Explanatory Notes:
1. These “Executive Limitations,” or “Forbidden Means,” represent the joint work and agreement of the Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) Board of Directors during the fall of 1999.
2. They have been prepared for the guidance of the Superintendent of the ICCSD.
3. They have been drawn, in substantial part, from the model offered boards in the book by John Carver and Miriam Mayhew Carver, Reinventing Your Board (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997) – a continuation of John Carver’s earlier book, Boards That Make a Difference (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990). The Board expressly recommends that anyone interested in the purpose and intention of the Board consult those books (the latter is now in a second edition). For purposes of these “Executive Limitations” the most relevant material is found in Chapter Four of Reinventing Your Board, “Executive Limitations Policies: Restricting the CEO’s Choices.” Terminology (such as the use of “Ends” in these Executive Limitations) is further explained in those volumes.
4. The Carver model contemplates that a board will create four categories of policies: Executive Limitations, Governance Process, Board-CEO Linkage, and Ends Policies. Obviously, all of these need to be consistent and integrated, cross-referenced and mutually supportive. Thus, these ICCSD Executive Limitations Policies need to be read and considered in the context of the other three categories of policies.
5. As the Carvers explain, and the Board believes, these “limitations” are not the product of the Board’s lack of confidence in, or trust of, the Superintendent. Quite the contrary. They exist because the trust and confidence is so great that the Board is prepared to delegate all administrative responsibility to the Superintendent. They are designed as an alternative to, and to avoid the necessity of, the Superintendent coming to the Board for “approval” of every administrative policy, decision or action. In short, the Superintendent is free to use any means s/he chooses to attain the “Ends” mandated by the Board – with the only exception being those means expressly noted in these “Executive Limitations.”
6. The Board does, of course, retain the responsibility, option and power to modify, or add to, these limitations from time to time. However, it expressly notes that such modifications are not to be applied retroactively. That is to say, in evaluating the performance of the Superintendent no negative weight is to be accorded decisions s/he has made, based on reasonable interpretations of the Board’s policies, merely because those decisions may have inspired the perceived need for the Board to make additions or clarifications to its policies. Only clear violations of policies in place at the time decisions are made will be considered.
7. Executive Limitations are applicable to all personnel throughout the District. Enforcement of these standards is, however, the responsibility of the Superintendent rather than the Board. Indeed it is one of the standards by which the Superintendent’s performance will be evaluated.
8. As with all Board policies, a system of “monitoring” compliance with Executive Limitations is necessary. However, the limitations policies themselves do not address issues of monitoring.
9. To avoid awkward expression, these limitations are sometimes written as an affirmative requirement and sometimes as a negative, or prohibition. The intention is the same and will be clear from the context.
10. These limitations follow the suggestion and illustrations of the Carvers regarding “layering” or levels. That is to say, they begin with the most general propositions and then become increasingly precise. Unlike the Carver model, however, these limitations are organized in conventional “outline” format; that is, rather than grouping all level two propositions together regardless of subject matter, limitations are grouped by subject matter regardless of level.
Policy Level 1: Global Executive Limitations Policy.
The Superintendent shall not cause or allow any practice, activity, decision,
or organizational circumstance that violates (a) any applicable and relevant
requirements of the U.S. or Iowa Constitutions, laws, court decisions,
or administrative regulations and requirements, (b) commonly accepted standards
of professional and business ethics and prudence, or (c) generally accepted
user-friendly stakeholder relations practices.
Policy Level 3 (a):
1. Positive stakeholder relations are expected by the Board of itself, and all District employees, because (a) we are a service organization, employed by, and responsible to, the people of the District, (b) it helps create a better learning environment for our students at school and at home, (c) it is, increasingly, the standard stakeholders have come to expect from all commercial and public institutions including school districts, (d) this adult “modeling” is one of the best ways to educate students regarding the behavior we (and their future employers) will expect of them, (e) it is an element of the reputation the Board wants to create and maintain for this District, and deliberately last, (f) public education is no longer the near-monopoly it once was. We are increasingly but an option in a marketplace of parental choices involving, among other things, transfers into other districts, various private schools, and home schooling – along with growing public support for vouchers, charter schools, and other alternatives. We want quality stakeholder relations because it’s right; we need quality stakeholder relations because it’s essential in a competitive market.
2. Because it makes for wiser decisions, as well as better stakeholder relations, affected parties should be sought out for participation in the District’s decision making process as early as possible with regard to those matters that may have an impact upon them. This includes, but is not limited to, (a) an ongoing affirmative outreach to, and communication with, those institutions and agencies with which the District shares a mission or program, (b) especially those also engaged in the education of K-12-age children, (c) those whose property borders on District property, (d) parents, teachers and staff, and of course (e) students – if, for no other reason, because “It is difficult to teach democracy in an authoritarian manner.”
