"Where Fillmore County News Comes First"
Online Edition
Tuesday, May 21st, 2013
Volume ∞ Issue ∞
- 11:44:26, May 21st 2013 - airmaxs52274 - Have you ever thought about adding a little bit more than just your a ... [Read More]
- 5:56:33, May 18th 2013 - modgudur - I guess the child is anti-gun control since Obama went to all that trouble ... [Read More]
- 9:27:41, May 16th 2013 - caal girl - Nice outfit on you. I loved some of the dresses but am holding my breath ... [Read More]
- 2:03:34, May 14th 2013 - - Thanks for sharing the trip with us! ... [Read More]
- 4:12:01, May 9th 2013 - Amanda Ziebell - Wow! Thanks to the Fillmore County Journal for this kind story. For a ... [Read More]
- 11:47:30, May 7th 2013 - EW - ramble.....ramble.....ramble..... ... [Read More]
- 10:25:25, May 7th 2013 - Thunder6 - Great article! I love to see the Youth of Fillmore County receiveing acco ... [Read More]
- 6:52:10, May 6th 2013 - Jason Sethre, Publisher of Fillmore County Journal & Olmsted County Journal - Maryh, ... [Read More]
- 7:29:56, May 5th 2013 - maryh - Where are OCJ's available for pickup...other than at the new office? ... [Read More]
- 2:41:47, May 3rd 2013 - Remark1976 - Mrs. Buckbee, I just looked up Senate File 796 and in it there are said p ... [Read More]
Miller out as Rushford-Peterson Superintendent
Fri, Mar 23rd, 2007
Posted in Education
Posted in Education
Comments
RUSHFORD - In a move that came as a surprise to many, at least those outside the school system, the Rushford-Peterson school board voted not to renew the contract of Superintendent Jeff Miller at their regular March meeting.
Board Chair John Nitecki recommended that the board not renew Miller's contract. Roger Metz made the formal motion not to renew, and Jim Kitchens seconded. With no discussion, the board went immediately to a roll-call vote where the decision was unanimous.
In February, the board conducted a 90-minute closed session to discuss their evaluation of the superintendent with him. Nitecki read a prepared statement after the meeting was re-opened that indicated Miller's review was mixed.
The statement praised Miller in six specific areas: developing organized and accurate board meeting agendas, satisfactory performance regarding district financial operations, performing well in contract negotiations, handling the bomb threat at the middle school, performing well in the subsequent development of a school security plan, and performing well in preparation of the annual budget.
The statement mentioned five specific areas where "growth" was needed: being the liaison between school and community, developing favorable relationships with employees and community members, completing work assignments in accordance of the Master Agreement, developing and managing a comprehensive strategic planning process. Nitecki added that the board also requested Miller regularly attend school community events.
"He wasn't around much-we rarely saw him," said one district employee of Miller, adding that he was a "personable, likable guy."
Miller also served as middle school principal and thus traveled frequently between Rushford and Peterson. For the past month, he's also been serving as elementary principal since Bruce Blixt requested medical leave. Miller also assisted in Athletic Director duties regarding the recent state tournaments since high school principal Brad Johnson was also on medical leave. (Mike Honken is officially Johnson's replacement during his leave.)
Nitecki said his recommendation last Monday came after he'd met personally with Miller for several weeks regarding his performance. No other information was given, other than that Nitecki recommended non-renewal.
"It would be disrespectful of the superintendent for me to comment," Nitecki said after the meeting when approached by the press. When asked whether the taxpayers' right to know what's going on in the district shouldn't be balanced with that respect for employees, Nitecki said, "I'm not saying anything that might disrupt this board. I'm not doing it."
Members Greg Smith and George Ingram referred the press back to Nitecki when approached with questions. Miller also had no comment immediately following the meeting.
This was Miller's fourth year serving as superintendent for the district.
Board Chair John Nitecki recommended that the board not renew Miller's contract. Roger Metz made the formal motion not to renew, and Jim Kitchens seconded. With no discussion, the board went immediately to a roll-call vote where the decision was unanimous.
In February, the board conducted a 90-minute closed session to discuss their evaluation of the superintendent with him. Nitecki read a prepared statement after the meeting was re-opened that indicated Miller's review was mixed.
The statement praised Miller in six specific areas: developing organized and accurate board meeting agendas, satisfactory performance regarding district financial operations, performing well in contract negotiations, handling the bomb threat at the middle school, performing well in the subsequent development of a school security plan, and performing well in preparation of the annual budget.
The statement mentioned five specific areas where "growth" was needed: being the liaison between school and community, developing favorable relationships with employees and community members, completing work assignments in accordance of the Master Agreement, developing and managing a comprehensive strategic planning process. Nitecki added that the board also requested Miller regularly attend school community events.
"He wasn't around much-we rarely saw him," said one district employee of Miller, adding that he was a "personable, likable guy."
Miller also served as middle school principal and thus traveled frequently between Rushford and Peterson. For the past month, he's also been serving as elementary principal since Bruce Blixt requested medical leave. Miller also assisted in Athletic Director duties regarding the recent state tournaments since high school principal Brad Johnson was also on medical leave. (Mike Honken is officially Johnson's replacement during his leave.)
Nitecki said his recommendation last Monday came after he'd met personally with Miller for several weeks regarding his performance. No other information was given, other than that Nitecki recommended non-renewal.
"It would be disrespectful of the superintendent for me to comment," Nitecki said after the meeting when approached by the press. When asked whether the taxpayers' right to know what's going on in the district shouldn't be balanced with that respect for employees, Nitecki said, "I'm not saying anything that might disrupt this board. I'm not doing it."
Members Greg Smith and George Ingram referred the press back to Nitecki when approached with questions. Miller also had no comment immediately following the meeting.
This was Miller's fourth year serving as superintendent for the district.









