A seven member screening committee assembled to put candidates up for an interview and selection for the school committee has chosen to forward only one person. According to a member of the screening committee, out of an applicant pool of 22, only 5 were interviewed; and of the five, only one, Mr. Paul Szymanski, an assistant superintendent with Hamilton-Wenham Regional School District, was found acceptable and qualified to step into the job right away.

“I personally was only comfortable with one name going forward,” said Peter Greeley, who also serves on the town’s Finance Committee. “Should we have sent more than one? Probably. But I felt that only one of the individuals was capable of stepping into that job right away.”

At least two members of the school committee expressed discomfort at the prospect of putting up only one candidate to either select or reject as there are no other choices. Committee members Joanne Barry and Maryanne Harring Laurendeau have it right.

To go forward with one candidate is a mockery of the selection committee. It is my opinion that the option stated by school committee member, Kim Conway, who favors bringing forward a lone candidate, should be followed:

Conway pointed out that the School Committee can vote to reopen the search process if its members decide they want to see more applicants.

I would also recommend that the selection committee be reconstituted to include more elected officials and less FINCOM members, who are appointed by a single person, for better accountability; especially, in light of the fiasco we are dealing with because of the school committee’s ineptness in preserving public property under their charge. This ineptness is all the more reason for a warrant article to be drawn up requiring the screening committee for all administrative level hires to have no less than 3 applicants and no more than 5 as is the case for the Town Manager Screening Committee.

This proposal to forward only one applicant for a final interview is reflective of the lack of seriousness and poor management skills exercised by the school committee in the past. It should signal that unless some other part of the government intervenes, that the school committee has no intention of changing the way it conducts business. This move is an absolute disgrace and reflective of attitudes that have brought our schools to the brink of total failure. The entire committee needs to be closely examined for a total replacement over the next 3 years and as they go so should go those they have appointed.