF HIS PAST EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE TO STATEWIDE RESPONSIBILITIES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHANGE. THAT 1.5 MILLION CHILDREN, THAT NUMBER, THAT VISION CAME UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN HIS PRESENTATION. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, HE HAS THE PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE THAT’S GROUNDED IN TODAY’S OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN BUSINESS, EDUCATION, AND THE POLITICAL REALITIES THAT ARE FACING THE SCHOOLS. HE WOULD BE MY CANDIDATE.>>I DIDN’T ASK PEOPLE TO EXPRESS THEIR PREFERENCES AT THIS POINT, THOUGH THERE’S NOTHING TO STOP PEOPLE, BUT TALK ABOUT EACH OF THE CANDIDATES IN TURN.>>DON’T JUMP ON MY ANSWER. [ LAUGHTER ]>>WELL, I AGREE WITH WHAT– CASANDRA’S DESCRIPTION WAS VERY GOOD, I THOUGHT. I LIKED BRIAN. I LIKE HIS SORT OF RELAXED STANCE. HE WAS JUST RELAXED. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE HIS EXPERIENCE IN DEARBORN, WORKING IN A DIFFICULT DISTRICT WITH A LARGE ARAB POPULATION– A LOT OF THEM WERE IMMIGRANTS, AND THAT WAS A DIFFICULT POPULATION OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND PARENTS WHO WERE UNFAMILIAR WITH OUR SYSTEM, PERHAPS, AND HE SEEMS TO HAVE HANDLED THAT VERY EFFECTIVELY, AND THAT’S A BIG PLUS. I KNOW HIM FROM HIS LOBBYING EXPERIENCE. I WAS A LOBBYIST, MYSELF, AT THAT TIME AND WORKED WITH HIM, AND HE WAS VERY EFFECTIVE. HE KNOWS HOW TO WORK VERY WELL WITH PEOPLE, AND THEY RESPOND POSITIVELY TO HIM. AND I ALSO APPRECIATE HIS EXPERIENCE– 17 YEARS ON A LOCAL BOARD, WHICH BRINGS A VERY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, SOMETIMES, RATHER THAN THE SUPERINTENDENT’S POINT OF VIEW. SO HE’S GOT BOTH SIDES OF THE TABLE, SO TO SPEAK, SO I THINK THOSE ARE ALL BIG PLUSES. I THINK VICKIE WAS SUPERB TODAY. SHE WAS– I THOUGHT SHE REALLY DID A SUPERB JOB, AND I THINK THAT SPEAKS VERY HIGHLY OF HER, BECAUSE IT SPEAKS OF A DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE. SHE’S THE ONLY ONE WHO ACTUALLY WORKED AS A TEACHER. BRIAN HAD STUDENT TEACHING EXPERIENCE AND COLLEGE TEACHING, BUT SHE HAS K-12 AND SPECIAL ED EXPERIENCE, ACTUALLY. WE KNOW WE GOT CRITICAL LETTERS FROM SOME PARENTS, BUT I KNOW WHEN I TALKED TO OTHER PEOPLE IN OAKLAND COUNTY, I GOT VERY POSITIVE RESPONSES ABOUT CONTINUING AND SPECIAL ED, SO YOU PAY THE MONEY AND MAKE THE CHOICE, I GUESS. SO I’M VERY IMPRESSED WITH VICKIE. THE FACT THAT SHE HAS WORKED NOT ONLY VERY WELL BUT VERY EFFECTIVELY WITH BROOKS PATTERSON, TOM McMILLIN– THESE ARE NOT THE EASIEST GUYS IN THE WORLD. [ LAUGHTER ]>>AND YET, SHE SEEMS TO DO VERY WELL WITH THEM. SO IT SEEMS TO ME SHE COULD WORK VERY WELL WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE. AND SCOTT, OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU SAID, HAS A FAN BASE. I MEAN, IT’S REALLY INTERESTING THAT SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE COME TODAY TO SPEAK ON HIS BEHALF. HE OBVIOUSLY HAS DONE A GOOD JOB. SO I TALKED TO QUITE A FEW PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WHEN WE BROKE, AND I ASKED THEM WHAT THEY THINK, AND THEY ALL TOLD ME– EVERYBODY– OR NOBODY WOULD SAY WHO THEY WERE FOR. THEY ALL SAID, “BOY, YOU HAVE A TOUGH CHOICE. ALL THREE OF THEM ARE GREAT. ANY ONE WOULD BE GOOD,” AND I THINK THAT’S TRUE. I THINK WE DO HAVE A– MAYBE YOU DON’T THINK IT’S A TOUGH CHOICE BECAUSE YOU’VE ALREADY MADE UP YOUR MIND, BUT I HAVEN’T QUITE, SO–>>THIS IS A TOUGH CHOICE.>>I’M VERY HAPPY THAT THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE GOT TO CHOOSE FROM.>>LUPE?>>VOY HABLAR TODA EN ESPANOL PORQUE ESTO MUY DIFICIL. I’M GOING TO SAY EVERYTHING IN SPANISH BECAUSE THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT. [ LAUGHTER ]>>VERY CLEVER. I WISH I COULD SPEAK A LANGUAGE.>>NO, POR FAVOR. [ LAUGHTER ]>>OKAY. “NO, POR FAVOR,” SHE SAID, SO OKAY. ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET’S TAKE BRIAN. BRIAN WAS THE FIRST ONE, AND I LIKED BRIAN’S PRESENTATION AND WHAT HE ALLUDED TO IS HAPPENING IN HIS AREA, BECAUSE HE SAID THAT HE HAS AN OPEN DOOR, AN OPEN DOOR TO HIS STAFF, HIS TEACHING STAFF, HIS PARENTS, AND EVERYBODY ELSE. SO AN OPEN DOOR MEANS TO ME, “YOU CAN COME AND TALK TO ME WHENEVER YOU HAVE A CONCERN.” HOPEFULLY PEOPLE GO IN THAT OPEN DOOR WHEN THEY HAVE SOMETHING GOOD TO SAY, TOO. HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT CELEBRATION, CELEBRATING SUCCESSES, AND THAT’S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I’VE TRIED TO DO SITTING AT THIS TABLE, BRINGING SUCCESSES THAT ARE HAPPENING IN SCHOOLS, BECAUSE YEAH, THERE’S A LOT OF PROBLEMS, BUT THERE ARE ALSO SUCCESSES THAT ARE OUT THERE IN THE SCHOOLS, OR ELSE WE WOULDN’T BE OPERATING AT ALL. SO I LIKE THAT CELEBRATION WORD THAT HE USED. HE WAS VERY CONVINCING THAT HE HAS A LOT OF VERY GOOD PROGRAMS WORKING IN HIS SCHOOL DISTRICT, STARTING WITH PRESCHOOLS, SPECIAL ED, THE DIVERSITY COMPONENT, WHICH, OF COURSE, I’M VERY ADAMANT ABOUT, SO THOSE WERE VERY GOOD PROGRAMS THAT HE TALKED ABOUT. AND, OF COURSE, I WAS A TEACHER FOR A VERY LONG TIME. I WAS AN MEA PERSON, SO I APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT HE WORKS WITH THE TEACHERS. I DID ASK HIM WHAT RELATIONSHIPS HE HAS WITH THE TEACHERS, BECAUSE I EXPECT EVERYBODY TO WALK IN THE SHOES OF A TEACHER AT LEAST ONE HOUR IN THE YEAR. THAT’S HOW YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT’S HAPPENING IN THE CLASSROOM, AND IF YOU’RE GOING TO BE THE LEADER OF A SCHOOL DISTRICT, YOU GO AND SIT THERE WITH THE KIDS, WITH THE TEACHER, AND FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT’S HAPPENING. SO VISITS– YEAH, THEY’RE WONDERFUL, BUT AS A TEACHER, I WANTED THE PRINCIPAL TO COME AND SIT WITH ME AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR. SO THAT’S WHY I KEPT ASKING FOR THAT KIND OF INFORMATION. ALL RIGHT, WITH VICKIE, SHE WAS VERY, VERY WELL PREPARED TODAY. WELL, SHE WAS PREPARED THE OTHER DAY, TOO. SHE’S VERY WELL INFORMED. SHE HAS A DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE. HER EXPERIENCE STARTED IN THE CLASSROOM, ON UP TO THE SUPERINTENDENTSHIP, SO HER CAREER PATH– THAT’S ANOTHER THING WITH BRIAN. HE, IN MY MIND, DOESN’T HAVE THE CAREER PATH THAT TAKES YOU UP TO THE SUPERINTENDENTSHIP, AND TO ME, THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT, GOING UP THE LADDER. AND WITH VICKIE, SHE DID GO UP THE LADDER, STARTING IN THE CLASSROOM, ON UP TO WHERE SHE IS NOW. SHE WAS VERY WELL INFORMED. EVERY QUESTION WE ASKED, SHE ELABORATED FOR QUITE A WHILE AND GAVE US A LOT OF EXAMPLES, WAYS SHE WOULD IMPROVE WHAT SHE’S DOING AND TAKE IT TO THE NEXT STEP. SHE GAVE ME AN IDEA OF WHAT SHE’D DO IN THE FIRST 50 DAYS OF THE POSITION. BRIAN HAD A 100-DAY PROGRAM HE TALKED ABOUT, IN HAVING DIFFERENT COMMITTEES HE’D DO IN 100 DAYS. BUT I SHORTENED IT TO 50 SO IT’D BE MORE– [ LAUGHTER ]>>OKAY, SO THEN WITH SCOTT, SOME PEOPLE SAY THAT HE’S A SELF-PROMOTER. WELL, HEY, I’M A SELF-PROMOTER. AND THE WAY YOU GET THERE IS BY HARD WORK. YOU SHOW THAT YOU WORK HARD, BECAUSE– I WOULDN’T HAVE THE FOLLOWING THAT I DO IF THE PEOPLE DIDN’T BELIEVE IN ME. A LEADER IS NOT A LEADER WITHOUT SOMEBODY FOLLOWING HIM. SO IT’S VERY OBVIOUS IN THIS ROOM AND IN THE LETTERS WE RECEIVED ABOUT SCOTT THAT HE’S A LEADER, BECAUSE HE’S GOT A LOT OF FOLLOWERS. HAVING SAID THAT, IF THAT’S SELF-PROMOTING, SO BE IT. I HAVE A LOT OF FOLLOWERS BECAUSE I WORK HARD, AND PEOPLE FOLLOW AND BELIEVE IN WHAT I’M DOING, SO THAT’S WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A LEADER– HAVING FOLLOWERS. HE WAS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT HIS PROGRAMS, VERY IN TUNE TO THE NEEDS OF THE STUDENT POPULATION, AND HE’S WORKING TOWARDS INCREASING THAT INVOLVEMENT AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHETHER IT BE SPECIFICALLY IN PRE-SCHOOL– AND I HAVE ALWAYS ADVOCATED IN MY SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHEN I WAS A TEACHER, THAT THE PRE-K THROUGH 3RD GRADE IS WHERE WE SHOULD POOL RESOURCES, BECAUSE WITH MY STUDENT POPULATION OF LATINOS, AS YOU HEARD ROBERTO SAY YESTERDAY, WE HAVE 50% DROP OUT. SO I WOULD SAY, “WHY ARE YOU PUTTING RESOURCES WHEN THEY’RE DROPPING OUT? LET’S PUT THEM OVER HERE.” SO PRE-SCHOOL IS A VERY IMPORTANT COMPONENT, AND I’M SO GLAD THAT THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE, AND ON DOWN, EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE WITH PRE-SCHOOL AND EARLY CHILDHOOD. HE BUILDS RELATIONSHIPS, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT. AS WE SAW, THE YOUNG MAN THAT SKIPPED WORK TODAY, THAT RELATIONSHIP WAS BUILT IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, I THINK HE SAID, AND IF YOU WEREN’T CRYING, I WAS, BECAUSE IT WAS VERY EMOTIONAL, TOUCHING, THAT HE CAN DO THAT KIND OF THING. THAT’S CALLED SOCIAL JUSTICE, WHAT YOU CALL MAKING PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS TO MOVE THE AGENDA FORWARD. AND SO THAT WAS VERY POWERFUL. AND COMBINING TWO SCHOOL DISTRICTS– ONE SCHOOL DISTRICT BEING MORE AFFLUENT AND THE OTHER BEING A MORE DIVERSE CULTURE, AND PUTTING– EVEN WHEN I MOVED TO A NEW BUILDING, THAT WAS A CATASTROPHE. THAT WAS TRAUMATIC FOR ME AND THE STAFF I WAS GOING TO. SO I CAN’T IMAGINE GETTING TWO SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE SO DIFFERENT AND TRYING TO GET THEM TOGETHER TO WORK TOGETHER. SO THAT’S VERY POWERFUL, RIGHT THERE. OKAY, I’LL STOP. AND ANOTHER THING, OF COURSE. [ LAUGHTER ]>>THE THREE OF THEM ARE VERY CLOSE TO UNIONS. YOU SAW MANY TESTIMONIES HERE. THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE THE TEACHERS ARE THE ONES WHO MOVE THAT NEEDLE IN ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT. AGAIN, I SAY THAT THE TEACHERS ARE THE HEARTBEAT OF ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT.