Part 3 of 3
6:35pm

* Discussion

** Superintendent Search Update presented by HR director Mary Page

Page says the search is on schedule and briefly outlines the remaining steps.
 She notifies the commissioners that one of the three finalists, Dirk
Richwine has withdrawn.

Page says interview with candidate Cristofer Gears will be at 5pm on November
30, and interview with candidate Jon Gurban will be at 6pm on November 30.
These interviews are open to the public.

Berry Graves ask when the background check information will be given to the
commissioners.  The answer is Friday, November 26, the day after Thanksgiving,
when the Park Board offices are closed.

Mason says that means they won't really receive the information until Monday,
November 29 and that the board needs time to discuss it.  Can the
commissioners get this information sent to them at home so that they can get
it soon enough?  She asks if both candidates will be tested.

Page answers that only Gears needs to be tested because the testing company,
DRI, says the test is valid for several years and Gurban took the test last
year.  Gurban has the choice of taking the test again if he wants.  [Gurban
took the test home last year when he took it -- hardly a controlled environment]

Mason says both candidates should take the test in the same manner and fashion.

Olson says that DRI is the experts on testing, etc. [but the answer they give
to validity of past tests all depends on how the question is asked, doesn't it?]

Berry Graves asks if criminal background check will be NCIC or MnSUS[?] or
both?  She has professional concerns about the test; in her full time job they
would not allow tests to be taken home, but instead require them to be taken
in a controlled environment.

Hauser agrees with Mason and Berry Graves, and cites her professional
background as well.  She says "for the sake of appearances" Gurban's test
should be repeated.  Then she says something about data privacy not allowing
the commissioners to see the results, and mentions federal law.  [It's the
State of Minnesota that has the applicable data privacy law, not the feds.
Usually applicants sign a waiver allowing potential employer to see things
precluded by law, anyway, just as you do when you visit your doctor because
federal law actually does restrict who can see your medical records.]

Page points out that it is a management assessment test, not a psychological 
exam.

Siggelkow reiterates it is a managerial assessment and he has taken several of
them.

Erwin addresses the concerns about these test no longer being on paper anymore
but on computers and how can that be done in a controlled environment.  He
suggests the applicants can take the test in the same room at the Park Board,
if need be.  He agrees with Hauser that it needs to be consistent between
candidates for appearance sake.  He asks if they can talk to DRI, the testing
group, to arrange it.

Berry Graves asks if Park Board might have a liability issue with using only a
management assessment and not a psychological exam.

Page says no law requires it.

Berry Graves wants it on the record that the Park Board has required
psychological testing in the past and have used a company called Barnett[?] to
do it.

Young suggests that the board does not need to see the hard to get exam
results before the November 30 interviews, but just before they actually make
their decision.  Actual vote on hiring will be done on December 8.

Page says testing takes about 6 hours each.

Young says the length of the testing makes it even more unrealistic to expect
this be completed by the holidays.  She asks how will the questions and
interviews be handled?

Olson says we have discussed the management assessment tests.  We will the
interview questioning discussion as soon as possible.

Kummer says it is not essential to have testing done by November 30 as they
have until December 8 to decide.  She also wants to know how they will
question the candidates.

Hauser agrees with Young and Kummer.

Olson says the other item on the agenda is a concern brought to him by Young
about the charter commission and the work they are doing.  Olson creates a
committee composed of Young, Fine and Dziedzic to work with counsel Brian Rice
in influencing the charter commission.

Young says that she has no exact date as to when this committee will get back
to the board with a report due to unknowns at present, but that the committee
will take care of what needs to be done post haste.

Olson says there will be a 5 minute recess before the long discussion of the
questioning and interviewing of the candidates.

7:04pm

Olson calls the Regular Meeting back to order.

Dziedzic says that Hennepin County commissioner Peter McLaughlin has stated
the County will put up $100,000 to go with $250,000 from the State to finish
the study on completing the Grand Rounds.

Olson suggests the board meet next Wednesday, before Thanksgiving, to discuss
the questions to be asked during the board interviews of the superintendent
candidates.

Hauser immediately makes a motion to do just that.

Young, in a very emotional voice, says she is very opposed to the idea, she
had planned for a very long time to be out of town that week.

Kummer says she understands Young's distress, but that they can take Young's
questions [in writing] and treat them gently.

Hauser says she likewise understands Young and asks can't the discussion be
held now?

Olson says that Young has her questions ready tonight, but sorry, it would be
unfair to the others who have not yet prepared their questions.

Berry Graves says she will also be gone that day.

Mason says she thought that previous discussion had concluded that the list of
questions would be the same as last time, but with the opportunity for each
commissioner to choose one new question.  [Yes, in fact that is exactly what
was brought up by Young and Mason at the November 3 meeting.]

Hauser agrees with Mason and says they can either send their questions to Mary
Page or discuss them next week.

Young points out that all of the commissioners had 2 weeks in which to prepare
their individual single questions.  She is very upset and says that while she
had planned to be out of town that she thought this process was important
enough that if they wanted to have their meeting next week, to go ahead.  But
she doesn't see why board members are not ready tonight...

Olson cuts her off, repeatedly stating that it is not on the agenda [which he
determines] and tells Young she is out of order!

Berry Graves asks if there is a background question as to any felony or
misdemeanor convictions, as is often the case on standard job applications.

Olson says Mary Page is gone, so too bad she didn't ask her question earlier.

Hauser moves that they use same list of questions as last time and add one
question per commissioner to be sent to Mary Page.

Motion Passes unanimously.  There will be NO meeting next week.

* Petitions and Communications

Mason received several letters, including one from CM Dean Zimmerman.

Hauser received a letter about young children playing on clay after a child
broke a bone[?] while doing so.

Motion to Adjourn.  Passes with Young opposed.

7:15pm - Adjourned


Reported by Chris Johnson, Fulton


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

Reply via email to