Our five school board members are a team of leaders who are charged with improving our school district. Team members do not always agree on solutions. Can you provide us with an example of a time where you had a conflict with other team members and how the conflict was resolved.

TL;DR: To rebuild community trust, I advocated for more open discussion of board decisions instead of letting them pass quietly on consent agendas. This created friction with other members. We resolved it through a facilitated discussion that helped us understand our different styles and find new ways to ensure transparency, ultimately making us a stronger team.

One of the greatest conflicts I’ve experienced on our board has centered on governance. School boards are among the most powerful forces shaping public education, but without structure, they can become reactive or overly influenced by adult-centered priorities. Effective governance models provide that essential structure—defining roles, responsibilities, and systems of accountability so that decisions truly serve students.

I joined in 2022, a time when community trust was low and concerns were clear: too many decisions seemed to have been made behind closed doors. Rebuilding that trust was my top priority. Guided by board policy and principles of good governance, I began moving items out of consent agendas to ensure ideas were openly discussed before votes were cast. While consistent with policy, this was a departure from how our board often operated. In my nearly 30 years of leadership, I have seen how meetings can either reinforce credibility or undermine it. They are most effective as a genuine forum for discussion, not a formality that leaves the impression that outcomes are predetermined.

This misalignment created friction. I first tried to resolve it through one-on-one conversations, but ultimately requested a facilitated team discussion at our retreat. That proved productive. We recognized that while most board members and administrators had worked together for decades, I was newer and brought a different governance lens. I also learned members were less comfortable in policy or advocacy roles. With this new understanding, I adjusted my approach to find alternative ways to ensure transparency and accountability that respected each member’s comfort level.

Ultimately, the conflict helped us grow. For me, leadership means creating systems that allow every voice to be heard and valued. This experience reminded me that how we work together is just as important as the decisions we make. Even when full consensus isn’t possible, we can still move forward by recognizing and respecting each person’s limits.