By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — Six residents weighed in on whether Superintendent Tom Geary should continue leading the district during the School Committee’s June 10 meeting.
The residents expressed their viewpoints two days before the School Committee voted 3-2 to extend Geary’s contract through June 30, 2029 (see separate story).
Huntingdon Road resident Brian Lambert said 267 residents signed a letter urging the School Committee to extend Geary’s contract.
“As engaged Lynnfield residents, we write to express our strong support for Superintendent Tom Geary and respectfully urge the School Committee to affirm your confidence in Superintendent Geary to continue supporting the leadership that is delivering results and reject calls for an unnecessary and destabilizing superintendent search,” said Lambert. “Our schools are moving forward, so let’s keep that momentum going.”
Since stepping into the superintendent job in December 2023, Lambert said Geary has “delivered visible progress by prioritizing student-centered goals, restoring key positions and revitalizing the curriculum.”
“His policies and decision to reinstate interventionists and focus on classroom needs has improved student-teacher ratios, increased personal instruction and helped rebuild a supportive and high-functioning learning environment,” said Lambert. “He has assembled a passionate and capable leadership team for the previously vacant roles, including assistant superintendent, IT director, Huckleberry Hill School principal, director of Student Services, Lynnfield Middle School vice principal, payroll and benefits administrator and Lynnfield Community Schools coordinator. These hires and internal promotions reflect strong, forward-thinking leadership and a commitment to stability and growth across the district.”
Summer Street resident Stephanie Budd urged the School Committee to extend Geary’s contract because superintendent searches “measure a moment in time.”
“They are educated guesses often well-intentioned, but frequently wrong,” said Budd. “You don’t have to look any further than Melrose, who will be undertaking their fourth superintendent search in five years this fall after their latest superintendent resigned after being there for less than one year. We have been through two superintendent searches in recent years in Lynnfield. Both followed the process by the book. The people chosen did not work out. That is not speculation. It’s history.”
Budd recalled that, “In 2023, the state of the district was deplorable.”
“Staff were leaving, morale was low and stress levels were high,” said Budd. “Teachers packed the LMS (Lynnfield Middle School) auditorium in unprecedented action to express their frustration and dismay at how they were being treated. That happened under a superintendent selected through a thorough search process. A moment in time that went very wrong.”
Budd said Geary is “not a question mark” and is “a proven answer.”
“He has decades of history here,” said Budd. “He has earned the respect of our educators, our staff and our families. He stepped up at a time when our district was in crisis. We needed leadership, immediate, stable and familiar leadership. Superintendent Geary brought that. His appointment gave this district a chance to rebuild, and the results are undeniable.”
Resident Anne Zeiser Petralia, who is a journalist and a documentary filmmaker, recalled that a previous School Committee voted 4-1 to appoint Geary as the district’s permanent superintendent “quietly” last summer “when families were on break.”
“This was an obvious sleight of hand that didn’t go unnoticed,” said Zeiser Petralia. “Our trust is broken and will not be restored with this School Committee until due process is upheld. One-hundred-and-fifty-one residents have signed a petition to open up the superintendent search, and they represent hundreds more.”
Zeiser Petralia said there are residents who “fear speaking out due to a climate of retribution, disrespect and dismissiveness from some committee members.”
“I saw it tonight,” said Zeiser Petralia. “With the School Committee’s fundamental mistake of bypassing a proper search and due process, both the superintendent’s legitimacy and the committee’s creditability remain in question. Lynnfield’s residents cannot trust your decisions and processes with the precedent you have set; yet many of campaigned on transparency in your platforms. (School Committee Chair Kristen Grieco Elworthy) said on April 12, 2024 in a ‘Meet the Candidates’ statement, ‘we will be hiring a brand new superintendent…while getting the trust and creditability of our School Committee.’ She said that if elected, she will bring residents into the decision-making process. And in a recent June 5 comment on my post about residents’ desire for a superintendent search and for a transparent process on the Lynnfield Conservations Facebook page, she said ‘this is a discussion we need to have in public as a committee and while many of you feel you know, in actuality that discussion hasn’t happened and it will happen in an open meeting.’”
Zeiser Petralia noted that the School Committee’s agenda included an executive session to discuss Geary’s contract and a potential vote on extending it in public.
“What is it a fait accompli? We are going down that road? You have got to be joking,” said Zeiser Petralia. “We never had the accountability of a deliberate superintendent search and considering the extension of a contract for someone who was not put in place through due process is an even more egregious offense. It looks like you are pulling a Watergate on us, covering up the original crime and adding a new one. It didn’t end well for Nixon it won’t end any better for you. So now is the time to pause, to show some respect for the public and humbly correct your mistake.”
