Shawna led the committee through a welcome exercise. 

Bill welcomed Wendy to the committee and shared her role.  He explained that she would be the school’s internal project manager for transition work, would be a liaison to the succession committee, and would be the committee’s advisor on the school’s talent processes, which she currently leads.  Wendy shared that she was honored to be a part of the committee’s work and happy to support.

• Anne shared the updated job description, which includes minor edits from the previous committee meeting and a new section at the bottom, which adds a section related to the competencies of internal candidates.  
• Amy and Shawna M. agreed that these bullets look good because they made clear the value of the competencies internal candidates would bring. 
• Bill noted that this description is not final — the committee would discuss the description as a standing item throughout the transition process and update it as needed.
• Shawna M. said that it feels like this language encourages applicants to apply, while encouraging internal candidates with these competencies to apply.  She asked if this means the focus is on an internal search. 
• Shawna W. shared that the key question to determine when we engage stakeholders is “what does Springfield Prep need?”  We will first hear from stakeholders and then can modify the job description and selection process depending on what we learn.  
• Amy asked about whether there would be a “pencils down" moment, when the committee or board finalizes this description. 
• Shawna W. said there would be, when the committee finalizes the description in order to post the role.   

• Shawna W. gave an overview of the phases of the transition.  She explained that these documents are for the committee, board, and school leadership team to understand the overall process.  
• Sarah, Shawna and Amy felt like the timeline makes the process more clear.  
• Amy shared that this process seems to have some assumptions built in — the timeline is relatively short which suggests a more internal or localized search.  She also shared that it feels important to have a clear and fair process that could lead to a variety of outcomes.
• Bill agreed, and noted that one key aspect of these phases is that phase 2 informs phase 3.  So, if community input indicates a need to conduct a certain type of search, the board can always do that and can modify the timeline accordingly.  I.e., this is intended to provide an overview of the plan (which is why the term “target” dates is used), not to be final.  
• The committee asked about legal obligations, in terms of job posting and board votes.  Bill shared his understanding that the board’s responsibility is to exercise its fiduciary duty to the school in having a thorough, fair, and equitable process and select the best leader for the school.  This means, in part, having clear hiring criteria and evaluating candidates according to this criteria.  
• Bill and Wendy shared that this aligns with how we always hire and that a clear, fair, and rigorous process is always important, whether a process is internal, external or both. 
• Shawna W. noted that part of gathering input is for the board to get very clear on what the job of the Executive Director looks like if Bill is not in it, and it is different once you move from founding to sustaining.  She said she believes the board will discover a lot of things in the process.  She believes that what will be most important throughout this process is to have a framework for the interview process, but be clear that the community input phase will be very important to inform the final structure.  The board will have much more clarity about the interview design needs by October.
• The committee shifted to discussing the detailed, working version of the document.  
• Bill walked through the planned timeline.  
• Shawna M. asked if there would be time for the board to share opinions about the process at the next meeting.  Shawna W. explained that yes, of course, the board is always free to share their opinions and that the Committee will be responsible for explaining its recommendations while simultaneously adapting if needed based on Board discussion.  So, if the committee anticipates issues the board will raise, it will want to address them in committee so that it can guide this work.
• The committee discussed the process of engaging the board, and whether votes would be required to approve a process. 
• Bill shared his understanding of the law, which is that votes would only be limited to high-level process items, such as establishing the committee and voting to hire a new Executive Director, but not to approve a hiring process. 
• The committee discussed whether the timeline would be too early to attract strong external candidates if that was determined to be necessary.  
• Shawna W. shared that hiring for charter sector roles typically happens quite early and also noted that the timeline could be extended after the community input phase if that was deemed valuable.

• The committee discussed the upcoming meeting and discussed what role the committee would have in reporting to the board.
• Amy shared her view that we should start with some reminders about what we discussed at our July meeting, what the current status of the committee’s work is, and what may or may not change during the community input phase. Sarah agreed.
• The committee discussed the talking points.  Bill shared that the intent to provide these is to have some alignment about the process, given how strongly the board feels about transparency.  They can serve to remind people that change will not happen right away or without people having an opportunity to participate and share their views.   
• Shawna W. shared that people may ask questions simply because they are trying to make sense of it all.  
• Anne requested feedback on the talking points by September 4th.  She shared that she will report out on the committee’s work but would welcome other committee members to report out as well.
• The committee decided to reconvene on September 8th after the Board meeting and after Bill has spoken with staff and shared information.