>>NO ONE DISAGREES.>>SO THIS IS MY THIRD MONTH ON THE JOB. [ LAUGHTER ]>>AND, YEAH, THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT. I MEAN, THESE WERE THREE VERY STRONG CANDIDATES THAT WE GOT A LOT OF FEEDBACK ON– INBOXES ON FACEBOOK, OBVIOUSLY THROUGH EMAILS, THROUGH PHONE CALLS, SITTING IN MEETINGS AND PEOPLE LEANING OVER AND TELLING US WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS WERE ON THE CANDIDATES. SO THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT, BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY– THREE STRONG CANDIDATES THAT ARE ALL WORTHY OF FILLING THE SHOES OF MIKE. SO LOOKING AT THE FIRST CANDIDATE, BRIAN WHISTON, AND I AGREED WITH MUCH OF WHAT WAS SAID HERE ALREADY, I REALLY APPRECIATE HIS LEGISLATIVE EXPERIENCE, BROAD SUPPORT AND ABILITY TO WORK WITH A BROAD CROSS-SECTION OF FOLKS, BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, STRONG SUPPORT FROM UNIONS. I WAS REALLY IMPRESSED BY THE FACT THAT HE WORKED WITH DEARBORN SCHOOLS. THAT’S A DIVERSE MAKEUP OF SCHOOLS, AND HE REALLY EXPRESSED THAT. THIRD HIGHEST WITH URBAN, OR THIRD HIGHEST URBAN DISTRICT IN THE STATE. I WAS ALSO IMPRESSED BY– AND I CAN’T REMEMBER THE EXACT TITLE OF THE PROGRAM, BUT HIS PUSH TO GET PARENT INVOLVEMENT, AS WELL AS HIS UNDERSTANDING OF KNOWING THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SYSTEMIC CHANGES TO MOVE EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT. WITH VICKIE, AGAIN, A STRONG INTERVIEWER, AS SHE WAS THE LAST TIME AND WAS AGAIN TODAY. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE THINGS– AGAIN, I’LL EXPRESS– SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE’S– THAT ARE VIEWED AS DEFICITS, TO ME, THEY’RE HER SHOWING THAT SHE’S COURAGEOUS AND HAS THE SKILLS, THE WILL TO EXPRESS AND DO WHAT SHE FEELS NEEDS TO BE DONE. WE SEE THAT THAT HAPPENS ACROSS POLICY MAKERS, BUT SHE’S STILL ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT STILL GETTING SUPPORT FROM A BROAD CROSS-SECTOR. SHE IS ABLE TO WORK WITH REPUBLICANS. THAT’S BEEN EXPRESSED. SO SHE IS ABLE TO WORK WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, ALTHOUGH WE’VE HEARD OTHERWISE. I DO APPRECIATE, AND WE SAW AGAIN TODAY, THAT HER DECISIONS ARE BASED ON DATA, DATA-BASED DECISIONS, AND SHE SHOWED US THAT THROUGH HER PRESENTATION. LOOKING AT THE LAST CANDIDATE, YES, VERY IMPRESSED BY THE SHOWING OF SUPPORT THAT CAME AND SHOWED UP. I THINK THAT WAS VERY WELL PUT TOGETHER. I THINK HE ARTICULATES VERY WELL AND IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT HE’S A COLLABORATOR. AS WITH THE OTHER CANDIDATES WHO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THE CRADLE TO GRAVE, AS WELL AS EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE, AS WELL AS THAT DRIVE TO ENSURE THAT WE’RE LOOKING AT– I’M SORRY, NOT CRADLE TO GRAVE. [ LAUGHTER ]>>POINT TO MY ENVIRONMENTAL WORLD. YEAH. I’M SORRY– CRADLE TO CAREER. SO REALLY, ABLE TO– HE WAS ABLE TO ARTICULATE WELL THAT HE HAS THAT UNDERSTANDING AND DRIVE. SO AGAIN, LOOKING AT ALL THE CANDIDATES, VERY ABLE TO– TO ME, THEY SHOW THAT THEY’RE ABLE TO BUILD COALITIONS OR BUILD COLLABORATION, I SHOULD SAY. SOME OF OUR CANDIDATES HAVE HAD WONDERFUL DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE, SUCH AS VICKIE, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.>>GREAT. THANKS, PAM. MY REFLECTIONS– I HAD TO JUST REMIND MYSELF, AS I BOILED DOWN OUR CRITERIA AS WE PUT IT TOGETHER, AND EVEN AS I SHARED IT WITH THE CANDIDATES WHENEVER THEY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IT, I WAS REFLECTING ON OUR DESIRE AND MY DESIRE TO, A, HAVE SOMEONE WITH A VISION AND KIND OF AN EFFECTIVE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT AND REFORM AGENDA THAT WAS SORT OF RIGHT, SUBSTANTIVELY. THAT SOMEONE WHO HAD SOME REAL EXPERIENCE IN MOVING THAT AGENDA FORWARD, IN IMPROVING EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND ACHIEVEMENT, AND CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAPS AND SO HAD DONE THAT WORK AND COULD DO MORE OF IT AT A LARGER SCALE, WITH THAT KIND OF EVIDENCE. AT THIS STAGE, SOMEONE, TOO, WHO IS PROBABLY MORE INTERESTED IN GETTING THAT WORK DONE, MOVING THE NEEDLE AND IMPROVING PERFORMANCE, AND THAT’S WHY THEY WANT TO BE SUPERINTENDENT THAN BEING A POLITICALLY IMPORTANT PERSON IN MICHIGAN. THE FOURTH, SOMEONE WHO COULD WORK STRAIGHT UP WITH US AS A BOARD AND HELP US WORK VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER, BUT ALSO HAD THE ADDED BENEFIT OF WORKING VERY, VERY EFFECTIVELY WITH ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS IN EDUCATION TO HELP US MOVE EFFORT — THE FIELD, PRACTITIONERS, THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE. SO, WHEN I BOILED DOWN IN MY CONVERSATIONS, I JUST MADE MYSELF REFLECT FROM WHAT WE’VE HEARD FROM THE CANDIDATES, I JUST PUT VICKIE AT THE TOP OF MY PAGE, MEANING, SHE’S JUST LITERALLY, HER NOTES ARE WRITTEN HERE AT THE TOP OF MY PAGE. I THINK, CLEARLY, SHE HAS TREMENDOUS EDUCATION LEADERSHIP ABILITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS. SHE HAD EVIDENCE OF MOVING THE NEEDLE IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. I THINK SHE LAID OUT A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HER EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT AGENDA THAN WAS UNDERSTOOD, INCLUDING ELEMENTS I APPRECIATE, LIKE THE EAA WAS A GOOD IDEA WORTH TRYING, AND IF IT HADN’T BEEN COMPROMISED BY CROSSWALK LEGISLATION THAT RICHARD MCCLELLAN OFFERS WANTED TO OPEN UP UNLIMITED AND POOR QUALITY CHARTER SCHOOLS, I SUPPORTED IT. AND THAT’S THE REASON, IN MY VIEW, IT GOT COMPROMISED FROM THE GET GO. SO, THAT WAS APPRECIATED. COMMON CORE. I DIDN’T PRESS HER, AND WE DIDN’T PRESS HER, WOULD SHE, AS SHE GOT THE JOB, TAKE OFF AND USE IT TO BE A BULLDOG FOR WHAT VICKIE MARKAVITCH WANTS? I TRUST NOT. BUT HAD SOME — ALWAYS, A BIT OF RESERVATIONS ON THAT SCORE. WOULD SHE WORK WELL AND STRAIGHT UP WITH US AS A BOARD? I BELIEVE YES. SHE SAID AS MUCH. WOULD SHE WORK EFFECTIVELY WITH THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE AND THE FIELD? I THINK SHE DID ANYTHING SHE COULD TODAY AND BEYOND TO SUGGEST SHE CERTAINLY WAS COMMITTED TO THAT AND COULD BE EFFECTIVE AT THAT. WHETHER THAT’S ENOUGH TO CHANGE THAT DYNAMIC OF PERCEPTION AND REALITY, I’M NOT SURE. BUT I THINK SHE DID A GOOD JOB OF KIND OF LEAVENING THAT UNDERSTANDING. WHEN I THINK ABOUT THESE CRITERIA AND THINK ABOUT BRIAN, I THINK SUBSTANTIVELY DEFINITELY HAS THE RIGHT AGENDA, IN TERMS OF CONTENT, FROM COMMON CORE, TO HOW WE SPEND MONEY, TO OUTCOMES, TO HAVING THE RIGHT UNDERSTANDING AND HONEST CONVERSATION ABOUT CHOICE AND CHARTERS NEED TO BE HAD. SO, I WAS VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE SUBSTANTIVE AGENDA THAT BRIAN REPRESENTS. I THINK HE HAS SHOWN EVIDENCE, AND I’M NOT ONE TO HISTORICALLY IMAGINE A LOBBYIST WOULD BE THE BEST CANDIDATE. BUT, AS AN EDUCATIONAL LEADER, I THINK HE SHOWED SOME GOOD EVIDENCE THAT HE HAS BOTH MOVED THE NEEDLE IN ACHIEVEMENT IN DEARBORN AND HAD MANAGED HIS TEAM IN AN EDUCATION ORGANIZATION EFFORT TO BE EFFECTIVE AND TO GET MORE EFFECTIVE AND TO CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVE. I THINK, OF ALL THE CANDIDATES, CERTAINLY, BRIAN WAS THE ONE WHO JUST KIND OF ANIMATES “I WANT TO DO THIS BECAUSE I WANT TO GET IT DONE.” VERSUS BEING A BIG, IMPORTANT POLITICAL PERSON. AND THAT SOLIDNESS, STRAIGHT FORWARDNESS WAS VERY WELCOME. I THINK, OF ALL THE — HE ALSO WAS VERY CLEAR, AND I SENSED IN TALKING TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED WITH HIM, FROM DAN DEGROW TO DAVID HECKERT, THE TRUST AND LOYALTY AND STRAIGHT FORWARDNESS WITH OTHERS IN EDUCATION AND HIS BOARD WOULD MEAN THAT, ON MY CRITERIA OF WORKING STRAIGHT UP WITH US ON A COMMON PAGE IS VERY PROFOUND WITH BRIAN. WE HEARD A LOT FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WEREN’T PUBLICLY PRESENTED IN TERMS OF THIRD PARTY PERSPECTIVE. THE FIELD, EDUCATORS, SUPERINTENDENTS, PRACTITIONERS IN THE FIELD, ON BALANCE, HAVE A TREMENDOUS TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN BRIAN, AS I SAID IN THE FIRST INTERVIEW, I THINK THERE’D BE A TREMENDOUS SIGH OF RELIEF ABOUT BRIAN IN THIS ROLE, A SORT OF A STRAIGHTFORWARD RELATIONSHIP OF MUTUAL TRUST AND ABILITY TO WORK TOGETHER. A WORK TOGETHER ABILITY THAT’S VERY PROFOUND. I THINK WE’VE HEARD ENOUGH THAT BRIAN WOULD BE EFFECTIVE. HE WAS INTERESTING AND THOUGHTFUL ABOUT HOW TO BE EFFECTIVE WITH THE FIELD AND THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR. HAS GOOD AND STRONG RELATIONSHIPS THAT CAN BE BUILT ON AND BE HELPFUL IN NAVIGATING THAT SOMETIMES TRICKY TERRAIN. WITH SCOTT, AGAIN, ON THESE SAME CRITERIA, AS YOU KNOW, SCOTT CERTAINLY HAS THE RIGHT VISION, THE RIGHT SUBSTANTIVE AGENDA, THE RIGHT SET OF NOTIONS OF WHAT KIND OF POLICY IMPROVEMENTS FROM TEACHERS TO EARLY CHILDHOOD. AND HE’S ACTED ON THEM. I KNOW HIS HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE IN TERMS OF WANTING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. HAVING DONE IT SUCCESSFULLY, I CONTINUE TO HAVE — INFORMED BY SOME THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE WHO I