School Committee Vice Chair Jim Dillon said former Superintendents Bob Hassett and Jane Tremblay were both hired without going through a superintendent search.
Committeeman Jamie Hayman clarified that Tremblay “did go through a process.”
“There was not a search, but there was a formal process and a formal interview,” said Hayman. “The public was brought into the process.”
Locksley Road resident Edelyne Beauvais-Thomas, who supported conducting a superintendent search, recalled that a resident asked Geary before he was appointed permanent superintendent last summer “why do you feel you are the most qualified candidate.”
“And the response you provided was who is my competition,” said Beauvais-Thomas. “I think there were a lot of different ways you could have answered that question by basically highlighting a lot of the skills you bring to the table, being with the district for so many years and here are the things that are going to help bring this district forward. I think there was an opportunity there for you to really hone in on some of those skill sets. I think the community just wanted to hear that from you and feel confident. I think this is where you fell short that night.”
While Beauvais-Thomas said many residents were disappointed that “due process was not followed” in regards to the superintendent search, she said the community “will rally around whatever decision is made at the end of the day.”
“We need to heal the divide and try to move the district forward,” said Beauvais-Thomas.
Speaking as a resident, Finance Committee member Brian Moreira said he was provided copies of Geary’s summative evaluation, supporting documentation and School Committee members’ individual evaluations.
“I recently shared a quantitative analysis of those ratings with the committee,” said Moreira. “Based on the evaluation rubric and the scoring provided by each member, I identified several discrepancies in the final goal ratings that I believe merit further review. For example, the professional practice goal was rated ‘Exceeded’ in the final summary, yet the distribution of individual ratings aligns more closely with a ‘Met’ outcome. Similar concerns apply to the student learning and district improvement goals.”
Moreira also said Geary’s self-assessment that was used as part of the evaluation process “lacked specific data and measurable outcomes, making it difficult to validate the basis for such high ratings.”
“The final evaluation appears overwhelmingly positive, yet it omits examples that many in the community have observed, such as missed opportunities to engage with students and administrators who spoke at public meetings on important issues,” said Moreira. “These interactions, or lack thereof, are meaningful reflections of leadership and should be part of a holistic assessment.”
Moreira urged the School Committee to hold off on extending Geary’s contract.
“Regarding the petition shared tonight in support of the superintendent, while every resident’s voice deserves respect, I believe it is also important to acknowledge how representative democracy works,” said Moreira. “The purest way to gauge the community’s will would be through direct democracy like a referendum on whether to conduct a superintendent search. That is not feasible, and I understand that is not how these decisions are made. But we do have the next best thing: A School Committee election just two months ago. One candidate ran on a platform explicitly supporting a search and won resoundingly. Two candidates who opposed a search trailed by wide margins, and even lost to blanks. That outcome speaks volumes about where the community stands on this issue.”
Finance Committee member Sarah Kelley, who was also speaking as a resident, thanked Geary for sitting through the School Committee’s discussion about extending his contract.
“I know sitting through this is extremely challenging,” said Kelley.
Kelley peppered School Committee member Kim Baker Donahue with a number of questions, including whether she is a member of the group requesting a superintendent search.
Baker Donahue said no.
In response to a question from Kelley about why Baker Donahue used the word “we” while referencing to the superintendent search petition, Baker Donahue said: “When I said we, I meant we as a School Committee have a petition that has been received by us.”
Kelley also asked Baker Donahue if she knew who started the petition and who was funding newspaper and Facebook advertisements for it.
Baker Donahue said no.
Kelley asked the rest of the School Committee if they knew who started the superintendent search petition “to be fair.”
“Does it matter?” said Baker Donahue in response.
Kelley said in response: “Yes it does actually.”
Elworthy agreed with Kelley.
“We all file campaign finance reports because it matters who funds different things,” said Elworthy.
Baker Donahue questioned why Elworthy was bringing up campaign finance reports when the School Committee was discussing the superintendent.
Dillon asked Kelley if the petition Lambert referenced was advertised in a newspaper similar to the one supporting the superintendent search. He also asked how long had Lambert been collecting signatures.
Kelley said no advertisements were placed in the newspapers, and Lambert’s petition was the result of “friends texting friends in less than a week.” She said Lambert’s petition was “gaining traction during this meeting.”