School Board selects search firm, discusses joint meeting with the City of Gainesville

BY JENNIFER CABRERA

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At the August 19 special School Board of Alachua County meeting, the board selected McPherson & Jacobson to conduct a Supervisor search and narrowly voted down a motion to hold a joint meeting with the City of Gainesville about Citizens Field.

Supervisor search

Each of the three search firms — HYA, the Florida School Board Association, and McPherson & Jacobson – was given an hour to make a presentation and take questions from board members. 

Click here to review the proposals from the firms, and click here to watch the presentations to the School Board.

Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Debbie Terry said a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a search firm was issued in April, and in July, the school district’s Performance Evaluation Committee scored the proposals and compiled a short list of recommended firms.

Costs of the proposals

HYA’s proposal had a base price of $63,600, with a menu of other services available, including executive coaching for $10,000 a year.

FSBA’s proposal had a base cost of $50,000, but the board members’ FSBA discount reduces that to $35,000 plus expenses of up to $16,200, for a not-to-exceed total cost of $51,200.

McPherson & Jacobson’s not-to-exceed price was $47,200, which includes a two-year guarantee that the firm will repeat the search if the person who is hired does not work out.

Comments on HYA

During the board discussion following the presentations, Chair Thomas Vu said he liked HYA’s method, which felt “really objective” to him; his least favorite thing about HYA was the one-year guarantee.

Member Sarah Rockwell liked HYA’s retention rate (94% of their placements complete their first contract). She also liked the firm’s “transparent, objective process and excellent reach,” along with the transition support and leadership development opportunities; however, her biggest concern with HYA was the cost.

Member Tina Certain said HYA’s transition plan was very detailed, “but it seemed, like, very scripted.” She also felt their cost was a negative. Certain added, “Also, for me, I’m biased. I want someone who has a lot of Florida experience because the challenges we face in Florida are unique to Florida, and that is something that I think we’re going to need their expertise on.” She thought the retention rate was irrelevant because the board has more responsibility for that than the search firm. 

Member Janine Plavac said she didn’t think cost should be a big consideration “because we’re only talking about a $10,000 difference between first and third.” She agreed that retention rate should not be weighted heavily, but she liked HYA’s vetting process and said, “I think they have the broadest reach.”

Member Leanetta McNealy said she didn’t have any comments on HYA because she had made up her mind.

Comments on FSBA

Vu said he liked “the Florida experience aspect of [FSBA].” He said, though, that he thought FSBA’s process was “the weakest of the three” because FSBA said they would present all the applications to the board instead of a vetted short list. 

McNealy said, “I’m the oldest up here, as far as years. All of our searches, basically, have been done by the Florida School Board Association.” She said she had entered the meeting thinking she didn’t need to have a discussion because she’s always been satisfied with FSBA, but “tonight I was somewhat disappointed in the presentation [from FSBA]. So I’m not happy… I’m just not able to go forward at this point.”

Rockwell said the biggest positive for FSBA was that “they know the Florida rules and laws, and they know us, and we know them,… but I agree with Dr. McNealy: I think, at this point, the cons outweigh the pros.” She cited the organization’s lack of reach outside Florida and a track record of Superintendents leaving “in that three-to-four-year mark.”

Rockwell also thought it was an issue that FSBA doesn’t filter the candidates, and their policy of not recruiting sitting Superintendents “really narrows the pool.”

Plavac agreed, saying, “I thought it was the weakest presentation… The biggest thing, again,… was no filtering.”

Certain said she had also entered the meeting with a preference for FSBA and added, “I won’t switch from that.” She said she didn’t think the presentation communicated the organization’s experience well: “There is vetting and screening of applications… Every application just doesn’t come to the board.” She added, though, that she “would have liked a tighter transition plan,” and the other two firms stood out in that regard; out of the two, she preferred HYA’s transition plan.

Certain concluded, “If I had to rank FSBA now,… they would not rank first for me [on the transition plan], but if I had to vote for them, I would vote for them first.”

Comments on McPherson & Jacobson

Vu said that before the meeting, he’d thought McPherson & Jacobson’s proposal was the weakest, “but when they were actually presenting, they filled in a lot of details, without even being prompted… I very much like their plan for how they want to do community engagement… I was very impressed with what I felt they could offer us.”

Rockwell also said she wasn’t very impressed by their packet, “but their presentation was great.” She said HYA seemed to have better transition support, “but [McPherson & Jacobson] has the option to add it on,… which, since their cost is a little lower, I’m guessing it would probably be about the same.” She said she was leaning toward HYA but would also support McPherson & Jacobson.

Plavac loved McPherson & Jacobson’s transparency and stakeholder involvement: “I think that just sets a tone for the district and for all the community that we’re working with a company that really values them and their input.” She also thought it was a positive that former Superintendents were part of the McPherson & Jacobson team. 

McNealy said McPherson & Jacobson had “won [her] over,” and that firm was her top choice.

Certain said McPherson & Jacobson gave “a very good presentation,” and she thought the only area where HYA had an edge was in the transition plan, but that could be added on with McPherson & Jacobson.

Vu said his preference was to hire McPherson & Jacobson.

Motion

Rockwell made a motion to move forward with McPherson & Jacobson, and Certain seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0.

The timeline for the search will be finalized at a September 9 workshop.

Joint meeting with the City of Gainesville

After the vote, McNealy said, “We need to have our joint meeting that I’ve asked three times now, and let’s get that on the books, please… About Citizens Field.”

Vu said he hadn’t scheduled it because “we haven’t gotten all the proposals back, and the site plans for all the options, but we can go ahead and schedule something if you want to make a motion.”

McNealy made a motion to schedule a joint meeting with the City of Gainesville, Alachua County, and the School Board, and Plavac seconded the motion.

Certain asked McNealy to explain the purpose of the meeting, and McNealy said, “The purpose is that we need to come together, finally… If we continue to drag our feet in the manner that it has been–… It’s almost the end of August, and so if we plan to do anything, whether it’s purchasing, continuing to rent, or whatever, we need to all come together and finalize this. I think we have taken too long.”

Certain asked why the County would be involved, and McNealy said, “Because we need money.” Certain responded, “No, we don’t. We don’t need the County’s money… We have our own money,” and McNealy responded, “Don’t say that… The County might want to help. You don’t know who I’ve spoken to. You’ll be on the [County Commission] soon enough.”

Certain said, “I want to purchase this… I think we’re muddying the water now by trying to bring in a third body, the County, because we already have a contract [to purchase the land from the City].”

McNealy agreed to remove the County from her motion but said, “This is my fourth asking. And so if you say no tonight, then we’ll move forward in the manner that it has gone, but I know constituents continue to say we need to have this discussion.”

Certain said she couldn’t figure out what they needed to discuss: “If we want to buy the field, we just need to complete the purchase contract and move forward.”

McNealy responded, “Whether you have a valid contract or not, when your people who elect us ask for these kinds of things, we need to move forward with that. Period.”

Certain asked again what the purpose of the meeting would be, and McNealy responded, “Mrs. Certain, I rest my case. Put it up for a vote, Chairman Vu. I will never ask for that again.”

Superintendent Kamela Patton asked whether the meeting would be scheduled before staff brings other options for stadiums, and Vu said, “If this motion passes, I think it should be scheduled after we get information on all the options.” Patton said the presentation on the other options is planned for the October 6 meeting, and she said she plans to ask the board next week whether they want to have a workshop on October 5.

The motion failed 2-3, with only McNealy and Plavac voting to schedule the meeting.