Highlights:
*2-year contract length decided on before final candidate selection
*4-year contract extension proposed by Patton after Compton chosen as new Superintendent
*New contract already drafted by county attorney before Patton made the proposal at last Board meeting - unclear who asked the attorney to do so
*Original 2-year contract length decision vote was divided 3-2
*Stump originally voted for 2-year contract, now voted for 4-year contract, only board member unavailable for comment, unknown why her position changed
Contract length divides board
TERESA MULLINS / Staff Writer
July 4, 2007
The school board was divided on a decision last week to change its agreement on a two-year contract with the new school superintendent and double the length of the term.
Board members who voted against extending the contract say it has nothing to do with their faith in new school superintendent Judy Compton’s ability. They simply wanted to stick to an original agreement made before Compton was even selected as the new helm of the school system.
Following a closed session at the board’s June 27 meeting, board member Bill Patton, Ervinton District, made a motion to extend the length of Compton’s contract from two years to four. Compton recently replaced Damon Rasnick, who retired June 30.
Clintwood District board member Dr. Lurton Lyle offered a substitute motion to let the contract stand as written. The board voted on the substitute motion, with Lyle and Willis District representative Dr. Jewell Askins voting in its favor.
Patton, Sandlick District representative Donnie Raines and board chairman Judy Long Stump voted against the motion.
The board then voted on the original motion made by Patton. The motion carried 3-2, with Lyle and Askins casting dissenting votes.
In a later interview, Lyle said the board discussed offering a two-year contract before interviewing candidates for the superintendent position. When the board later voted to offer the position to Judy Compton, the board voted on the length of her contract. At that time, Patton and Raines voted against a two-year term but Stump, Lyle and Askins voted in favor of the motion.
During last week’s meeting, however, the contract issue came up again. A four-contract had been drafted by the school board’s attorney and was ready to be signed. However, it is unclear who asked the attorney to draft the four-year version.
Lyle said his preference for a two-year contract has nothing to do with Compton. He said he felt more comfortable with a two-year contract and knew the board could always extend it in the future.
All superintendent candidates were asked during interviews if they were willing to accept a two year contract, Lyle said, and all candidates agreed.
Askins said she preferred a two-year contract because it would remove the superintendent appointment from the election cycle, which removes it from any presumption of political bias.
A two-year contract also would ensure the selected candidate was a good fit. Like Lyle, Askins said her preference for a two-year contract is no reflection on Compton or her abilities.
Prior to last week’s meeting, Lyle and Askins were unaware the length of contract was an issue, they both said.
Patton said in a telephone interview yesterday he always favored the four-year contract. Each time a superintendent is hired or a contract is renewed, it causes friction because different people want different candidates, Patton said. And you can’t please everyone, he continued. “The children are what it’s all about,” Patton added.
“I think (a four-year contract) is much better,” Patton stated. “County residents know Mrs. Compton was a dedicated principal and her knowledge will be good as superintendent,” he said.
Raines also favored a four-year contract from the start. “I would have preferred a four-year contract for any of the candidates,” Raines stated. “I don’t feel that two years gives a new superintendent enough time.” Raines added that Compton plans to apply for several grants, and has plans for the school system that will take time to come to fruition.
“Four years will tell if the candidate can handle the job,” he said. Raines pointed out that former superintendent Damon Rasnick’s four-year term was “well worth it.”
Several attempts to reach Stump were unsuccessful.
By law, the superintendent’s contract has to be a minimum of two years, but can be no longer than four years.
All Virginia school systems have the option of offering a two-year contract, and many exercise that option, Askins said. But historically, Dickenson County has offered four-year contracts to superintendents.
Compton said Tuesday she is pleased with the contract she was offered.
http://www.thecoalfieldprogress.com/news.php?viewStory=8469