****** CORRECTION: An editorial Wednesday erred in stating that former Wake County schools Superintendent Del Burns was fired. Burns resigned Feb. 16, to be effective June 30, but the school board majority - angered by his criticism of changes it wanted to make in the school system's diversity policy - put him on paid administrative leave until his departure date. ******
Certainly some members of the Wake County school board are not alone in their inclination toward a secret search for a successor to Superintendent Del Burns, fired by the board majority because he publicly differed with its members in their opposition to a diversity policy in school assignments and other issues. Almost every time similar searches are conducted - for example, for chancellors in the state university system - the argument for secrecy is the same: good candidates won't apply if they know their names will be divulged before the choice is made.
And so the search is left in the hands of companies such as Chicago-based Heidrick & Struggles, which will be paid more than $80,000 to conduct the search and recommend candidates. These companies are for-profit, of course - in effect employment agencies for executives. Candidates are "vetted," meaning that the search firms are supposed to turn up potential problems.
All that's well and good, but there's a difference in searching for a public school superintendent and a CEO for a private company. And by conducting the search openly, even having some candidates meet with the public in town hall gatherings and the like, the school board could build confidence in its final choice.
Skeptical? No wonder
Confidence is something this board desperately needs. As shown by the strong public opposition to its abolition of the diversity policy and to the resegregation of schools that likely will result from that action, the school board majority faces a sharply divided community. The majority was formed last year with district elections that put anti-diversity activists with little leadership experience on the board.
By dumping Burns and the diversity policy, the majority has managed to appear oblivious to the views of a substantial number of constituents who don't agree with them. Those constituents understandably are skeptical of the majority's aim to find a superintendent who will obediently carry out their wishes.
Will they make a choice based on ideology? Do they have a candidate in mind whose name they want to keep secret for some reason? Do they want to eliminate possible choices who might find favor in the community but who disagree with the direction of their policies?
When public bodies are inclined to hide something, that kind of skepticism is entirely justified. And no public board should be closer to constituents and more interested in their opinions than a school board.
Openness works
As to the issue of good candidates shying away from public searches, the truth is that many public searches, successful ones, have been conducted in other states. And there have been times in North Carolina when the names of finalists for university positions, for example, have been released.
Giving out finalists' names provides an extra measure of scrutiny, one that a board operating in good faith should welcome. Media outlets can interview those who know the finalists. Citizens who may know them can speak out and compare their qualifications. Familiarity, in the case of selecting someone for a public position, breeds not contempt but confidence.
The school board has a chance here to go against knee-jerk attitudes about the complications of candor and instead conduct itself with a breath of fresh air and some sunshine. Majority members could even begin a healing process by opening doors they'd otherwise be inclined to close. That would be the wise choice, and something in their own interest as well as that of the community.
