Mad at the Board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at the same school as OP and treasure the community but are troubled with the board.

I think the board president needs to resign and the majority board should be reconstructed in order to facilitate future trust.

They made a mistake. Own it.

Another family weighing in here, and I agree completely. I was disappointed that the HOS was leaving and creating the resulting uncertainty and instability, but I'm even more disappointed in the lack of transparency from the Board about this all. They clearly made a mistake in selecting this HOS. If that's not the case, explain why. If it is in fact what happened, own it and tell parents how you will do better in this next search. The fact that they weren't proactive in planning a town hall, parent/Board meeting or listening session, etc. tells me they're resting on their laurels and planning business as usual, and that's really unfortunate. They had time to go out and pick a new interim head of school to include in the carefullly orchestrated announcements, but parents get a "we'll be in touch after Thanksgiving with more"?

I mean, either you can be upset the HOS is leaving or upset they chose poorly, but you shouldn’t be both.

It could be the HOS is leaving because the parents are impossible.

Could be, it’s a problem common to all private schools judging by your tone.

Nope, a very happy private school parent here.

But I don’t know why you Maret folks are so bent on staying at an obviously toxic place!

Because of some sort of perceived prestige.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at the same school as OP and treasure the community but are troubled with the board.

I think the board president needs to resign and the majority board should be reconstructed in order to facilitate future trust.

They made a mistake. Own it.

Another family weighing in here, and I agree completely. I was disappointed that the HOS was leaving and creating the resulting uncertainty and instability, but I'm even more disappointed in the lack of transparency from the Board about this all. They clearly made a mistake in selecting this HOS. If that's not the case, explain why. If it is in fact what happened, own it and tell parents how you will do better in this next search. The fact that they weren't proactive in planning a town hall, parent/Board meeting or listening session, etc. tells me they're resting on their laurels and planning business as usual, and that's really unfortunate. They had time to go out and pick a new interim head of school to include in the carefullly orchestrated announcements, but parents get a "we'll be in touch after Thanksgiving with more"?

I think the board is trying to save face, but the situation feels extremely unfair. Why should the board remain in place if they are not accountable and parents are dissatisfied with their performance?

Because nobody cares about the opinions of the peasants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at the same school as OP and treasure the community but are troubled with the board.

I think the board president needs to resign and the majority board should be reconstructed in order to facilitate future trust.

They made a mistake. Own it.

Another family weighing in here, and I agree completely. I was disappointed that the HOS was leaving and creating the resulting uncertainty and instability, but I'm even more disappointed in the lack of transparency from the Board about this all. They clearly made a mistake in selecting this HOS. If that's not the case, explain why. If it is in fact what happened, own it and tell parents how you will do better in this next search. The fact that they weren't proactive in planning a town hall, parent/Board meeting or listening session, etc. tells me they're resting on their laurels and planning business as usual, and that's really unfortunate. They had time to go out and pick a new interim head of school to include in the carefullly orchestrated announcements, but parents get a "we'll be in touch after Thanksgiving with more"?

I think the board is trying to save face, but the situation feels extremely unfair. Why should the board remain in place if they are not accountable and parents are dissatisfied with their performance?

Because nobody cares about the opinions of the peasants

Ah, the enlightened have spoken.

[Anonymous]

I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

Raising tuition is certainly a way to make a school financially sound, and tuition is typically a Board decision. So they would be responsible for that.

All Boards make errors at times. The governance documents will provide for Board terms/replacements/etc. already. Asking an entire Board to resign would be a colossal error in and of itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

Forgive me. Silly me thought that Boards who are chosen to lead a school should display accountability. It's not so they can flog themselves publicly and give the masses the pound of flesh they might think they deserve. It's so that we have faith that they won't screw it up again this time. Hiring decisions go poorly all the time - no one is going to perfect on that front. But when something goes wrong, I do expect my leaders to take ownership of the issues and display some level of accountability and self-awareness. Not "join us in thanking our outgoing HOS for all the great things we did together, and Happy Thanksgiving ya'll"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

Raising tuition is certainly a way to make a school financially sound, and tuition is typically a Board decision. So they would be responsible for that.

All Boards make errors at times. The governance documents will provide for Board terms/replacements/etc. already. Asking an entire Board to resign would be a colossal error in and of itself.

