Text messages show internal tension over Cape schools superintendent search

Text messages among Cape Girardeau Public Schools Board of Education members show tension regarding the board’s search for a new superintendent.

Provided to the Southeast Missourian through a state Sunshine Law request, the texts reveal board members Paul Cairns and Veronica Langston questioning the group’s process to replace superintendent Neil Glass, who announced his retirement in late January. The board set an application window that opened Feb. 1 and closed Feb. 13 — nine business days — and an initial hiring target date within February. That date has since been extended because interviews with the two candidates — one internal; one external; neither publicly identified — for the position occurred Tuesday, Feb. 28. Board members have indicated they intend to hire the next superintendent Tuesday, March 7.

The messages

The texts begin Jan. 31, and for several days addressed issues such as the process timeline, possible interview dates and “required” and “preferred” qualifications.

The group met Feb. 9, in closed session, to continue those discussions. In the aftermath of that meeting, the text messages show some disagreement with the timeline of the process and how much flexibility to allow for all board members to attend candidate interviews.

In a Feb. 10 text, board member Kyle McDonald objected to pushing the interviews beyond February:

“I understand the desire to have all board members present for the interviews but I think it is a mistake to wait an extra week. That puts the first interview after the next board meeting which means it could be well into March before we have a decision on the next superintendent. There are already some grumblings of uncertainty amongst our administrators and staff and I believe that the longer the wait the greater the likelihood that we loose (sic) some good people.”

Board member Cairns responded that same day:

“The idea that staff members are ‘already some grumblings of uncertainty amongst our administrators and staff’ is an indication that we’ve done a poor job of establishing and/or communicating appropriate expectations. It isn’t helpful that we are doing this in February based on an unexpected retirement in late January, but the idea that we should slam through a process that puts in place a new superintendent in record time is wildly inappropriate in my view. This decision is too important for our district to simply hold a coronation for an internal candidate in my view.”

Also on Feb. 10, McDonald contended the candidates should only sit for one interview:

“Multiple interviews are unrealistic. It is a lot of stress for a candidate to do it once, let alone expect them to go through the process multiple times.”

Board member Casey Cook disagreed with McDonald:

“We just hired a new COO (basically the same job as superintendent, premium job, premium pay for premium responsibilities) and we interviewed the candidates multiple times by multiple groups. I would also say if a candidate is stressed by multiple interviews (which in my opinion a good interview is a conversation) with the group that is supposed to have a candid and open relationship with that might be telling.”

By Feb. 15, board member Langston had begun to question the process:

“I have serious concerns about the quantity of applications we have received. MSBA (Missouri School Boards Association) has indicated they can’t remember receiving less (sic) than 5 applicants during any superintendent search. I am concerned that our process is flawed. Our well funded, vibrant district deserves the best possible leader. Our obligation is to select the best person. I don’t feel comfortable moving forward, believing that our process must be terribly flawed, and with so few applicants. Can we discuss alternatives?”

Later that day, McDonald defended the process:

“We have the best candidate but no one seems to want to discuss this fact. Apparently no one has heard of ‘grow your own’ or the corporate ladder. ... This is not a flawed process. We have had others that (sic) that have inquired about the position but out of respect for (redacted) they haven’t applied. MSBA has more applicants on average because they recruit applicants. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they are good applicants or a good fit for the district. ... I am strongly opposed to delaying this process any further. We have 2 applicants and a date set. Let’s move forward as previously agreed to by the board.”

Langston replied:

“I find it reprehensible that we have turned away other qualified candidates based on the belief that we already have the best possible candidate within our system.”

Board member Jared Ritter commented in support of McDonald’s view:

“Look how amazing (redacted) will be one day if (redacted) continues to strive. Should we send the message that we don’t encourage growing our own and promoting within just as much?”

Langston pointed to a comment Glass allegedly made regarding his support for an internal candidate and McDonald’s assertion that potential candidates did not apply out of respect for the internal candidate:

“These statements actually fit together perfectly, and don’t lend themselves to a thorough search or a transparent process.”

In another text, she continued:

“What was the point of the search if qualified potential applicants were led to believe that applying would be a waste of their time? Just to check boxes and give the illusion of transparency?”

McDonald countered:

“I’m done arguing with you about this because you and I will never agree about the fact that the process is valid, is transparent, and has produced 2 qualified applicants. The entire board has agreed to meeting with the applicants on 2/28. We have two qualified candidates. Let’s just see where it goes from there.”