3. Positive stakeholder relations include, but are not limited to, (a) an effort to ascertain our stakeholders’ expectations and then exceed them, (b) good listening skills, (c) a helping attitude that responds to others by dealing with, and when possible resolving, concerns, complaints and suggestions courteously and promptly, (d) a constant demonstration of respect for, and genuine interest in, others (“every student an honored student,” parents, colleagues, etc.), (e) a prompt and friendly greeting for visitors.
4. Positive stakeholder relations means an avoidance of, among other things, (a) a failure to respond to communications (phone, mail, e-mail) at all, or as promptly as reasonably would be expected, (b) the use of abusive language or other behavior generally considered to be lacking in civility and respect for others.
5. But positive stakeholder relations also means the avoidance of the appearance, as well as the reality, of conflicts of interest, or favored treatment of any stakeholder because of such things as personal relationships, political or financial power. Special caution should be applied in this regard to any District dealing by or with Board members themselves.
6. Stakeholders shall be notified of the existence of
Board policies, including these Executive Limitations, and copies shall
be readily available to all by such means as the Superintendent shall choose.
Policy Level 3(b):
1. Teachers, staff and other employees and volunteers of the District are, of course, also stakeholders entitled to the considerations expressed in Policy 2(a), above.
2. In hiring, promotions and discipline extra care must be taken to document and avoid the appearance as well as the reality of special favoritism of individuals because of family relationships, personal friendship, or prior support (regarding internal “politics”) with anyone in the decision making process.
3. The Board is especially desirous of encouraging and maintaining an atmosphere open to an expression of a diversity of views. (a) It is consistent with the District’s educational mission. If there is to be a spirit of open inquiry in our classrooms, and students are to value the purposes of the First Amendment, there cannot be a discordance with those values in the way in which the District is administered. (b) The Board believes such an atmosphere will tend to promote more constructive innovation, and more rapid response to needed changes. (c) Accordingly, it will look with extreme disfavor on any documented instance of an employee being sanctioned in any way (including being characterized as “disloyal” or “insubordinate”) for reasons reasonably believed to be related to the employee’s ethical and civil expression of facts, concerns, opinions or views.
4. The Superintendent will not prevent employees from
communicating with Board members, either individually or as a Board, with
regard to any matter, especially any assertions that board policies have
been violated or that they do not adequately protect their human rights.
(Employees should be aware, however, that the Board has delegated all administrative
decision making to the Superintendent, subject only to these Executive
Limitations. Although Board members want to be generally informed about
conditions in the District, and therefore welcome direct communications,
they will normally merely refer complaints to the Superintendent without
recommendation rather than take action on them, as such, as a Board. Normally
the only exception to this practice would occur if the Superintendent has
already resolved a complaint in a manner that the complaining party believes
violates Board policy, or is indicative of the need for a revised or new
policy.)
Policy Level 3(c):
1. The Superintendent shall provide the Board, and public, sufficient budget information to enable credible projection of, among other things, revenues and expenses, separation of capital and operational items, cash flow, and disclosure of planning assumptions.
2. It is assumed, in accord with Policy Level 1, above, that there will be a budget document prepared in accordance with relevant U.S. and Iowa law and regulations affecting school finance. However, the Superintendent is also to prepare budget information in such form as to make it most easily understood by the media, public, and others unsophisticated in the intricacies of these accounting requirements.
3. Budgets shall not plan the expenditure in any fiscal year of more funds than are conservatively projected to be received in that period.
4. Budget plans will include such progressive projections
of “unspent, unobligated balances” as are necessary prudently to reach
no less than 3 percent by fiscal year 2004-2005 and to be maintained above
that minimum thereafter.
Policy Level 3(d): The Superintendent shall not
1. Indebt the District in an amount greater than can be repaid by certain, otherwise unencumbered revenues within sixty days (with the exception of Board-approved long-term bonded indebtedness – such as for new school buildings).
2. Deplete the “unspent, unobligated balance” below the projected guidelines in Policy Level 3(c) 4, above.
3. Fail to settle payroll and debts in a timely manner.
4. Allow government-required payments or reports to be overdue or inaccurate.
5. Acquire, encumber or dispose of real property.
6. Fail aggressively to pursue receivables after a reasonable grace period.
7. Fail to provide the Board with monthly summaries of
the financial condition of the District, including any “exception reporting”
detail relating to unexpectedly large receipts or disbursals.
Policy Level 3(f): The Superintendent shall not
1. Fail to provide adequate insurance coverage for losses due to theft, casualty or liability for the District as an entity, its employees and Board members.
2. Allow unbonded personnel access to material amounts of funds.
3. Permit school buildings or other plant and equipment to unnecessary and improper wear and tear, or insufficient regular maintenance.
