Speaking of Micromanagement...

The Dynamic Duo and other bloggers like to label as "micromanagement" any attempt by Douglas, Knecht and/or Murphy to perform the oversight someone in their position is supposed to provide. Actually, the mere discussion of new or different oversight or accountability measures often causes the label to be invoked.

Let's see if those bloggers will be consistent in their application of that label. My guess is that it is a one-way street and that if an example of "micromanagement" by anyone else is pointed out, the response will be, "But that was different!"

Debra Raeder has developed a well-deserved reputation among PUSD insiders for making demands about who should be interviewed and/or hired for various upper-level staff openings. For example, the current Centennial High principal was Raeder's hand-picked choice for that position. A more egregious example was when candidates were interviewed for the PR Director position currently held by Jim Cummings. Multiple DAC employees have first-hand knowledge of Raeder calling up in a rage, demanding to know if a particular applicant would be interviewed. I will refrain from mentioning the applicant's name to avoid embarassing this person.

Recently, the board expressed interest in resuming a practice that used to be typical. The board used to convene in executive session to consider virtually all principals, assistant principals, directors and top-level administrators. That changed immediately prior to when Douglas was sworn in (but after she was elected). The timing of the change in PRACTICE, which did not coincide with a change in official POLICY, is very unlikely to be a coincidence.

About a year later, the POLICY regarding principals, directors and top-level administrators was changed from "make appointment" to "consider appointment." It has been claimed by some that this one-word change limits the board to discussing the one candidate the superintendent recommends. However, since all of the official actions of the board are labeled on the agenda as "consideration," it would be safe to say that the board has latitude in how they "consider." Whether they simply accept or reject the superintendent's recommendation or actually choose from amongst the finalists, with the superintendent's recommendation duly noted, should be up to their discretion, just as it was until recently. Accusations that such an interpretation "violates board policy" are absurd and mere rhetoric.

Apparently, the definition of "micromanagement" depends on whose actions are in question. Raeder gets a pass, but the new members don't. Who has an "agenda" now?