RESPECT A LOT IN EDUCATION, RESERVATIONS ABOUT EITHER LACK OF ATTENTION OR INABILITY TO MANAGE TO FOLLOW THROUGH THE INNOVATIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. SO THAT YPSILANTI WILLOW RUN HAS NOT GOT THE ONGOING, DURABLE SUPPORT TO IMPROVE AND CLOSE ACHIEVEMENT GAPS AND MAY BE WORSE OFF TODAY THAN IT WAS BEFORE. AND SIMILAR CONCERNS ABOUT DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND IMPROVEMENT IN OTHER AREAS. AND A LACK OF MOVING THE NEEDLE THAT SCOTT MENTIONED. CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAPS AND FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THE HARD WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT’S WHAT HAPPENS. ON THE THIRD CRITERIA. OF WHY INTERESTED IN THIS JOB. CERTAINLY WE ALL SAY, AND I BELIEVE, WE WANT TO DO THIS TO CHANGE THE LIVES OF 1.5 MILLION OF THEM, IMPROVE THOSE THINGS. I’LL TAKE SCOTT AT HIS WORD FOR THAT. BUT, AMONG THE CANDIDATES, THERE CERTAINLY WAS A BIT MORE OF A CAMPAIGN FOR THIS JOB. AND THAT CAN BE VERY GOOD. LUPE IS FOND OF CAMPAIGNS ALSO. SOMETHING THAT GIVES ME SOMETIMES, SOME RESERVATION. ON THE FOURTH CRITERIA, WORKING STRAIGHT UP WITH US, AND ON THE SAME PAGE, NO SURPRISES, NO UNILATERAL DECISION MAKING, AGAIN, I HAVE TO — THAT’S WHY I ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS– TAKE SCOTT AT HIS WORD THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. AND ACTUALLY WE HAVE A RELATIONSHIP AND I THINK THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE THE CASE. THE SUPPORT FROM MANY QUARTERS THAT YOU’VE SEEN FOR SCOTT REFLECTS A REAL ABILITY, AS MANY TESTIFIED, TO BRING PEOPLE FORWARD AND BUILD ALLIES. AND THAT CAN BE A GREAT STRENGTH AND IT IS — I VIEW IT AS A GOOD THING HE HAS GOOD RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE AND ACROSS THE AISLES. AND THAT’S NOT AT ALL WHAT I’M CONCERNED ABOUT. THAT CAN BE VERY HELPFUL TO ALL OF US AS WE TRY TO WORK TOGETHER AND MOVE FORWARD. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS TOO, KAREN. SO, THAT’S MY REFLECTIONS ON OUR CANDIDATES. AND, JUST ECHOING IT’S A TREMENDOUSLY DIFFICULT DECISION WITH TREMENDOUSLY QUALIFIED AND EFFECTIVE PEOPLE FOR THIS JOB. UNLESS OTHERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENTS JUST AFTER HAVING LISTENED TO EACH OTHER, AND WE’RE GOING TO TALK MORE. WE’RE NOT GOING TO START VOTING. BUT, I THINK ONE WAY TO MOVE FORWARD WOULD BE NOW FOR EACH OF US TO NAME YOUR FIRST CHOICE AND YOUR SECOND CHOICE. AND WE’LL GO AROUND THE TABLE AND WRITE THOSE DOWN AND SEE WHERE THAT SORT OF LEAVES US. AND WE’LL DISCUSS MORE AND PERSUADE EACH OTHER MORE TOWARDS OUR CHOICES AND SEE HOW WE MOVE CLOSER TO SELECTION. SO, CASANDRA, IF YOU WERE TO PUT YOUR FIRST AND SECOND CHOICES, WHO WOULD THEY BE?>>WELL, LET ME PREFACE IT BY SAYING IF I WERE CHOOSING SOLELY BASED ON THE INTERVIEWS, VICKIE MARKAVITCH WOULD CERTAINLY BE MY NUMBER ONE CHOICE. BUT, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, I WOULD SAY MY NUMBER ONE CHOICE WOULD BE BRIAN WHISTON, FOLLOWED BY VICKIE.>>FOLLOWED BY–?>>VICKIE.>>OH.>>I WOULD SAY VICKIE, FOLLOWED BY BRIAN.>>RICHARD?>>I WOULD SAY SCOTT MENZEL, FOLLOWED BY BRIAN WHISTON.>>EILEEN?>>I WOULD SAY SCOTT MENZEL. AND I HAVE NO SECOND CHOICE.>>YOU HAVE NO SECOND CHOICE?>>CORRECT.>>KATHLEEN?>>JUST WRITING IT DOWN. “NO SECOND CHOICE.” OKAY. I TOO WILL TAKE VICKIE AS MY FIRST CHOICE AND BRIAN AS MY SECOND.>>LUPE?>>SCOTT IS MY FIRST. AND I HAVEN’T DECIDED ON MY SECOND.>>OKAY. PAM?>>VICKIE WOULD BE MY FIRST AND BRIAN WOULD BE MY SECOND.>>AND BRIAN IS MY FIRST AND VICKIE IS MY SECOND. SO, GIVEN THOSE PREFERENCES, WE HAVE — BRIAN HAS FIVE FIRST OR SECOND VOTES. VICKIE HAS FIVE FIRST OR SECOND VOTES. AND SCOTT HAS THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES — FIRST PREFERENCE VOTES. PREFERENCES — THESE ARE NOT VOTES. I’LL PROPOSE THE ADVOCATES FOR SCOTT CONTINUE TO MAKE YOUR CASE AND SEE IF ANYONE WANTS TO CHANGE THEIR VOTES.>>OKAY. A POINT THAT’S BEEN MADE TO ME BY MORE THAN ONE INDIVIDUAL IS THAT SCOTT HAS IMPORTANT EXPERIENCE WITH RURAL EDUCATION, WHICH, IN MANY CASES, IS ALSO IMPOVERISHED EDUCATION AS WELL. I THINK THAT’S AN ADDITIONAL SKILL, EXPERIENCE THAT HE BRINGS TO THE POSITION.>>ANYBODY ELSE?>>I THINK IT’S UNFORTUNATE THAT, SINCE MY PERCEPTION OF SCOTT AS A CANDIDATE IS SO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE LIST YOU WENT THROUGH ON EACH OF THE POINTS. I THINK IT’S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE DIDN’T HAVE THE KIND OF SUPPORT FOR OTHER CANDIDATES THAT WE DID FOR HIM TODAY. AND THAT ALSO THE DETRACTORS DID NOT MAKE A CASE, IN MY WRITTEN DOCUMENTS OR IN MY PHONE CALLS. BECAUSE I DIDN’T GET ANY OF THAT. SO, I’M EVALUATING HIM ON THE WORK THAT I’VE SEEN HIM DO IN THE INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT. NOT LIVINGSTON BECAUSE I WASN’T FAMILIAR WITH HIM THEN. BUT I VIEW HIM AS A PERSON WITH STELLAR CHARACTER. INCREDIBLE ADMINISTRATIVE ABILITIES WITH THE MENTAL, EMOTIONAL, AND PHILOSOPHICAL REACH TO IMPACT CHILDREN IN MICHIGAN, AS THIS BOARD HAS SAID OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT IT WANTS TO SEE HAPPEN. I THINK HE HAS THE SPECIAL ED EXPERIENCE, THE ABILITY TO FUNCTION PRE-SCHOOL THROUGH EMPLOYMENT THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD– THAT KIND OF EXPERIENCE. WE’VE CERTAINLY HAD THE VISION OF IT, BUT NOT THE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN THE YEARS THAT I’VE BEEN ON THE BOARD. SO, I WOULD STRONGLY ADVOCATE THAT PEOPLE TAKE A SOLID LOOK AT HIS CANDIDACY.>>ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO ADVOCATE?>>WELL, YEAH. OF COURSE I ADVOCATE FOR SCOTT FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT I SAID. NOW, WHEN YOU INTRODUCED YOUR THREE PERSPECTIVES, YOU SAID SOME OF THE REASONS WHY YOU DID NOT LIKE THIS ONE OR THIS ONE OR THIS ONE. I DIDN’T DO THAT. I JUST SAID THE POSITIVE THINGS. SO, I WANT TO GO BACK AND SAY WHY I HAVE RESERVATIONS FOR BRIAN. AND THE RESERVATIONS ARE HIS CAREER LADDER. THAT IS A BIG THING FOR ME. ANOTHER ONE IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN READING IN THE PAPER. WHETHER IT HAPPENED FIVE OR TEN YEARS AGO, THAT’S IRRELEVANT. AND HIS ANSWER “IT IS WHAT IT IS.” AND SO I DIDN’T LIKE THAT FLIPPANT WAY OF EXPRESSING SOMETHING THAT IS VERY VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS JOB. BECAUSE IT CAN COME BACK AND EITHER TARNISH THE DEPARTMENT OR TARNISH THE POSITION AS STATE SUPERINTENDENT. SO, I HAVE RESERVATIONS ON THAT. ANOTHER RESERVATION THAT I HAVE IS THAT HE CRITICIZED THE DEPARTMENT THAT HE’S GOING TO BE WORKING WITH. SO, TO ME, THAT IS A BIG THING, BECAUSE THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ARE THE PEOPLE HE’S GOING TO BE LEADING. AND WHEN HE SAYS NEGATIVE THINGS ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT, I HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THAT. AND THEN WITH VICKIE, SHE WAS MARVELOUS. SHE KNOWS HER STUFF, AS WE SAY. SHE KNOWS HER STUFF. BUT, IF YOU CANNOT GET ALONG WITH, WELL, PERSPECTIVES ARE REALITY. I DON’T KNOW HER PERSONALLY. I’VE NEVER WORKED WITH HER. BUT THE PERCEPTION IS SHE WOULD HAVE PROBLEMS WORKING WITH SOME SECT OR SOME OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS PICTURE. WITH SCOTT, HE HAS THE RIGHT SPIRIT, THE RIGHT CAREER LADDER. HE HAS THE RIGHT EXPERIENCE, THE RIGHT DIMENSION FOR THIS POSITION. I THINK HE WOULD GET ALONG WELL WITH THE DEPARTMENT. HE WOULD GET ALONG WITH THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE, AND CERTAINLY WITH THE PEOPLE. THERE’S A LOT OF SUPPORT HERE. YOU SAID “THAT LUPE THINKS THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT.” YES IT IS. IF YOU DON’T’ HAVE PEOPLE THAT FOLLOW YOU, HOW CAN YOU BE THE LEADER? A LEADER IS NOT A LEADER IF HE OR SHE DOESN’T HAVE FOLLOWERS. SO, THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT. WHEN YOU RUN FOR OFFICE, YOU NEED PEOPLE BEHIND YOU. THAT’S JUST A COMMON THING THAT YOU DO. IF TWO OTHER CANDIDATES HAD BEEN SMART, THEY WOULD’VE DONE THE SAME THING, OR HAD GOTTEN PEOPLE TO DO IT FOR THEM. SHOWING SUPPORT FROM COMMUNITY, PARENTS, AND STAKEHOLDERS IS VERY IMPORTANT. SO, I SAY THAT SCOTT HAS ALL OF THE ABOVE AND I CAST MY VOTE FOR HIM.>>PREFERENCE.>>PREFERENCE, I’M SORRY.>>GIVEN THAT, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. IS ANYONE INTERESTED IN CHANGING THAT INITIAL PREFERENCE VOTING? APPRECIATE THE STRONG ADVOCACY AND DIFFICULTY OF ALL THIS. GIVEN THAT, I WOULD SUGGEST WE FOCUS ON BRIAN AND VICKIE. BRIAN HAD SIX FIRST OR SECOND PLACE PREFERENCES. AND VICKIE HAD FIVE FIRST OR SECOND PLACE PREFERENCES. AND I HAVE SOME MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT EACH OF THEM. AND WE CAN GO AROUND AGAIN FOR EVERYBODY AND SHARE PERSPECTIVE AND PERSUASIVENESS ON FIRST OR SECOND. CASANDRA?>>IN HIGHER ED–>>IS THIS A GOOD STORY?