Ok. But at the end the money comes from the parents not the board. Haven’t seen any attempt to improve efficiency, but on the contrary to hire more administrative staff, like the assistant to the head of school, which was hired in an opaque process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tough look for Maret, but following Marjo was always going to be difficult.

It will cause some short term churn, some teachers and administrators will leave, day to day experience of students will likely not change.

Maret will maintain its niche within the DMV independents and still be a great school.

All of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

Raising tuition is certainly a way to make a school financially sound, and tuition is typically a Board decision. So they would be responsible for that.

All Boards make errors at times. The governance documents will provide for Board terms/replacements/etc. already. Asking an entire Board to resign would be a colossal error in and of itself.

Ok. But at the end the money comes from the parents not the board. Haven’t seen any attempt to improve efficiency, but on the contrary to hire more administrative staff, like the assistant to the head of school, which was hired in an opaque process.

Operational money comes from parents via tuition. Long term capital acquisitions and endowment growth typically come from major donors and capital campaigns, which is very much the job of the board, and one this board has done successfully.

Hiring and firing school staff is not in the board's job. Their only employee is the HoS. It's their job to fire that head if the HoS make dubious hiring decisions, which they are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No need for plain English. If you’re at the school and impacted, you fully understand. If not, it’s none of your business.

Maret parent here--

I disagree. When you say, "this specific board member" do you mean the Board President?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

Raising tuition is certainly a way to make a school financially sound, and tuition is typically a Board decision. So they would be responsible for that.

All Boards make errors at times. The governance documents will provide for Board terms/replacements/etc. already. Asking an entire Board to resign would be a colossal error in and of itself.

Ok. But at the end the money comes from the parents not the board. Haven’t seen any attempt to improve efficiency, but on the contrary to hire more administrative staff, like the assistant to the head of school, which was hired in an opaque process.

Operational money comes from parents via tuition. Long term capital acquisitions and endowment growth typically come from major donors and capital campaigns, which is very much the job of the board, and one this board has done successfully.

Hiring and firing school staff is not in the board's job. Their only employee is the HoS. It's their job to fire that head if the HoS make dubious hiring decisions, which they are doing.

The board should not attribute to themselves the success of others. Marjo was the one who was extremely successful in increasing the endowment. On the endowment’s financial returns, it’s hard to tell whether the board is doing a good or bad job since the data is not public (which it should be). On acquiring the new athletic field, it’s also not clear that it was a success since we don’t know the actual price paid for it. It is always easier to obtain that piece of land if the school overpaid. But again, it’s hard to tell since the data is not public. Of course, all these things can be presented as successes for the board, but it would be nice if they were a bit more humble and not claim success where nothing exceptional has been done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an outside observer who has watched countless Maret threads get locked and deleted in recent months, y’all are nuts. Your HoS probably said to himself that this job just isn’t worth the aggravation. So you come here wondering what you can do to force a better decision from your search committee and your board? Thats rich.

Look at this HoS as having been your interim- which probably would’ve been a really good idea of following a 30 year head- and now there’ll be a whole new pool of applicants, and maybe a better fit is available this time.

But I also don’t think any HoS will be successful there until they’ve endured several years of vitriol, and until enough current families graduate to the point where the school becomes filled with families that did not know previous heads.

Yep

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tough look for Maret, but following Marjo was always going to be difficult.

It will cause some short term churn, some teachers and administrators will leave, day to day experience of students will likely not change.

Maret will maintain its niche within the DMV independents and still be a great school.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was also disappointed in the search when it happened. I don't think people were in love with any of the three finalists who came to campus, especially since it was known that a very well-loved candidate didn't make the cut for the final round for reasons no one outside of the board knows. I sincerely hope they will do a better job of working with the search firm this time around and actually bring the highest quality candidates to the final round.

That being said, what else do you want from the board? For some reason, they picked someone who (somewhat predictably) turned out to be a lemon to succeed MT. It seems obvious that they told him they weren't going to renew his contract and gave him an out to say he is resigning. It's exactly what they need to do right now. Beyond looking at just the HoS, though, they've been good stewards of the school's long term interests: acquiring the field space at ECC solves a problem the school has had forever, and the school is in solid financial shape. They are executing much-needed planned campus improvements without taking on debt, and the faculty is finally moving forward with important programmatic work like articulating an educational philosophy, writing a portrait of a graduate, and reviewing graduation requirements.

