The Lee County School Board voted4-3 to table a “good cause” proposal for four new positions Tuesday night after a majory said they did not have enough information.

Concerns included not having enough time to read material as the matter was not presented to them until a late hour before the meeting.

The positions were requested in conjunction with a reorganizational chart the board was presented with earlier in the day by Superintendent Dr. Ken Savage. The positions are for a deputy superintendent, business operations; deputy superintendent, student achievement; chief strategic engagement officer and chief performance officer.

Savage had a great deal of push back from some of the board members regarding his reorganization. Some of the questions asked revolved around why his presentation was not data driven, as well as questioning if this was the right time to make changes. Other points made by board members included that people placed in positions should earn and be qualified, rather than placed when not prepared or ready to take on the role.

“I sense a danger in losing human capital,” Board member Mary Fischer said. “I feel the timing is difficult and that I can’t support moving forward with this.”

Others applauded Savage for offering change, something they feel the district needs.

“This ain’t your grandpa’s Lee County,” Board member Betsy Vaughn said. “What I have observed since I have been here is power is important. I am ready for this change. If you look at power, where should the power be? Centralized in this building? Let’s end power. The schools, the principals and dear to my heart, let’s empower the teachers.”

The community also expressed a desire to see change in the district. One individual who spoke during public comment said “change shakes out issues. Let us lose some of these valuable personnel. Personnel is only as good as people filling the position. Growth is painful, Avoidance does not stimulate growth.”

Savage said in November the chiefs were tasked with looking at the organization through new eyes to fill vacancies without having to ask for more money. He said meetings began in December and then in earnest in January and February where different configurations and ideas were presented, as well as pros and cons.

Savage said when Dr. Greg Adkins decided he was going to retire as the superintendent he picked up the reorganization due to the hours of time already invested in the project. The focus became how the district can become more composite, results oriented and performance based.

“It’s a working draft that evolves every day. It is very important that we have more input and more eyes on it,” Savage said of the reorganization chart.

Savage said it is important to share with the proposed reorganization no one is being fired.

“All of our staff has been renewed in this method. Every employee are accounted for and everyone is there,” he said.

The advantages he shared is the district can better service the schools with increased organizational efficiency, enhanced accountability through organizational structure, succession planning and anticipated review of cost-neutral compensation.

The working draft includes a chief strategic engagement officer, chief performance officer, an enterprise risk division, as well as a deputy superintendent student achievement, deputy superintendent business operations and area superintendents.

The chief strategic engagement officer, a new proposed position, would be the “skin of the organization,” Savage said. The officer would better connect the district with all the stakeholders by co-creating the story together with a two-way engagement and feedback.

The chief performance officer, Savage explained to be a vital role, as that individual would help drive value across the entire organization through measuring the strategic plan.

“The strength in our organization is a strategic plan and it’s ambitious,” Savage said.

The enterprise risk division would handle financial vulnerabilities and legal vulnerabilities. The division will include professional standards and equity, enterprise insurance management, safety, security and emergency management, internal audit and public records.

Savage also addressed the deputy superintendent levels, which do not exist in the district. He said with all the important chief level positions there are potentially 15 direct reports to the superintendent.

“We know from a research standpoint with four to six direct reports to allow a strong dynamic and appropriate level of thought leadership,” Savage said.

He said it is the district’s job to make learning gains and produce student achievement, which is for the position of the student achievement deputy superintendent.

“It doesn’t matter what family, income, ZIP code, our job is to produce student achievement,” Savage said.

The presentation put the business service division, human resource division, information systems division, capital operations division and school support operations division under the leadership of the deputy superintendent business operations position.

Board member Cathleen O’Daniel Morgan said she did not get the business proposal at all.

“What this plan tells me is you understand academics, but you don’t understand business. I’m stunned that you refer to the information and technology group as support staff for the schools. This makes no sense to me. This is way off base and I’m not prepared to move forward with that,” she said. “I believe the business operations has not been well considered. Disrespect has been shown to key members of leadership. I have been stunned by lack of professionalism and disrespect and lack of transparency shown to the leadership team. Damage has been done, people have watched how the superintendent has managed the change process. He has not been transparent and honest with some of the communication provided. I am very concerned about the impact to the organization moving forward. I am not opposed to change, some do make sense.”

Savage said the only big distinction is instead of the information systems division directly reporting to the superintendent, they would report directly to the deputy superintendent.

“That is the only substance change, reporting to a particular person,” he said.

He said when he embraced the role as the interim superintendent he wanted to try and return the district to a time where the schools were the priority.

“At the end of the day, I want to be very clear that our schools know that we are here for them. We are here the teachers, the students and families to get the type of school system they all deserve,” Savage said.

With that he began “The Listening Tour” where Savage sat and met with every single principal in the district. Also, beginning in August he plans to visit every school within the first 100 days of school.