The Kansas City school board picks a new interim superintendent while it searches for a permanent replacement (10/23, Local).
Considering the district’s record of short tenure for superintendents, I suggest that “interim” is a better adjective than “permanent.”
John L. Coakley Jr.
Education and young people are important to me and many others. It’s difficult to observe the abuse of both in the Kansas City School District. With national attention, it approaches incredibility.
Would someone ask that district how much time has been spent with the “guidance” of an interim superintendent over the last 10 years?
Also, after interim Superintendent John Martin’s retirement, does the district incur any financial obligation to him? If so, does that contribute to the current financial benefits he receives?