The baffling thing about Maret since the pandemic is that various members of the community seem to be deriving some sort of satisfaction from being upset or angry no matter what is happening. Someone always seems to be demanding that some other party apologize more or repent harder for whatever "sin" they've decided others are guilty of. In the meantime, the students are getting a great education and are generally enjoying their experience, despite what a flop Dennis has been.

If Dennis weren't on the way out, a deeper dive into the board would make sense, but no board bylaws prevent an error in judgement (which I think we all agree the board made). Bylaws should ensure that a board does what it needs to in order to correct such an error, which _is_ happening. And we absolutely should hold the highest possible standards for the upcoming search. But why OP feels the need for some governance investigation or for any specific board member to publicly flog themselves or whatever they're after to show "accountability" is just lame and counterproductive. Let's just be happy we are getting rid of a dud and put our energy towards finding fantastic candidates to be the next HoS.

That sounds fine in theory. In reality, if the board made such a major error once, why should we trust it not to make others? And the board can’t claim credit for the school’s financial strength when it comes largely from higher tuition paid by families. So what exactly is the board doing?

Raising tuition is certainly a way to make a school financially sound, and tuition is typically a Board decision. So they would be responsible for that.

All Boards make errors at times. The governance documents will provide for Board terms/replacements/etc. already. Asking an entire Board to resign would be a colossal error in and of itself.

Ok. But at the end the money comes from the parents not the board. Haven’t seen any attempt to improve efficiency, but on the contrary to hire more administrative staff, like the assistant to the head of school, which was hired in an opaque process.

Operational money comes from parents via tuition. Long term capital acquisitions and endowment growth typically come from major donors and capital campaigns, which is very much the job of the board, and one this board has done successfully.

Hiring and firing school staff is not in the board's job. Their only employee is the HoS. It's their job to fire that head if the HoS make dubious hiring decisions, which they are doing.

The board should not attribute to themselves the success of others. Marjo was the one who was extremely successful in increasing the endowment. On the endowment’s financial returns, it’s hard to tell whether the board is doing a good or bad job since the data is not public (which it should be). On acquiring the new athletic field, it’s also not clear that it was a success since we don’t know the actual price paid for it. It is always easier to obtain that piece of land if the school overpaid. But again, it’s hard to tell since the data is not public. Of course, all these things can be presented as successes for the board, but it would be nice if they were a bit more humble and not claim success where nothing exceptional has been done.

I agree the board should not take all of the credit -- you are correct that Marjo deserves a lot of credit, too. To say that the board deserves none of the credit, however, is just as wrong. Fundraising for capital campaigns is always a partnership between the head, the board, and the development office. They work together to identify donor prospects and cultivate those donors. Board members are, themselves, often major donors, and they also donate their skills and expertise in areas like law and real estate to help make major purchases (like ECC) happen. Marjo and the Maret board worked together very effectively. Many of those same people are still on the board and continue to be a generally competent and function board. Yes, they made a bad HoS hire. They are trying to correct the mistake. To come out right now on some huge apology tour saying, "Wow, we really blew it in hiring such a dud! This was horrible!" (or whatever people seem to want to hear right now), would severely undercut a HoS who still has to finish out the year. It would be nice over the summer when they launch the search to say something about "lessons learned" from the last search and articulate how they plan to avoid another mistake -- but until the interim is in place, it would be really destructive to have a board openly degrading the sitting head (not to mention ruining the polite cover story of a voluntary resignation.)

The rest of that response is exactly the kind of incessant grousing that has become an unfortunate norm. ECC is an unequivocal win for the school, but now the comments are "well, we don't know how much it cost..." At what point will you just be happy that the school finally achieved a huge goal it's been working towards for decades? And information about the school's endowment is public. It is published in the annual report, and it is in the school's public 990 filings. Again, why are people literally searching for items to complain about? Don't borrow trouble.

Every school is a mix of wonderful things and areas that really need to be improved. Maret is no different. Hiring this head was not the board's best decision, but that doesn't mean they've done nothing well. Not everything at the school is perfect, and some things are really struggling at the moment. Simultaneously, many things about the school continue to be wonderful, and there's a lot to be excited about in the near future. You choose which part you want to focus your energy on.