Thoughts similar to my own. Though I did not speak up because I thought it may be due to the limited attention I have given the issue.
Being in the search business I can understand that the complexities of the district and the complication caused by the aborted process last year may scare some potential candidates away from the search. That being said, given the national scope of the search I would have hoped for a stronger short list. Having not paid attention to the requirements of the search I wonder if the Board has placed too many restrictions on the search resulting in candidates who can check all the required boxes. Often times what is needed by the search firm is some flexibility when the "ideal" (all the boxes checked) candidates don't exist or don't excite. Setting priorities on the requirements is often helpful - for example, giving up on requirement #4 if it results in a candidate with stronger experience in requirement #1. This type of adjustment generally leads to stronger candidates; otherwise the result is a compromise candidate that generally meets all requirements. A search becomes more difficult when stuffed into a predetermined time line. It leaves no room for adjustments during the course of the search and the contingency of what to do when the candidate list isn't exciting. (Thinking of the Park Board here.) I am not saying the result is the Board's fault, as the search firm may not have performed on their end - it is difficult to know given my limited attention to the issue. If others agree that the short list of candidates isn't strong then it will take some courage on the part of someone on the Board to say no to all three and restart the search. Al Giesen Tangletown REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
