Keystone Central board debates personnel transparency, meeting minutes and a principal transfer

During the July 10 work session, several board members asked administration to add or clarify language in the minutes related to approval of a district solicitor contract and to a recent personnel change. Board member Elizabeth asked that the minutes note that "discussion occurred regarding the contract" and sought clearer labelling on contract forms so a reader can see whether a contract is a renewal or a revision.

That line of discussion moved into personnel items later in the meeting when the agenda included a transfer: the appointment of the director of pupil services to principal at Woodward (documented on the personnel agenda as a transfer). A board member asked whether the public or the board would be provided a resume and experience details for the new principal. The superintendent and administrators said the candidate holds required certification. Minutes capture actions and votes but not full transcripts of discussion, administrators said.

The discussion escalated when a board member characterized a request for resume information as an "insinuation" and called the remark offensive; other members pushed back and defended the right to ask for more information before approving personnel items. The chair and other board members urged civility and adherence to meeting conduct standards that were stated at the meeting start.

No formal personnel voting record was shown in the work-session transcript available for this meeting. Board members asked that a missing contract document (a solicitor contract referenced earlier) be provided and added to the record for later review.

The board also discussed the legal limits on changing state-mandated contract forms and said that some forms must remain in the original state wording. The superintendent and staff said they would follow up with the requested documents for board review.