>>THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENCY HAS CHANGED. SO, I’M MAKING AN ANALOGY HERE. IT USED TO BE THAT THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT WAS TO BE AN ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY. AND NOW THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT IS MUCH MORE OF AN EXTERNAL ROLE. YOU HAVE INTERNAL PEOPLE THAT HANDLE THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS OF THE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY. AND YOUR ROLE AS PRESIDENT IS TO BE OUT TALKING TO DONORS, MAKING CONNECTIONS, TESTIFYING IN FRONT OF THE LEGISLATURE. AND I SEE THE SUPERINTENDENT ROLE FOLLOWING THAT SAME TRAJECTORY. AT ONE TIME, THE SUPERINTENDENT MIGHT’VE — WAS REQUIRED TO BE THE DAY TO DAY MANAGER/OPERATOR OF THE DEPARTMENT. AND I THINK THAT STILL EXISTS. BUT I SEE THAT ROLE CHANGING TO BEING SOMEONE WHO IS MORE — HAS TO MAKE THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND BUILD CONNECTIONS. AND THAT’S WHY I LEAN TOWARDS BRIAN, BECAUSE I THINK HE HAS A BACKGROUND OF DOING THAT. AND I THINK WE SAID FROM THE BEGINNING THAT WE WERE WILLING TO LOOK AT CANDIDATES WHO WERE NOT TRADITIONAL CANDIDATES, WHO HAD MAYBE DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS THAT BROUGHT THEM TO THIS POSITION, AS OPPOSED TO JUST COMING UP THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL RANKS. AND REALLY THAT WAS THE FOCUS FOR ME IN WHY I SELECTED BRIAN. BECAUSE HE HAS SO MANY YEARS OF WORKING DIRECTLY WITH LEGISLATORS, UNDERSTANDING THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. AND I DO THINK HE HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS. AND I THINK HE’S DONE IT IN A WAY THAT HAS NOT BEEN OFF-PUTTING TO ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. AND I ALSO WANT TO MAKE VERY CLEAR THAT I AM NOT IN OPPOSITION TO ANYONE. I’M SIMPLY ARGUING ON BEHALF OF A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT I OPPOSE EITHER OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES. BUT THAT’S WHERE MY THINKING IS.>>MICHELLE?>>WELL, I THINK, LOOKING AT THE CRITERIA, AND LOOKING AT THE CANDIDATES, I THINK THAT VICKIE FITS ALL THE THINGS WE SAID WE WANTED IN A CANDIDATE AND SUPERINTENDENT. AND ONE OF THOSE, WHICH I THINK EVEN LUPE SAID WAS IMPORTANT TO HER WAS THAT THEY HAVE TEACHING EXPERIENCE AND LOCAL SCHOOL EXPERIENCE. AND THAT SHE HAS. SHE ALSO SEEMS — THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE, LIKE I SAID, THEY ALL WERE VERY GOOD. BUT SOMETIMES, SPEAKING IN GENERAL TERMS, IT’S HARD TO GET THE IDEA OF WHAT THEY’RE ACTUALLY GOING TO IMPLEMENT. AND THE CLARITY WHICH — VICKIE SPOKE ABOUT ALL THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND IDEAS THAT HAD BEEN TESTED AND HAD BEEN SUCCESSFUL. AND KNOWING THE RESEARCH AND UNDERSTANDING. SHE HAD THE RURAL. SHE HAD PONTIAC, THE URBAN. SHE HAS WORKED IN A VARIETY OF SETTINGS. AND SHE’S GOT A LENGTH. THE LENGTH OF TIME AND DIVERSITY OF EXPERIENCE AND THE RESEARCH AND HAS PROVEN HERSELF. I LOOK AT SORT OF THE LENGTH OF TIME, FOR INSTANCE, THAT SCOTT HAS. AND, UNLESS I’M WRONG, IT’S ABOUT TWELVE YEARS IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, NONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN, UNLESS I’M WRONG, AND CORRECT ME, AS A PRINCIPAL OR TEACHER. SO, AND I WOULD SAY– NONE OF IT IS WITH VERY DIVERSE COMMUNITIES –>>WE’RE JUST TALKING ABOUT VICKIE AND BRIAN NOW.>>RIGHT.>>RELATIVE TO THOSE TWO, SHARE YOUR PERSPECTIVE.>>OKAY, SORRY. WELL, WHAT MAKES HER STAND OUT TO ME IS THAT SHE DOES HAVE ALL THIS EXPERIENCE IN VERY DIVERSE GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC AREAS AND SHE’S GOT IDEAS THAT ARE EFFECTIVE, THAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN EFFECTIVE, AND THAT, A LOT OF TIMES, SHE’S IMPLEMENTED PERSONALLY. AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT WE NEED.>>AND VIS A VIS BRIAN?>>AGAIN, I LIKE– YOU KNOW, BRIAN IS– AGAIN, AS RICHARD POINTED OUT, THEIR STYLES ARE MUCH DIFFERENT. BRIAN, I THINK, IS SOMEONE WHO’S GOING TO LISTEN, TO THE DEPARTMENT, TO PEOPLE, THE BOARD. AND HE ALSO HAS THAT EXPERIENCE IN THE DISTRICT. BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, HE’S OBVIOUSLY BEEN ABLE TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THIS VERY CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENT OF ALL THIS CHANGE THAT’S BEEN HAPPENING, AND THAT SPEAKS A LOT TO ME, THAT HE’S BEEN ABLE TO JUGGLE IT AND SUCCESSFULLY HANDLE IT. BUT AGAIN, MY PREFERENCE IS STILL VICKIE WITH BRIAN SECOND.>>RICHARD, WHAT ARE YOUR REFLECTIONS ON THE TWO?>>WELL, AS DR. MARKAVITCH MENTIONED– CONCEDED, TWO OR THREE TIMES, SHE’S BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD IN THE PUBLIC, AND PERSONALLY, I DON’T THINK SHE’S BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD AT ALL. I THINK THAT’S HER GREAT APPEAL FOR SOME MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD. BUT IF WE TAKE HER COMMENTS AT FACE VALUE, I THINK WE PROBABLY DON’T WANT SOMEONE WHO’S PRONE TO BEING MISUNDERSTOOD COMMUNICATING FROM THE BOARD TO THE FIELD TO THE LEGISLATURE, SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND, OBVIOUSLY, MR. WHISTON HAS THE LOBBYING EXPERIENCE. THEY BOTH HAVE STRENGTHS, IN SOME WAYS COMPLEMENTARY. AND IT REALLY DEPENDS WHAT THE BOARD WANTS TO GET DONE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.>>KAREN, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR YOU TO SHARE A PERSPECTIVE ON THESE TWO, NOT TO GET A PREFERENCE VOTING, BUT THE GOVERNOR’S PERSPECTIVE IS VERY IMPORTANT.>>YOU KNOW, I REALLY DON’T BELIEVE THAT I COULD REPRESENT THAT WELL IN THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW. I JUST DON’T HAVE ENOUGH TIME IN THAT OFFICE FOR A FAIR REPRESENTATION OF THAT FOR YOU RIGHT NOW. I THINK THAT MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS ON OUR COMMITMENT TO WORKING WITH WHOEVER THIS BOARD CHOOSES IS– REMAINS, THAT COMMITMENT TO WORKING WITH WHOEVER THIS BOARD CHOOSES. THAT’S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. YOU’RE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND YOU BEAR THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON YOUR SHOULDERS TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMON GOOD. I WILL JUST REITERATE THAT OUR PREFERENCE IS THAT YOU SERIOUSLY CONSIDER AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS GREAT RELATIONAL QUALITY AND CAN INCORPORATE ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS AT THE TABLE, NOT JUST THE ONES SITTING AT THIS TABLE RIGHT NOW, BUT ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS AT THE TABLE.>>THANK YOU. EILEEN.>>I RESPECT VICKIE AND BRIAN TREMENDOUSLY, BUT FOR ME, THERE’S AN OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW IN THE STATE, WITH THE ADEQUACY STUDY COMING UP, TO TAKE THE THINGS WE’VE SAID ARE OUR GOALS AND VALUES FOR OUR CHILDREN AND FIND A NEW DISCUSSION. BOTH OF THE CANDIDATES YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT ARE FROM ONE COUNTY– OAKLAND INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT. I AM SEARCHING FOR A FRESH VOICE AND A FRESH ROLE FOR PUTTING THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE LAST FOUR YEARS BEHIND US THAT WERE DUE TO A LOT OF LEGISLATIVE MISUNDERSTANDINGS. BECAUSE OF THAT, I TRULY THINK WE’RE GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION WITH EITHER OF THESE, NOT BECAUSE THEY’RE NOT GREAT PEOPLE, BUT BECAUSE THEY’RE PEOPLE THAT WILL MAINTAIN THE DIRECTION THAT WE’VE BEEN ON, WHICH IS NOT A BAD ONE, BUT IT HASN’T GOTTEN US THE RESULTS WE’RE AFTER. SO I’M CONCERNED ABOUT VICKIE, WHO WAS ABLE TO CERTAINLY ADDRESS THAT SHE TAKES DIRECTION FROM HER BOARD, BUT SHE DID NOT ADDRESS WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT ABOUT THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS THERE’VE BEEN ABOUT HER PERSONAL VIEWS VERSUS THE PERCEPTION IN LANSING OF WHAT SHE BELIEVES. AND FOR BRIAN, I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT IT’S TOO BIG A JUMP FOR A NON-TRADITIONAL CANDIDATE TO GO FROM THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENCY TO THE COMPLEXITIES, FOR EXAMPLE, OF TESTING. WOULD THAT WE COULD DO TESTING BASED ON WHAT PARENTS WANT, WHICH IS A VERY GOOD THING, TO KNOW THAT THEY’RE ACHIEVING. BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS, IT CAN’T BE THAT WAY, AND YET THAT WAS A TENANT AT HIS FIRST INTERVIEW, AND I’M NOT SURE THAT HE REALLY UNDERSTOOD THE THING. THAT IS A HUGE ISSUE FOR US. WE WANT WHAT’S RIGHT FOR CHILDREN. WE ALL DO. BUT IF YOU CAN’T TEST, IF YOU GO FOR TESTING THAT DOESN’T TEST OUR STANDARDS, WE’RE IN VIOLATION OF OUR OWN LAWS, NOT TO MENTION FEDERAL ONES. BEYOND THAT, I DON’T BELIEVE I CAN– I WILL CONTINUE, AS YOU GO AROUND THE TABLE, TO TRY TO LEND INSIGHT ON THE ISSUES YOU BRING UP, BUT I DON’T MATCH EITHER OF THESE TWO CANDIDATES TO WHAT YOU SAID YOU WANT OUR GOAL TO BE, WHICH IS MEETING THE GAPS, TRYING TO MOVE CHILDREN FROM THEIR FIRST CONTACT WITH SCHOOL INTO JOB PLACEMENTS THAT ARE PRODUCTIVE, FILLING THOSE 80,000 JOBS WE KNOW ARE OPEN IN STEM AREAS. AND I DON’T FEEL THAT EITHER OF THESE CANDIDATES WILL BRING THE SAME ABILITY TO PERFORM ON THAT THAT SCOTT MENZEL WOULD’VE.>>LET ME JUST REITERATE. I BELIEVE, SEEING THE PREFERENCES, THAT THERE WERE NOT ENOUGH PREFERENCES TO REFLECT THAT SCOTT WOULD LIKELY GET THE VOTES, AND THERE WERE FIVE OR SIX FIRSTS OR SECONDS FOR BRIAN OR VICKIE, SO I WAS TRYING TO ENCOURAGE US ALL TO–>>THERE WERE THREE FOR SCOTT MENZEL IN FIRST PLACE, AND HE’S BEEN ELIMINATED FROM THIS IN PREFERENCE TO TWO OTHER CANDIDATES WHO COME FROM OAKLAND COUNTY AND ARE VERY SIMILAR IN A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WOULD DO. I WOULD POSIT TO YOU THAT ALTHOUGH YOU SAY THAT, THAT THIS IS A REFORM DISCUSSION VERSUS A MAINTENANCE DISCUSSION. AND I THINK THAT, PROBABLY, THE BOARD NEEDS TO FACE THAT, BECAUSE IT’LL BE PERCEIVED THAT WAY OUTSIDE THE BOARD.