NORTHAMPTON — School Committee members took an unusual step of publicly discussing concerns about Superintendent Portia Bonner’s job performance last year, a conversation usually reserved for behind closed doors.
The Committee’s Thursday agenda included a vote to accept recommendations by the Superintendent Evaluation Subcommittee, based on surveys assessing Bonner’s performance in her second year as superintendent in the district. Bonner was evaluated based on a rubric provided by the state, with ratings based on goals along with standards and indicators. The goals rating ranges from zero (did not meet) to three (exceeded) while the standards and indicators is rated from one (needs improvement) to three (exceeded).
School Committee Vice Chair Gwen Agna stated during the virtual meeting that based on the subcommittee’s survey, Bonner had received an average goals rating of one (progressing) and a standards and indicators rating of one (needs improvement). It’s the second consecutive year that Bonner has received a “needs improvement” score in her time at the district.
According to the evaluation’s subcommittee meeting on July 21, Bonner’s evaluated goals were to establish work groups within the school district, develop a budget process for the school district, and grow leadership skills. Evaluated standards and indicators included supporting English and math outcomes for disadvantaged students, support for administrators, community engagement and a communication skills.
Ward 4 Committee Member Michael Stein, who has frequently been at odds with the city policies regarding the school budget, made a motion to approve the evaluation and call for an executive session for the committee to discuss future expectations for Bonner and “specific performance issues.” The committee generally holds executive sessions not privy to the public when discussing personnel issues.
But when other committee members balked at the idea of approving an executive session, with some saying that legal advice should be sought first, Stein became more explicit in what his actual concerns were. He also said it wasn’t a violation of Open Meeting law to discuss them publicly, since he had already voiced such concerns before.
Stein accused Bonner of deliberately ignoring goals set by the School Committee, and misleading the City Council and its Finance Committee about the actual size of classrooms in the school district, resulting in a funding gap.
“Unless people are saying that those aren’t real issues that deserve actual conversation, I don’t know why you wouldn’t vote for this,” Stein said. “It’s really frustrating to me, honestly. Especially as the person who is, quite frankly, being treated differently than the rest of you.”
Anat Weisenfreund, the committee member for Ward 2, agreed with Stein that the committee should talk more about their concerns regarding Bonner, who has 11 months remaining with the district before her contract expires. Bonner announced in June that she would depart the district after the upcoming school year.
“There are real performance concerns, and I also hear member Stein referencing other things that we have talked about before that are quite serious and quite concerning,” Weisenfreund said. “Dr. Bonner is going to be with the district for a while longer, and I think that the intent here is to make sure that we work with her to make sure these types of things don’t occur again.”
But Ward 6 Committee Member Margaret Miller, a member of the evaluation subcommittee, disagreed with Stein, as well as saying he had taken an “antagonistic” and “hostile” tone toward Bonner.
“I don’t agree completely with your thoughts about how to supervise someone,” Miller said. “I do not believe it is the entire committee’s role to be supervisors of the superintendent…we have offered our input. We have evaluated. We have expressed our concerns and the things we think the superintendent has done well. And I think that’s where our role stops.”
In response, Stein said that it was the “legal responsibility” of the committee to supervise the superintendent.
“If you’ve given us a ‘needs improvement’ two consecutive times, and efforts have been made by the subcommittee to provide guidance and real honest, significant efforts that I think you would agree are appropriate and good, and they haven’t been respected…then we need to have other conversations as a body,” Stein said. “The fact that you would sit here and say that the tone problem is a one-way street from this committee that you don’t think has the right or ability to supervise? It’s appalling.”
Bonner, who was present at the meeting, did not comment directly during the vote on the recommendation of her evaluation. But later in the meeting, when discussing the upcoming calendar of committee meetings, Bonner alluded to the remarks made by Stein.
“Tonight I sat and I listened, and I’ve been very very quiet,” she said. “But there is a perception that’s being painted about me by one of the members and it’s very disconcerting, very disheartening and it’s also slandering and dismissive.”
Bonner declined further comment when contacted by the Gazette.
The committee ultimately approved Stein’s motion to accept the recommendations and the executive session, with Ward 1 member Holly Ghazey the only dissenting vote.
Discontent with the city’s policies regarding school spending is likely to have a major effect on the upcoming municipal elections, with almost all members of the School Committee not seeking reelection. Stein and Ward 2’s Anat Weisenfreund are running again for their current seat, and Ward 3 Member Emily Serafy-Cox is running for an at-large seat.
Alexander MacDougall can be reached at amacdougall@gazettenet.com.