4. Unnecessarily expose the District, its employees or Board to claims of liability.
5. Fail to follow normal business practices of ethics and prudence with regard to purchases considering, among other things, competitive bidding, benefit-cost analysis, and the appearance as well as reality of conflicts of interest.
6. Fail to protect intellectual property, information, and files from loss or significant damage.
7. Fail to comply with generally accepted auditing practices and controls with regard to the receipt, processing and disbursal of funds.
8. Invest or hold operating capital in ways that do not conservatively optimize the District’s balance of return and risk.
9. Endanger the District’s public image or credibility,
especially in ways that would hinder the accomplishment of its mission.
Policy 3(g):
1. Preface. The Board is mindful of the external limitations on the Superintendent with regard to employee compensation, such as (a) the law governing negotiations with employee bargaining units, (b) what often ends up being the binding decisions of arbitrators, (c) the “comparable” salaries and benefits paid to the employees of other school districts similarly situated, and (d) not incidentally the relatively rigid limitations on potential income.
It is aware that something on the order of 80 percent of the District’s budget is personnel costs, with the result that even a relatively minor change in pay scales – without offsetting income – can have a substantial impact on such things as programs offered, numbers of teachers and the resulting average class size.
The Board recognizes that there is not a perfect fit between the interests of the District and the interests of any given bargaining unit.
Understanding these limitations and circumstances, the Board would like the Superintendent to balance two – sometimes seemingly conflicting – goals.
(a) Negotiations will be conducted with the maximum mutual respect and good will possible, recognizing that all parties are professionals and co-workers in a common enterprise. The Superintendent will be as generous with pay and benefits as is consistent with [1] attracting top professionals to our District, [2] maintenance of existing programs without cuts, and [3] recognition of superior performance.
(b) However, every effort must be made to avoid increases in pay and benefits that are not offset by increases in revenue – and will, therefore, require employee layoffs, larger class size and cuts in programs.
2. Maximum equity will be maintained between admnistrators’ and other employees’ pay, benefits and other “perks.”
3. The Superintendent will not change his or her own compensation and benefits.
4. The Superintendent will not promise or imply permanent or guaranteed employment to any newly hired employee.
5. And see, Policy Level 2(a) 5, above, with regard to
favoritism generally and Policy Level 3(b) 2, above, regarding favoritism
in hiring.
Policy Level 3(h):
1. The Superintendent shall regularly provide the Board with two categories of information in a timely, accurate, and understandable fashion: (a) that which is necessary to monitor achievement of the Board’s “Ends” and compliance with these Executive Limitations, and (b) that which the Board requests as a part of an overall “Management Information Reporting System” designed to keep it informed of District operations generally, even though action on such matters has been delegated to the Superintendent.
2. The Superintendent will make the Board aware of such additional information as in his/her judgment relates to relevant District trends, anticipated adverse media coverage, material external or internal changes (particularly those that affect the assumptions on which previous Board policies have been established). Status reports regarding ongoing crises or disasters shall be provided Board members as soon as is consistent with the Superintendent’s other responsibilities at the time.
3. The Board hereby expressly requests that the Superintendent inform the Board whenever in his/her judgment the Board is not in compliance with its own policies regarding Governance and Board-Superintendent Linkage, especially in any circumstance in which the Superintendent believes Board behavior is detrimental to the working relationship between the Board and Superintendent.
4. Information will not be withheld, or its provision delayed, in an effort to avoid the Superintendent, or other District personnel, “looking bad.” The Board assumes that there are explanations for bad news and, when not, that remedies can be found.
5. In presenting information, proposals or analyses to the Board on her/his own motion, or Board request, the Superintendent shall include as much internal and external data and research, and staff and other opinions and points of view as are needed for fully informed Board deliberation and choices.
6. Although the Superintendent normally will communicate with the entire Board, s/he also will comply with reasonable requests by individual Board members for information, meetings with her/him, or other personnel. Individual Board members are free to pursue their own interests, inquiries, communications and conversations with any District personnel. However, the Board members have agreed among themselves to exercise sensitivity and restraint with regard to (a) unwarranted and excessive demands on the time of employees, (b) failing to make clear the role one is playing (e.g., Board member (but not “The Board”), parent, citizen, volunteer, etc.), (c) “crossing the line” into matters of administration and one-on-one-board-member-micromanaging, or (d) failure to inform the Superintendent and other Board members of activities of relevance to them. The Board expressly requests that, if, in the Superintendent’s judgment, the requests or activities of an individual Board member are impeding the routine work of the Superintendent or other staff s/he will first discuss the matter with the Board member, and, failing mutual resolution of the conflict, present the matter to the full Board.
7. More generally, the Superintendent shall not fail to report in a timely manner any actual or anticipated non-compliance with any policy of the Board.
8. The Superintendent will not fail to supply for the
consent agenda all items delegated to the Superintendent by the Board,
and yet still required by law or contact to be board approved, along with
such monitoring assurance as may be relevant.