>>I DON’T AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK ALL THREE OF THEM WANTED TO MAKE REFORMS. THEY WANT TO TAKE A NEW LOOK. I THINK THAT VICKIE AND BRIAN BOTH WANT TO TAKE A NEW LOOK AT DIFFERENT WAYS OF ACHIEVING WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. AND I THINK VICKIE WAS TALKING ABOUT PONTIAC BEING AN EXAMPLE OF MAYBE A WAY OF DOING IT. AND BRIAN ALSO HAD EXPERIENCE AT SCHOOLS IN DEARBORN THAT WERE SUCCESSFUL IN A NOT NECESSARILY ADVANTAGED DISTRICT. SO I THINK THEY ALL WANT TO COME AND– THEY ALL SAID PRACTICALLY THE SAME THING ABOUT COMING INTO THE DEPARTMENT, IN ANSWER TO LUPE’S QUESTION ABOUT THEIR FIRST 50 DAYS, OR 100 DAYS, WHATEVER–>>NOW 50 DAYS.>>JUST 50 DAYS? BUT THEY WOULD ALL DO THE SAME THING. THEY’D ALL MEET WITH THE STAFF, LISTEN, MEET WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, TRY TO CORRECT ANY PERCEPTIONS THAT PEOPLE HAD, MAYBE REARRANGE A FEW THINGS, BUT THEY ALL THOUGHT THAT– I DIDN’T THINK BRIAN WAS CRITICAL OF THE DEPARTMENT. I THOUGHT HE WAS COMPLIMENTARY. THERE WAS VERY GOOD SERVICES PROVIDED. MAYBE THERE WERE ONE OR TWO THINGS HE FELT HE COULD IMPROVE, BUT BEFORE HE DID THAT, HE WOULD SIT DOWN AND LISTEN, MEET WITH EVERYBODY. NONE OF THEM FELT THEY’D WALK IN HERE AND TURN EVERYTHING UPSIDE DOWN, OR KEEP EVERYTHING THE SAME. AND THAT’S TRUE OF ANY CHIEF EXECUTIVE WHO WALKS INTO A NEW SITUATION. THAT’S WHAT YOU DO. YOU LISTEN, MEET WITH PEOPLE, TALK WITH PEOPLE, AND THEY ALL TALKED ABOUT NOT BEING SUCCESSFUL IN DOING WHAT WE WANT TO DO, SO HOW DO WE DO IT DIFFERENTLY? THEY DON’T WANT TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE’RE DOING, NECESSARILY. THEY WANT TO COME UP WITH SOME NEW APPROACHES. THAT’S MY INTERPRETATION OF WHAT I HEARD YESTERDAY AND TODAY. I GOT TIRED FROM TALKING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE AND HEARING FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE. SO I DISAGREE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATION–>>I WAS TRYING TO–>>–REFORM, AND I THINK THAT’S JUST PLAIN WRONG.>>SEEING, I THINK, A STRONG PREFERENCE AMONG THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD FOR EITHER BRIAN OR VICKIE, TRYING TO FOCUS DISCUSSION ON TRYING TO HELP US RECONCILE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. SO THAT’S WHAT I THOUGHT WAS CLEAR IN THESE KIND OF INITIAL PREFERENCE VOTING, BECAUSE THE NEXT STEP COULD BE TO HAVE EVERYONE EXPRESS, AFTER WE NARRATE DISCUSSION SOME MORE, A FIRST PREFERENCE AMONG THOSE TWO. IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT THAT, OR– YEAH, RICHARD.>>WELL, I WANT TO RESPECTFULLY CHALLENGE THE CHAIR ON THAT. BRIAN ONLY GOT TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES, WHEREAS SCOTT GOT THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES. SO I THINK THAT THE BODY ITSELF SHOULD VOTE TO EITHER ENDORSE YOUR RULING OR NOT BEFORE WE PROCEED UNDER THAT ASSUMPTION.>>AND I KNOW VICKIE GOT TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES AND THREE SECOND PLACE VOTES AS WELL, SO I’D CERTAINLY ASK FOR A MOTION THAT WE FOCUS DISCUSSION ON BRIAN AND VICKIE, SEEING AS I DON’T SEE THE VOTES FOR SCOTT. SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO NOMINATE SCOTT ANYTIME.>>I DON’T THINK WE’VE HEARD FROM–>>YEAH, BUT I WAS ALSO TRYING TO FOCUS ON THOSE TWO, BUT LET’S FINISH THAT PART AND PEOPLE CAN REFLECT ON ALL THREE, IF THEY’D LIKE TO CONTINUE. BUT I WAS–>>BUT I WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT RICHARD IS SAYING. WILL YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY THE VOTE THAT WE TOOK– HOW MANY GOT FIRST PLACE, HOW MANY GOT– I WANT TO SEE WHAT RICHARD IS SAYING.>>I HAVE: CASANDRA HAD BRIAN FIRST, VICKIE SECOND. MICHELLE HAD BRIAN SECOND, VICKIE FIRST. RICHARD HAD SCOTT FIRST, BRIAN SECOND. EILEEN HAD SCOTT FIRST AND NO SECOND. KATHY HAD VICKIE FIRST, BRIAN SECOND. PAM HAD VICKIE FIRST, BRIAN SECOND. AND I HAD BRIAN FIRST, VICKIE SECOND.>>WHAT DID I HAVE?>>YOU HAD–>>YOU HAD ONE FOR SCOTT– I’M SORRY. AND NO SECOND.>>OKAY, SO WHAT DOES– TELL ME THE COUNT, NOW, PLEASE.>>SO THE COUNT IS SIX FIRST OR SECOND PLACE VOTES FOR BRIAN, FIVE FIRST OR SECOND PLACE VOTES FOR VICKIE, AND THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR SCOTT.>>AND MY POINT WAS THAT THERE WERE THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR SCOTT, THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR VICKIE, AND TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR BRIAN.>>IS THAT TRUE?>>YES.>>SO THEN HOW CAN BRIAN BE FIRST?>>IT’S A WAY TO EXPRESS SOME BROADER PREFERENCES OF THE BOARD, IS– ON BALANCE, SIX OF US CHOSE BRIAN FOR EITHER FIRST OR SECOND, AND NOT SCOTT, FIVE OF US CHOSE VICKIE AS EITHER FIRST OR SECOND, AND NOT SCOTT, THREE CHOSE SCOTT IN FIRST AND NO SECOND.>>MAY I SAY, WE COULD DO IT EITHER WAY, BUT I THINK IT BEHOOVES US TO VOTE AS TO WHICH WAY WE’RE GOING TO DO IT.>>WE COULD VOTE ON WHETHER WE WANT TO ADVANCE DISCUSSION OF BRIAN AND VICKIE, OR WE COULD GO RIGHT TO A DIFFERENT STRATEGY, WHICH WOULD BE TO TAKE A PREFERENCE POLL OF WHAT THE FIRST PLACE OF THE VOTING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD IS.>>I DON’T THINK THE ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS THE VOTE. I THINK THE ISSUE IS JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION. SO BY DOING THIS, I THINK– YOU LOOKED FIRST AT SCOTT HAVING THREE FIRST VOTES, THEREFORE GIVING THE THREE OF YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS WHY YOU THOUGHT HE SHOULD BE NUMBER ONE, AND NOW WE’RE JUST GOING AROUND TALKING TO THE OTHER ONES WHO HAD OTHER NUMBER ONES ON WHY THEY THINK THEIRS IS NUMBER ONE.>>SO, IN THE FIRST PLACE, YOU ALL WHO HAD SCOTT IN FIRST PLACE TRYING TO PERSUADE ANYONE ELSE TO CHANGE THEIR VOTE. SCOTT HAD THE LEAST NUMBER OF FIRST OR SECOND PLACE VOTES IN TOTAL.>>BUT I’M NOT SURE THAT KATHLEEN FINISHED HER CONVERSATION, AND PAMELA HASN’T HAD A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN YET, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE CONTINUE THAT BEFORE WE GET INTO ANOTHER VOTE OR QUESTIONING THE VOTE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THAT’S MY RECOMMENDATION.>>WELL, TRULY, I DON’T FEEL COMFORTABLE CONTINUING, SAYING ANYTHING, UNTIL I UNDERSTAND THE COUNT.>>BUT, LUPE, YOU’VE SAID A LOT. AND KATHLEEN HASN’T HAD A CHANCE TO REALLY SAY MUCH, AND PAMELA HASN’T HAD A CHANCE TO SAY ANYTHING.>>WELL, FINISH, THEN I’M NEXT, BECAUSE IT’S GOING TO BE MY TURN NEXT.>>PAMELA HASN’T HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK YET, SO MAYBE SHE COULD SPEAK FIRST, BEFORE YOU.>>BUT I HAVEN’T SPOKEN YET. AM I NEXT IN LINE OR NOT?>>YOU HAVE SPOKEN.>>YOU’RE NOT THE CHAIR. AM I NEXT IN LINE?>>I WAS ATTEMPTING TO SUGGEST, WITH CONSENSUS, THAT WE FOCUS ON BRIAN AND VICKIE, SENSING THERE WASN’T– THERE WAS STRONGER SUPPORT FOR EITHER OF THOSE AMONG THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD. YOU’RE– PEOPLE ARE SUGGESTING THEY DON’T WANT TO DO THAT, OR SOME PEOPLE, A FEW PEOPLE. SO WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THAT PROCESS, OR WE COULD HAVE A VOTE ON WHETHER TO NARROW THE FIELD BY EMBRACING THE FIRST PREFERENCES OF THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD FOR EITHER BRIAN OR VICKIE, AND FORCING THE FOCUS ON TRYING TO DECIDE BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM.>>I OBJECT TO YOUR PHRASING, BECAUSE SCOTT AND VICKIE HAVE THE FIRST PLACE VOTES. THEY’D BE TIED 3 TO 3. THOSE ARE THE TWO WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING. [ OVERLAPPING CHATTER ]>>THERE IS NO CONSENSUS.>>I MEAN, THAT’S RIGHT. WE’RE TRYING TO MOVE TOWARD A CONSENSUS. MORE OF US ARE PREFERRING BRIAN THAN–>>I MOVE THAT WE CONSIDER SCOTT MENZEL AND VICKIE MARKAVITCH AS HAVING EACH ACHIEVED TIED IN THE NUMBER OF FIRST PLACE VOTES.>>SECOND.>>IS THERE– DOES SOMEONE SECOND?>>SECOND.>>I THINK THIS IS NOT REFLECTING, CERTAINLY, THE OVERALL PREFERENCES. LET ME TAKE A STRATEGY THAT TIM RECOMMENDED, AND SEE WHERE THAT LANDS US. AND WE DID THIS, AS YOU KNOW, IN PUBLIC A COUPLE TIMES BEFORE, WHICH IS GO AROUND THE TABLE AND HAVE EVERYONE IDENTIFY A FIRST PLACE VOTE, A PREFERENCE.>>CAN PAMELA SPEAK?>>I’M SORRY, PAM, YEAH.>>BEFORE WE DO THIS?>>YEAH.>>OR NO ONE HAS TO CHANGE THEIR POSITION FROM–>>RIGHT.>>YEAH.>>I DON’T KNOW WHAT THAT DOES.>>POINT OF ORDER. YOU’RE ASKING US TO RESCIND A MOTION AND CONTINUE.>>THERE WAS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. WE COULD VOTE FOR OR AGAINST IT.>>YEAH.>>I GAVE UP MY CHAIR ROLE, BECAUSE I DIDN’T WANT TO BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS, SO I THINK THAT’S OKAY, BUT–>>I’LL BE VOTING NO. I’LL JUST TELL YOU THAT.>>AND I’LL BE VOTING NO.>>OBVIOUSLY, NO.>>SO WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION. SO CALL TO QUESTION.>>IF I MAY SAY THIS, I THINK YOU COULD CALL TO QUESTION.>>SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO MOVE VICKIE AND SCOTT AS THE TWO FIRST PLACE PREFERENCE VOTERS TO– FOR THE CONSIDERATION. IS THERE A SECOND?>>LUPE.>>OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR– AND NO FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.>>AYE.>>ALL OPPOSED?>>NO.>>I DON’T– CAN WE DO A COUNT ON THAT?>>YEAH. ALL RIGHT. LET’S HEAR IT AGAIN. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.>>AYE.>>WHAT ARE WE VOTING FOR?>>YOU’RE VOTING FOR YOUR MOTION TO MOVE TO CENTER ON VICKIE AND SCOTT AS THE TWO DISCUSSANTS TO FURTHER. THAT’S THE MOTION THAT’S BEEN MADE, AS HAVING THE MOST FIRST PLACE BALLOTS.>>IS THERE DISCUSSION?>>THE DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD, BUT YOU CAN HAVE SOME MORE. