Board ends talk on rehiring Slayman
Who the next superintendent of Chester County schools will be is an open question. But at least we know it won’t be former Superintendent Agnes Slayman.
A majority of the board – with four voting yes Monday night – eliminated that option by passing a resolution formally stating that the distict would not rehire any former superintendent for the job. That, we hope, puts to rest the possibility that at least some board members wanted to rehire Slayman, who resigned under pressure last year after a number of district employees accused her of bullying and threatening them.
Rumors that Slayman might get her old job back had circulated for weeks on social media. Speculation intensified two weeks ago when interim superintendent Keith Callicutt said he would resign at the end of January because he had been unable to help guide the district through its leadership crisis following Slayman’s departure.
Callicutt, the highly respected former superintendent of Fort Mill schools, was brought on board to use his leadership skills to help the district move forward and resolve differences among board members, district staff, teachers and the community at large. But the level of dissension in the county stymied him.
“After several months of listening and observing, while also making numerous efforts to help us heal and move on from past conflicts, it has become clearly evident to me that I have failed in these efforts and that I am not the right person for the job,” he said after announcing that he would resign.
His frustration is a good indication of how difficult reaching consensus on Slayman’s successor could be. But reassuring the community that Slayman will not return was the necessary next step in relegating her controversial tenure to the past and moving on.
More than 150 people packed Monday’s meeting, most of them beseeching the board to end speculation about rehiring Slayman. Considering the reasons for forcing Slayman out of office, it is difficult to believe the board would ever seriously consider that option.
An investigative report commissioned by the board last year included numerous accounts from district employees claiming that Slayman had threatened them with violence, including threats to kill them. Her leadership style was described as “selfish, vindictive, cruel and bullying,” and she was accused of acting “spiteful, vengeful, mean, cruel, vicious, insensitive, paranoid, moody, divisive and hostile.”
“You would not allow this kind of bullying by a student,” former state Sen. Linda Short told the school board Monday. Before being elected to the state Senate, Short served for a decade on the school board and was chairperson from 1990 to 1992, so she has considerable experience with the school system.
In return for retiring, Slayman was paid $300,000 in severance money for the two years remaining on her contract. She also was retained as a consultant for the district.
In retrospect, a clean break might have been preferable. Remaining connections with the district no doubt helped fuel rumors of her return.
We suspect that the current turmoil will make it harder to find a highly qualified successor. Many potential applicants could be reluctant to walk into such a stormy environment.
School officials need to find a way to put their differences aside and act in the best interests of the community. And the community needs to demand that its elected officials and district employees work together to that end.
That is not likely to be easy. But at least the board took the first essential step Monday in resolving not to rehire Slayman.
This story was originally published January 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM with the headline "Board ends talk on rehiring Slayman."