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION?>>OKAY. I GUESS I WANT TO SEE IT IN WRITING, ON A CHART. HOW MANY GOT NUMBER– HOW MANY GOT FIRST PLACE, HOW MANY GOT SECOND PLACE, HOW MANY GOT THIRD PLACE. I WANT TO SEE IT IN WRITING SO I CAN SEE, IN MY BILINGUAL MIND, HOW MANY EACH ONE RECEIVED. AND THEN I CAN VOTE, BUT I CAN’T– I DON’T–>>ALL WE’RE VOTING– LET ME JUST RECAP. BRIAN WHISTON HAD TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES AND FOUR SECOND PLACE VOTES IN AN INITIAL PREFERENCE VOTE. VICKIE MARKAVITCH HAD THREE– A TOTAL OF SIX. VICKIE HAD THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES AND TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR A TOTAL OF FIVE FIRST OR SECOND. SCOTT MENZEL HAD THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES, NO SECOND PLACE VOTES, A TOTAL OF THREE FIRST OR SECOND PLACE VOTES. THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO MOVE THE TWO FIRST PLACE VOTES-GETTERS TO FINAL CONSIDERATION AND ELIMINATE BRIAN WHISTON FROM FURTHER DISCUSSION. THAT’S THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. IT’S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR– ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION?>>I DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT TALLY WORKS. I DON’T UNDERSTAND–>>IT’S JUST A TALLY OF PREFERENCES, BASED ON– ARTICULATED FIRST AND SECOND, BASED ON THE VOTING BOARD MEMBERS.>>BUT WHY NOT JUST FIRST?>>WELL, AT SOME POINT, WE’RE GOING TO NEED TO GET THERE. BUT THIS IS A WAY FOR US TO TRY TO NARROW THE FIELD BY ARTICULATING PREFERENCES, AS WE’VE DONE BEFORE. SO WE’VE GOT, AGAIN, SIX TOTAL FOR BRIAN WHISTON, IN TERMS OF FIRST AND SECOND PLACE VOTES, TWO OF WHICH ARE FIRST PLACE. THREE– A TOTAL OF FIRST PLACE VOTES AND TWO SECOND PLACE VOTES FOR VICKIE MARKAVITCH– A TOTAL OF FIVE FIRST OR SECOND PLACE VOTES. THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES FOR SCOTT MENZEL, WITH NO SECOND PLACE VOTES, AND THAT’S A TOTAL OF THREE. SO AGAIN, LET’S CALL TO QUESTION ON THIS MOTION, WHICH WAS TO ELIMINATE BRIAN WHISTON FROM FURTHER DISCUSSION AND TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ABOUT VICKIE MARKAVITCH AND SCOTT MENZEL, BASED ON RICHARD’S MOTION, WHICH WAS THAT THEY HAD THREE FIRST PLACE VOTES EACH. THAT’S THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.>>AYE.>>ALL THOSE OPPOSED?>>NO.>>I BELIEVE THE NOS CARRY. I’M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO– A SIMILAR MOTION–>>– MAKE MOTIONS?>>WHAT’S THAT?>>CAN THE CHAIR MAKE MOTIONS?>>YEAH. I’M–>>OH, OKAY.>>SO I’M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, BASED ON THOSE INITIAL PREFERENCES OF SIX FIRST OR SECOND FOR BRIAN, FIVE FOR VICKIE FIRST OR SECOND, AND THREE FIRST OR SECOND FOR SCOTT, THAT WE NARROW DISCUSSION TO BRIAN WHISTON AND VICKIE MARKAVITCH, AND ELIMINATE SCOTT MENZEL FROM FURTHER DISCUSSION. IS THERE A SECOND?>>DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THIS? I MEAN, CAN’T WE JUST HAVE THE CONVERSATION?>>WELL, RICHARD ASKED FOR A MOTION TO BASICALLY DO WHAT I WAS ENCOURAGING US TO DO, GIVEN THOSE VOTING PREFERENCES THAT WE’VE SEEN. SO I’D APPRECIATE A SECOND AND A VOTE ON THAT MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ABOUT BRIAN WHISTON AND VICKIE MARKAVITCH, AND–>>–JUST CONTINUE TO TALK, RIGHT?>>YEAH, I DON’T–>>YEAH, WE’LL CONTINUE TO TALK.>>I DON’T THINK WE NEED– I MEAN.>>I THINK WE SHOULD JUST CONTINUE TO TALK WITHOUT PASSING A MOTION.>>ALL RIGHT, THEN IF WE DON’T NEED A MOTION, THAT’S FINE, BUT THAT IS WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING APPEARS TO BE THE GLOBAL PREFERENCE OF THE BOARD.>>AND THIS IS HELPFUL TO ME. IT TELLS ME THAT ALL THREE NAMES ARE STILL IN CONSIDERATION. THE MOTION WOULD’VE BEEN TO ELIMINATE SOMEONE FROM CONSIDERATION, SO– AND THAT’S WHAT’S BEEN CLARIFIED BY ALL OF US. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.>>I THINK WE DO NEED TO ELIMINATE SOMEONE FROM CONSIDERATION AT SOME POINT.>>YES, AGREED.>>SO WHY DON’T WE FINISH WITH LUPE AND PAM SHARING PERSPECTIVE ON, I WAS ENCOURAGING, THE TWO THAT APPEAR TO HAVE THE STRONGEST OVERALL PREFERENCE, BUT, CERTAINLY, CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT SCOTT, ABSENT ANY FORMAL ELIMINATION AT THIS STAGE. SO LET’S FINISH THAT, AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO VOTE TO ELIMINATE SOMEONE FROM CONSIDERATION.>>WE HAVEN’T GOT THERE YET.>>OKAY.>>WE ALSO HAVE A DIFFICULT DECISION. THEY WERE ALL GOOD, SO, YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT TAKE A WHILE.>>LUPE OR PAM, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE TO SAY ABOUT BRIAN, VICKIE, AND SCOTT?>>YES. YOU KNOW, FOR ME, FOR VICKIE, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE DIVERSITY OF THE DIFFERENT CANDIDATES AS FAR AS THE POPULATIONS THEY WORK WITH. AND MICHELLE, YOU’VE POINTED THIS OUT: VICKIE WAS STRONGLY ABLE TO DEFINITELY SHOW THAT SHE’S WORKED WITH URBAN, SUBURBAN, RURAL, RICH, POOR, MID-INCOME PEOPLE AS WELL AS REFUGEE CHILDREN AND THOSE WITH ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE. SHE BROUGHT WITH HER THE DASHBOARD, WHICH WAS VERY IMPRESSIVE, THAT SHE WORKED WITH TOM McMILLIN TO PUT TOGETHER. I ALSO WAS IMPRESSED THE FACT THAT SHE WAS ABLE TO REDUCE DEFICIT WHILE IMPROVING ACHIEVEMENT, DEFINITELY POINTED OUT HOW THAT WAS DONE THROUGH COLLABORATION. RAPID TURNAROUND WITH A SPLIT BOARD, AND MENTIONED HOW SHE DID THAT WHILE EXPERIENCING CUTS IN FUNDING. SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS SHE POINTED OUT ON DAY 1: WORKING WITH THE GOVERNOR AS FAR AS HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT DOES THE REFORM DISTRICT LOOK LIKE. THERE WAS ONE OTHER POINT– USING THE ADEQUACY STUDY– NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT WOULD INCREASE MONEY, BUT LOOKING AT WAYS TO BETTER COLLABORATE AND LEVERAGE IT. I REALLY APPRECIATED HER POINTING THAT OUT. THERE WERE A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT I WAS ABLE TO COLLECT THAT SHE EMPHASIZED. YOU KNOW, I THINK, AS IT RELATES TO SCHOOL CHOICE, IT SOUNDS LIKE SHE HAD A STRONG HANDLE ON THAT, NOT OPPOSED TO CHARTERS, BUT REALLY GETTING A BETTER HANDLE AND HAVING BETTER COLLABORATION, AND SHE MENTIONED HOW SHE’S MET WITH CHARTERS AND WORKED WITH THE LEADS ON SOME OF THOSE ISSUES. GOING TO BRIAN– LET’S SEE HERE. YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I WILL JUST EMPHASIZE HIS EXPERIENCE AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER AND A SUPERINTENDENT, HIS EMPHASIS ON WORKING WITH PARENTS AND STUDENTS TO HELP THEM BE A PART OF THEIR– TAKING OWNERSHIP OF THEIR EDUCATION, HIS EXPERIENCE AS A LOBBYIST– ALL THE THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE THEM MY FIRST TWO PREFERENCES– OR, I’M SORRY– EXPERIENCE WITH THE LEGISLATURE. SO THERE’S OTHERS, BUT I THINK I’M GOOD WITH THAT.>>AND AGAIN, AS I REFLECT ON THESE CANDIDATES, VIS A VIS BRIAN AND VICKIE, I’VE SORT OF REFLECTED MY THOUGHTS ABOUT SCOTT, CERTAINLY, VICKIE, BOTH TODAY AND ARTICULATING IN KIND OF AN EDUCATION DIRECTION AND AGENDA, WAS VERY COMPELLING AND MORE NUANCED THAN WHAT IS UNDERSTOOD ABOUT HER. I HAVE THE SAME RESERVATIONS THAT RICHARD AND OTHERS HAD THAT IF THERE’S MISCOMMUNICATION OR MISUNDERSTANDINGS, OR, FOR WHATEVER REASON, AN INABILITY TO CONNECT AND LINK ARMS WITH STAKEHOLDERS IN THE FIELD, THAT THAT– AND THAT COULD BE OVERCOME BY JUST WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE VICKIE’S SINCERE EFFORTS– THAT IS A CHALLENGE FOR ALL OF US AND HER IN THIS ROLE. THAT’S WHY THE EXCELLENT ABILITY TO BUILD THESE RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE FIELD AND WORK TOGETHER WITH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS THAT I THINK BRIAN REPRESENTS ARE VERY STRONG. AND SOMEONE ALSO SAID, “LISTEN TO VERSUS TALK AT” EDUCATORS, THE STAFF, AND DEPARTMENT HERE, US, AND TRY TO REFLECT WELL THE EDUCATION AGENDA AND VISION. SO I WILL, CERTAINLY, FAVOR BRIAN, WITH VICKIE BEING SECOND AND SCOTT BEING MY THIRD CHOICE.>>SO WE CAN EITHER CONTINUE CONVERSATION, OR SHOULD WE TRY TO ELIMINATE ONE CANDIDATE SO WE CAN HAVE A VOTE THAT DOESN’T END UP 3-3-2?>>I CAN’T HEAR YOU, CASANDRA.>>I SAID, SHOULD WE CONTINUE CONVERSATION, OR TRY TO ELIMINATE ONE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT TWO CANDIDATES AS OPPOSED TO THREE?>>LET’S DO WHAT WE DID BEFORE, WHICH SEEMED TO WORK– WHY DON’T WE ASK THE QUESTION, BY SHOW OF HANDS, FOR EACH CANDIDATE, ARE YOU NOT WANTING TO ELIMINATE THAT CANDIDATE FROM CONSIDERATION, YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT CANDIDATE ON THE TABLE. SO LET’S GO IN ORDER THAT THEY APPEAR. THE FIRST CANDIDATE IS BRIAN WHISTON. WHO WOULD LIKE TO KEEP BRIAN IN CONSIDERATION FOR THIS POSITION?>>ON THE TABLE?>>YEAH. I SEE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, COUNTING MYSELF. OKAY.>>VICKIE MARKAVITCH. WHICH– WHO WOULD LIKE TO KEEP VICKIE MARKAVITCH ON THE TABLE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION? I SEE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE. SCOTT MENZEL. WHO WOULD LIKE TO KEEP SCOTT MENZEL ON THE TABLE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION? I SEE THREE. GIVEN THAT, I THINK IT’S APPROPRIATE AND CLEAR THAT WE FOCUS FURTHER DISCUSSION ON VICKIE AND BRIAN AND WEIGH THE TRADEOFFS AND MERITS FOR THEM AS SUPERINTENDENT. IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? ALL RIGHT. LET’S GO AROUND AGAIN, BRIAN VIS A VIS VICKIE. ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO SAY? AND PARTICULARLY, THOSE OF YOU WHOSE FIRST CHOICE WAS SCOTT MENZEL. AS YOU REFLECT ON THESE CHOICES, BETWEEN VICKIE AND BRIAN, TALK TO US ABOUT YOUR RELATIVE PERSPECTIVE OF THEIR STRENGTHS AND ABILITIES FOR THE JOB THAT WE NEED TO PULL TOGETHER TO HELP DO. RICHARD? LUPE? EILEEN?>>I WOULD SAY THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD, FIVE PEOPLE, HAVE STATED CLEARLY THAT THEY DO NOT CONSIDER A REFORM CANDIDATE TO BE A PRIORITY FOR THE BOARD, AND SO I WOULD CEDE CONTROL OF THIS TO THOSE OF YOU WHO WOULD PLAN TO SORT THIS OUT, BECAUSE TO ME, A REFORM CANDIDATE WAS A SIGNIFICANT PRIORITY: SOMEONE WHO MATCHED ALL THE THINGS WE’VE SAID, ALL THE DISCUSSIONS WE’VE HAD ABOUT OUR CHILDREN OVER AND OVER AGAIN THROUGH OUR MONTHLY MEETINGS. AND I CONSIDER BOTH OF THE CANDIDATES TO BE VERY GOOD PEOPLE. EITHER OF THEM BRING LIMITATIONS TO THE POSITION THAT I FEAR MAY GET US OUT OF FEDERAL COMPLIANCE OR MAY CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR US UNNECESSARILY WITH THE CONSTITUENCY WITH WHICH WE HAVE TO WORK, SO I WILL– NO MATTER WHO YOU CHOOSE, I WILL PUT FORWARD EVERY POSSIBLE EFFORT TO WORK WITH THEM, AND I CEDE CONTROL TO YOU ON THIS DISCUSSION.>>WELL, I MEAN, I CERTAINLY WOULD DIFFER WITH YOUR CHARACTERIZATION. I THINK WE ALL WANT A REFORM CANDIDATE WHO CAN HELP US BE EFFECTIVE IN MOVING REFORMS. I HOPE YOU DON’T ABDICATE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE AND MAKE A DECISION ON THE BOARD. WE ALL NEED TO PULL TOGETHER AND SELECT THE PERSON WE THINK IS, ON BALANCE, BY THIS BOARD, ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, GOING TO HELP US AND HELP MICHIGAN THE MOST. AT SOME POINT, EACH OF US, AS VOTING MEMBERS, WILL BE ASKED TO SHARE A PREFERENCE, AND I HOPE YOU WILL DO SO.>>I JUST SAID THAT I CANNOT CHOOSE BETWEEN THESE TWO CANDIDATES. I CONSIDER THEM TO BOTH BE VERY, VERY GOOD EDUCATORS AND VERY GOOD PEOPLE, BUT THEY DID NOT– EACH OF THEM BRINGS ISSUES TO THE TABLE FOR THIS JOB THAT CONCERN ME DEEPLY. AND I WILL DO EVERYTHING IN MY– WHOEVER IS ELECTED, I WILL DO EVERYTHING IN MY POWER TO WORK WITH THEM CONSTRUCTIVELY.>>LUPE AND RICHARD, IF YOU THINK ABOUT BRIAN AND VICKIE, ON BALANCE, GIVEN THEIR RELATIVE STRENGTHS, WHAT’S YOUR THINKING?>>OKAY. THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, A DEMOCRATIC GROUP. YOU’RE MY COLLEAGUES. YOU HAVE SPOKEN. BRIAN HAS THE MAJORITY, SO I WILL PUT MY SUPPORT FOR BRIAN.>>RICHARD, IF YOU WERE TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE?>>I THINK BRIAN HAS SOME GREAT THINGS TO BRING TO THE TABLE. FRANKLY, I THINK HIS STYLE WILL BE MORE WHAT THE BOARD MAJORITY WOULD LIKE, SOMEONE TO KIND OF BRING US TOGETHER AND WALK WITH US, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE TEMPERATE IN DEALING WITH THE PRESS. SO I– AND I’M FROM DEARBORN, SO I GUESS MY HOMETOWN GUY. ANYBODY WANT TO SHARE ANY OTHER PERSPECTIVES ON THESE TWO AND PERSUADE EACH OTHER?>>I WANT TO SAY THAT I COULD LIVE WITH ANY OF THE THREE, SO I COULD CERTAINLY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH EITHER OF THE TWO. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE EXCEPTION WITH THE TERM “REFORM” AND WHATEVER THAT MEANS.>>REFORM SCHOOL.>>YEAH. REFORM SCHOOL. [ LAUGHTER ]>>AND I THINK EVERYBODY, AS KATHY HAS SAID, WANTS TO SEE A CHANGE. I THINK THEY’RE ALL HERE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SEE CHANGE AND IMPROVEMENT. AND MAYBE THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO REFORM THE SO-CALLED REFORMS, BUT THEY– SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY’RE NOT, FOR THE STATUS QUO, REFORM, DOESN’T MEAN THAT THEY’RE NOT LOOKING TO IMPROVE THINGS AND MAKE THINGS BETTER FOR CHILDREN AND CERTAINLY, AREN’T AS CAPABLE AS SCOTT TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND AS VISIONARY AS HE IS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE THAT POINT.>>OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT BRIAN AND VICKIE THAT PEOPLE WANT TO SAY? THEN I WOULD SAY THE NEXT THING IS TO ASK ALL THE VOTING MEMBERS TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE FOR– A FIRST CHOICE PREFERENCE AMONG BRIAN OR VICKIE.>>I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE MORE THING ABOUT VICKIE THAT NO ONE HAS MENTIONED YET. IT WOULD BE A BREAKTHROUGH, IN A SENSE, FOR US TO HAVE A FEMALE SUPERINTENDENT. NO ONE HAS RAISED THAT BEFORE.>>I DID YESTERDAY.>>IT IS MARCH.>>I DIDN’T REALIZE. ANYWAY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE OKAY. PLUS, I THINK SHE’S SUPER QUALIFIED.>>ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS?>>I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS ONE THING: I DON’T– MY VOTE– BECAUSE I DIDN’T MAKE SCOTT MY TOP ONE OR TWO CHOICE, I THINK THAT– I WOULD HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE HE WOULD APPLY AGAIN, AND GET– WITH SOME EXPERIENCE WORKING IN– MORE EXPERIENCE WORKING IN A HIGH POVERTY, URBAN ENVIRONMENT, WHICH IS SUCH A CONSUMING ISSUE IN EDUCATION IN MICHIGAN, AND WE REALLY NEED SOME HELP ON THAT. SO I WOULD HOPE HE WOULD COME BACK, AND I COULD SEE HIM BEING SUPERINTENDENT SOMEDAY. YEAH.>>OKAY, WELL, SINCE SCOTT’S NAME CAME UP AGAIN, I THINK SCOTT HAS THE SPIRIT, EXPERIENCE, DRIVE, PASSION– EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW TO BE THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT. WE DID NOT VOTE ON HIS BEHALF, BUT COMING BACK, HE HAS IT RIGHT NOW.>>ALL RIGHT. GIVEN ALL THAT, WHICH– IF YOU WERE TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE FOR YOUR FIRST CHOICE AMONG BRIAN OR VICKIE, CASANDRA?>>BRIAN.>>VICKIE.>>ABSTAIN.>>ABSTAIN.>>VICKIE.>>BRIAN.>>VICKIE.>>BRIAN. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?>>3-3?>>3-3, 2 ABSTENTIONS.>>ALL RIGHT. 3-3, 2 ABSTENTIONS.>>MAYBE WE CAN HAVE CO-SUPERINTENDENTS.>>YEAH, CO-SUPERINTENDENTS. JUST KIDDING.>>WELL, THIS– [ LAUGHTER ]>>WHY DON’T WE TAKE A MINUTE OR A FIVE MINUTE BREAK TO REGROUP AND FIND THE BEST STRATEGY FOR RESOLVING THAT?>>NOW, JUST TO CLARIFY COMMUNICATION HERE, YOU SAID A PREFERENCE, AND LAST TIME WE USED THE WORD PREFERENCE, MY VOTE, MY SECOND PLACE VOTE WAS USED IN A WAY THAT I HAD NOT ANTICIPATED, AND SO I DID NOT WANT TO VOTE HERE, NOT QUITE KNOWING WHAT WOULD BE DONE WITH THESE PREFERENCES.>>OH, BUT YOU WANT TO VOTE?>>I MEAN, WHEN THERE’S AN ACTION TO BE TAKEN, I WANT TO VOTE ON THE ACTION, BUT WHEN YOU USE THE TERM PREFERENCE, I’M– THAT’S WHY I ABSTAINED.>>WE’RE TRYING TO, IN DISCUSSION, NARROW THE FIELD MORE. THAT’S WHY IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IF OUR BIPARTISAN COLLEAGUES PARTICIPATED IN THIS, BECAUSE OUR BEST DECISION IS ONE THAT WE MAKE WITH BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN THE BOARD, IN TERMS OF TRYING TO GET THE PREFERENCES BETWEEN– GIVEN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, BRIAN OR VICKIE, SO I, CERTAINLY, WOULD VERY MUCH APPRECIATE SOME DIRECTION FROM MY COLLEAGUES, ALL OF THEM, BETWEEN THOSE TWO, WHO MIGHT BE THE STRONGEST CHOICE THAT YOU HAVE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS A TOUGH DECISION. SO IF WE VOTED AGAIN FOR THOSE TWO IN OUR PREFERENCES, AND YOU ALL, TOO, WERE WILLING TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL BECAUSE THAT WOULD GIVE US AN INDICATOR OF WHO WE MIGHT COLLECTIVELY ADVANCE TO A VOTE. DO YOU WANT TO TRY IT AGAIN?>>I CAN CERTAINLY SAY IT AGAIN, BUT I VIEW THAT BOTH OF THESE PEOPLE ARE VERY GOOD CANDIDATES, BUT I ALSO ANTICIPATE THAT EACH OF THEM HAS A WEAKNESS TO THEM THAT WOULD EITHER PUT US OUT OF FEDERAL COMPLIANCE IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME OR CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR US WITH EXTERNAL UNITS. SO I HAVE NOT BEEN– I HAVE SAID THAT FOR ME TO TRY TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THEM IS NOT POSSIBLE. I THINK THEY’RE BOTH GREAT PEOPLE AND I WOULD DO EVERYTHING I COULD TO WORK WITH THEM, BUT I CAN’T MAKE THAT CHOICE. THE SIX OF YOU, OR SOMEBODY OTHER THAN ME, FEELS STRONGLY THAT THESE TWO CANDIDATES ARE YOUR TOP CHOICES. I RESPECT THAT, I DEFER TO IT.>>RICHARD, ARE YOU WILLING TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE FOR WHAT’S BEST FOR THE BOARD AND MICHIGAN IN TERMS OF THESE TWO?>>THAT BREAK IS SOUNDING PRETTY GOOD RIGHT NOW. [ LAUGHTER ]>>ALL RIGHT, LET’S TAKE A SHORT BREAK AND COME BACK.>>LET’S GET STARTED AGAIN, FOLKS. WE HAD A CHANCE TO REFLECT, COOL OFF, KIBBUTZ. IN THAT REFLECTION, I THINK, PLEASE CONTINUE TO CONSIDER– WE’RE GOING TO GO AROUND AGAIN WITH PREFERENCES OVERALL BETWEEN BRIAN AND VICKIE, REFLECTING ON THE SORT OF OVERALL SENSE OF THE FULL BOARD, ALSO WHAT MIGHT BE MOST EFFECTIVE FOR US TO COME TOGETHER AND FOR US TO BE EFFECTIVE IN OUR ENGAGEMENTS WITH STAKEHOLDERS IN THE BROADER COMMUNITY, INCLUDING THE GOVERNOR, LEGISLATURE, AND OTHERS THAT WE MUST WORK EFFECTIVELY WITH. SO I’M ASKING PEOPLE TO REFLECT ON THOSE POINTS, AND–>>OH.>>KATHY’S PASSING OUT CLIPPINGS, HER PRESS CLIPPINGS. THIS IS ABOUT THAT LAW, THAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL BUSINESS. THAT’S YESTERDAY’S NEWS. SO WHY DON’T WE GO AROUND AGAIN. AGAIN, IF YOU WERE TO EXPRESS A PREFERENCE IN TERMS OF MOST EFFECTIVE HELPMATE FOR ALL OF US IN EDUCATION, BETWEEN BRIAN AND VICKIE, LET’S AGAIN TAKE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE BOARD. CASANDRA?>>BRIAN.>>MICHELLE?>>YOU CAN PASS ME AND COME BACK AROUND.>>OKAY. RICHARD?>>I’LL PASS.>>EILEEN?>>PASS.>>KATHY?>>DO IT JUST IN CASE?>>I PASSED FOR NOW. I SAID TO COME BACK AROUND.>>AT SOME POINT– WE CAN’T STAY DEADLOCKED, AND WE CAN’T PASS, OR SHOULD NOT. THAT WOULD BE AN ABDICATION OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS ELECTED BOARD MEMBERS, TO HELP WRESTLE TOGETHER WITH A GOOD DECISION, SO–>>I’M GOING TO STICK WITH VICKIE AT THIS POINT.>>OKAY. LUPE?>>BRIAN.>>I’LL STAY WITH VICKIE FOR NOW.>>BRIAN. AGAIN, LET ME REITERATE– WE CAN’T STAY– IT DOESN’T HELP THE WHOLE BOARD, IT DOESN’T HELP US DEMOCRATS TO STAY DEADLOCKED. UPON REFLECTION OF PREFERENCES AND DISCUSSION THAT WE’VE HEARD TODAY, IT WOULD HELP IF WE HAD SOME MOVEMENT AND SOME HELP FROM OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IN TERMS OF THEIR PREFERENCES BETWEEN THOSE TWO. WE WILL HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER, CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER. WHOEVER’S PICKED AS SUPERINTENDENT, WE’RE GOING TO ALWAYS TRY TO WORK TOGETHER ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, SO IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HELPFUL IF YOU WERE TO SUPPORT AND/ OR AT LEAST EXPRESS A PREFERENCE ABOUT OUR TWO REMAINING CANDIDATES. SO LET’S TRY IT AGAIN. CASANDRA?>>BRIAN.>>MICHELLE?>>IN THE NAME– I MEAN– GIVEN THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE MORE CONSENSUS FOR BRIAN, I THINK, INITIALLY, I WILL VOTE FOR BRIAN.>>PREFERENCE FOR BRIAN.>>PREFERENCE FOR BRIAN.>>RICHARD?>>I’LL PASS.>>EILEEN?>>NO CHOICE BETWEEN THOSE TWO CANDIDATES. THEY’RE WONDERFUL PEOPLE.>>KATHLEEN?>>LOOKS LIKE MAYBE THERE’S A SEMI-CONSENSUS. [ LAUGHTER ]>>NO, ALL THE CANDIDATES WERE ASKED PRIOR, WOULD THEY BE WILLING TO TAKE A JOB IF THERE WAS A SPLIT VOTE. THE SEMI-CONSENSUS POINT WAS NOT USED, AND THEY ALL AGREED, ABSOLUTELY. THEY UNDERSTOOD THE DYNAMICS AT WORK, SO, YES.>>WELL, I THINK– I ADMIRE VICKIE TREMENDOUSLY AND I THINK THE PERCEPTION OF HER IS INCORRECT, BUT AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME, I THINK MAYBE BRIAN HAS MORE OF A CHANCE OF WORKING CONSTRUCTIVELY WITH THE LEGISLATURE. ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY’D BE FOOLISH NOT TO WORK WITH VICKIE. BRIAN DOES HAVE SKILLS IN THAT AREA THAT ARE VERY IMPRESSIVE, AND I’LL GO WITH BRIAN.>>OKAY. LUPE, I ASSUME YOU’RE STILL–>>I THINK I ALREADY VOTED.>>RIGHT. PAM? DID YOU VOTE?>>I– YOU KNOW, VICKIE STILL REMAINS TO BE MY TOP CHOICE. OBVIOUSLY, I CAN LIVE WITH BRIAN. SOMEONE HAS BROUGHT UP THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A WOMAN SUPERINTENDENT. NO ONE CAN SAY THAT SHE HAS NOT PERFORMED WELL IN THE INTERVIEWS. NO ONE HAS BEEN ABLE TO SAY THAT SHE DOES NOT HAVE A DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE. YOU KNOW, WITH THESE POSITIONS OF POWER AND BEING OUT FRONT, NOT EVERYONE LIKES WHAT YOU DO OR SAY, AND IT’S UNFORTUNATE, BUT I’LL SAY IT BECAUSE IT’S MARCH AND IT’S WOMEN’S HISTORY MONTH, THAT THAT DOESN’T ALWAYS BODE WELL FOR WOMEN. SO THAT’S UNFORTUNATE. I DEFINITELY WANT TO BE A STRONG PART OF THIS TEAM WE HAVE HERE, AND WHEN WE FIRST STARTED OUT, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATED THE CLOSED DOOR PROCESS THAT WE USED IN COMING UP WITH THE SIX CANDIDATES, AND IT SEEMED LIKE ON BOTH SIDES, THE REPUBLICANS AS WELL AS US, THE DEMOCRATS, WE LOOKED AT ALL THE CANDIDATES. WE LOOKED AT A PERSON SUCH AS BRIAN AND WE LOOKED AT THE FACT THAT– I BELIEVE– THAT HE IS A REPUBLICAN. AND SO HERE WE ARE– I’M STRUGGLING BECAUSE I FEEL THAT WE HAVE A STRONG FEMALE CANDIDATE, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR REPUBLICAN COUNTERPARTS WHO ARE NOT NECESSARILY– YOU KNOW– COMING ALONG NICELY WITH BRIAN. SO THAT’S A STRUGGLE FOR ME.>>SO IF YOU HAD A PREFERENCE BETWEEN BRIAN AND VICKIE, GIVEN ALL OF THAT, THAT YOU’D LIKE TO EXPRESS?>>PARDON ME?>>YEAH, EXACTLY. [ LAUGHTER ]>>I CAN STAY WITH VICKIE FOR RIGHT NOW.>>ALL RIGHT. AND I’M CONTINUING TO PREFER BRIAN. SO AS I JUST NOTE THESE PREFERENCES, WE HAVE CASANDRA BRIAN, MICHELLE BRIAN, TWO ABSTENTIONS, BRIAN FROM KATHLEEN, LUPE BRIAN, VICKIE FROM PAM AND BRIAN FROM ME. SO THAT’S ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, WITH TWO PASSES AND ONE FOR VICKIE PREFERENCES. SO GIVEN THAT, I APPRECIATE THE DIFFICULTY OF GETTING TO THAT KIND OF PREFERENCE POSITION, BUT THAT APPEARS TO REFLECT A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD IN TERMS OF PREFERENCES. AGAIN, I WISH OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES WOULD PARTICIPATE SO WE COULD CONTINUE TO PULL TOGETHER, EXPRESS THEIR PREFERENCES BETWEEN THESE TWO. IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO SHARE IN THE DECISION MAKING, AND I’M DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU’RE NOT WILLING TO, BECAUSE CERTAINLY, THE COMMITMENT HERE AND THE SPIRIT HERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO WORK TOGETHER ACROSS PARTY LINES AND PULL TOGETHER AND MAKE DECISIONS TOGETHER THAT ARE BETTER FOR THE COLLECTIVE BOARD, AND I THINK WE’VE BEEN THROUGH A HEALTHY DEMOCRATIC PROCESS TODAY. NO ONE CAN SAY WE HAVEN’T IN TERMS OF THAT DECISION MAKING. YES.>>MAY I MAKE A MOTION? I SAY WE OFFER THE POSITION TO BRIAN WHISTON.>>AND THE MOTION SHOULD INCLUDE THAT YOU EMPOWER THE STATE BOARD PRESIDENT TO OFFER THE POSITION TO BRIAN WHISTON, AND WORK TOWARDS SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION OF A FINAL CONTRACT.>>I’LL ACCEPT THAT.>>I’D LIKE TO SUPPORT THAT.>>ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SUPPORTED TO OFFER THE POSITION OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION TO BRIAN WHISTON AND EMPOWER THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION PRESIDENT TO MAKE THAT OFFER AND WORK OUT THE DETAILS, HOPEFULLY SATISFACTORILY, OF A CONTRACT, WHICH, IF THAT IS DONE, HE WILL BE SUPERINTENDENT, AND IF WE FAIL, THEN WE’LL BE BACK HERE NEXT WEEK FOR GROUNDHOG DAY 17 OR WHATEVER. ANYWAY– I APPRECIATE THE MOTION. I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?>>I JUST WANT TO SAY I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE MAJORITY TO RESOLVE, AND I APPRECIATE THEIR WORKING THAT OUT. I ALSO APPRECIATE THE SECOND WHO, LIKE MYSELF, WAS NOT INITIALLY SUPPORTIVE, BUT SINCE THE DIRECTION IS CLEAR, I THINK IT’S TRUE THAT WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND WORK FOR THE SUCCESS OF OUR NEW SUPERINTENDENT AND MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FOR THE SAKE OF OUR PEOPLE.>>ABSOLUTELY.>>I APPRECIATE–>>SO I THINK WE– WE NEED A ROLE CALL VOTE, CORRECT?>>YES.>>OKAY.>>ONE MORE COMMENT. I WILL BE VOTING NO, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH BRIAN, OR, IF THIS MOTION FAILS, TO WORK WITH WHOEVER, OR IF THE CONTRACT CANNOT BE NEGOTIATED, TO WORK WITH WHOEVER IS SELECTED.>>IT WOULD EVEN BE HEALTHIER IF, GIVEN THE SENTIMENTS OF THE FULL BOARD, PEOPLE WILLING TO EXPRESS UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FOR THE OFFER OF SUPERINTENDENCY, SO JUST REFLECT ON THAT AS WE TAKE A VOTE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION?>>I THINK WE OUGHT TO ALSO– I DON’T KNOW IF IT SHOULD BE PART OF A MOTION, BUT TO THANK ALL THE CANDIDATES, FINALISTS, ALL OF THE SEMI-FINALISTS AS MUCH AS THE FINALISTS, FOR EXCELLENT PRESENTATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, AND WE HOPE THEY’LL BE BACK AND WORK WITH US– CONTINUE TO WORK WITH US AND THEN MAYBE APPLY AGAIN, AS MICHELLE SAID.>>THANK YOU, KATHLEEN, AND I TRIED THROUGHOUT TO ROUTINELY NOTE AND THANK THE TERRIFIC CANDIDATES AND FINALISTS– A VERY DIFFICULT DECISION, OBVIOUSLY, AND ALL THE SEMI-FINALISTS AND APPLICANTS. SO WE’RE LUCKY TO HAVE HAD SUCH GOOD PEOPLE STEP FORWARD, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? YOU WANT TO CALL THE ROLE, MARILYN?>>AUSTIN?>>YES.>>FECTEAU?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>PUGH SMITH?>>YES.>>STRAUSS?>>YES.>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>WEISER?>>NO.>>ZEILE?>>YES.>>7-1, CARRIES.>>GREAT. MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE OFFERING THE POSITION OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION TO BRIAN WHISTON. CONGRATULATIONS BRIAN, CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE FINALISTS. NOTE THAT TIM QUINN AND THE SEARCH FIRM WILL BE ENGAGING IN HELPING IN THESE DISCUSSIONS. ALL THE CANDIDATES BASICALLY HAD A PREVIEW OF WHAT TYPE OF CONTRACT WE’D BE TRYING TO EXECUTE AND WERE SATISFIED WITH THE TERMS, MORE OR LESS. WE HAVE TO MAKE THOSE FINAL NEGOTIATIONS, WHICH INCLUDED SOME ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS OF FULL DISCLOSURE OF ANY OUTSIDE INCOME AS PART OF THIS WORK, SO THAT WE CAN BE CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT IN ALL WE’RE DOING. LISTEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I’M GOING TO TURN THIS BACK OVER TO MIKE FLANAGAN, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, FOR A FINAL BLESSING ON ST. PATRICK’S– OH, ISN’T IT ST. PATRICK’S DAY?>>YESTERDAY. [ OVERLAPPING CHATTER ]>>ONE WORD. OKAY, SOME OF YOU KNOW I WAS A 5-3 VOTE, SO IT’S NOT– [ LAUGHTER ]>>NOT LIKE I NEVER STRUGGLED WITH THAT, BY THE WAY. I’M NOT GOING TO PRETEND THERE WEREN’T STRUGGLES, AND I MIGHT’VE EVEN BEEN A SHAKY FIVE. BUT I WANT TO CONGRATULATE BRIAN. I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE BOARD FOR THE DILIGENCE THEY TOOK ON THIS. I THINK YOU HANDLED THIS APPROPRIATELY, AND WE HAD THREE GREAT CANDIDATES AT THE END. I KNOW THEM ALL WELL, AND– GREAT. WE’LL CALL THIS MEETING ADJOURNED.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *