I have been provided a PDF of a message to the school district team from Park City School District Superintendent Dr. Gildea, saying she is retiring from the Park City School District at the end of January.

I’ll write more later on what this means for this district, but I wish her luck. I mean that, honestly. All of us are trying to make it through this world. Park City may not have been the right fit, and maybe there is a place where her style will work better.

Likewise, her message did say “retire,” so perhaps she is done.

For us in Park City, we are now looking to the future. Let’s get the next Superintendent right.

Thank you to everyone who supported Karl and my petition not to renew Dr. Gildea’s contract this year. We did well; as of now, there are over 525 signatures. Unfortunately, we didn’t do well enough. The Park City School Board voted 3-2 to renew her contract.

As they say, though, the show goes on. We’ll have to see what it means when the new board is seated in January. They could retain Dr. Gidlea, or they may fire her. If they fire her and her new contract is structured like the current one, taxpayers will be on the hook for about $275,000 in compensation for being let go. That’s a lot of money.

One of the criticisms that I have frequently received from School Board President Andrew Caplan is that my criticism of Superintendent Dr. Gildea is unfair or perhaps mean-spirited. My response is, please don’t confuse dissent with disloyalty. I want the best for our schools. I want the best for our teachers. I want the best for our children. Park City affords many of our children a better chance for success because of what it inherently is. We shouldn’t squander that opportunity. I’m afraid that we are.

Are the additions of preschools in our elementary schools good? Yes. Does US News rate Park City Schools highly? Yes. Was A/C working in the high school yesterday? No. Will our construction come in at budget? Maybe. Will bullying and racism be almost non-existent in our schools? Will the school district figure out how to coexist with other local governments? Will teachers be treated with respect? I’m not so sure.

Will Dr. Gildea perform like a rock star over the next five months? I hope so. Time will tell.

The show goes on.

In today’s school board meeting, it appears that the board will decide whether to renew superintendent Dr. Jill Gildea’s contract. This will be a two-year extension on top of the existing contract, which runs through next June.

I have argued that the current school board should not vote to renew Dr. Gidlea’s contract. With three members of the current board not running for reelection, it should be left to the 2025 board to decide whether they want to continue working with the superintendent. If the current board renews her contract and the future board decides to terminate Dr. Gildea’s relationship with PCSD, it will cost taxpayers over $250,000.

If you have an opinion on this issue, I would encourage you to write to the school board immediately. The board can be emailed at:

Karl Persson and I launched a Change.org petition asking the Park City Board of Education not to vote on renewing the Superintendent’s contract this year. We felt it was best left to the new school board starting in January 2025 since they will have to work with the Superintendent going forward.

I am hearing that three members of the school board may be planning to vote for Dr. Gildea’s renewal as soon as Tuesday. However, I believe current school board members are making an assumption that they shouldn’t make — that the new board will vote to oust Dr. Gildea by default. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case.

School Board President Andrew Caplan has argued that Dr. Jill Gildea has done an excellent job as Superintendent. He has also stated that there have been performance reviews dating back to the beginning of her tenure.

What I don’t have is access to those reviews. Perhaps there have been formal performance reviews each year. In those reviews maybe Dr. Gildea has shown she has excelled against a confluence of events. Perhaps she did everything she could to stem the hate, harassment, and bullying documented in the Office of Civil Rights complaints. If we all had the same information, renewing Dr. Gildea’s contract this year may seem obvious.

I would guess that School Board President Andrew Caplan sees it that way. It seems obvious to him.

So, if it is obvious, why not let the future board decide? In January 2025, there will be nothing more important to the new school board than this. They can read Dr. Gildea’s formal performance reviews since 2018. They can see her successes and how she overcame adversity over seemingly insurmountable events.

There seems to be an assertion that the new board members are already out to get Dr. Gildea. That doesn’t make sense. From what I have seen, school board members are willing to serve our community because they want our schools to be the best possible for our children. There are no singular issues.

Again, if it is obvious to most that Dr. Gildea has done a good job and should continue to guide our schools, then the members of the 2025 school board will see it — especially once they read the performance reviews.

If the board won’t let the next board have a vote, then they are, perhaps, more cynical than me. If that’s the case, I’m not sure about their motivation.

If you would like to review the petition Karl Persson and I launched that asks for the school board to not vote on the superintendent’s contract until the new board assumes office in January, it can be found here:

View Petition

If you would like to email the school board to voice your opinion on whether they should vote to renew the superintendents contract before the new board is seated, the email address is:

Thanks for your support.

On Sunday, Karl Persson and I launched a petition urging the Park City School Board to delay renewing Superintendent Jill Gildea’s contract until the new school board is seated. School Board President Andrew Caplan stated that the current board intends to vote on Dr. Gildea’s contract, which we believe is inappropriate.

We feel the new school board, seated in January 2025, should make the decision on the superintendent, as they will be responsible for that choice. As of now, we have over 100 signatures supporting this effort, which is incredible.

However, we anticipated not receiving signatures from those closest to our schools — our teachers and district employees. The reason? Fear of retaliation. If they were to sign the petition on Change.org, they might face repercussions from the school district.

In any organization, those closest to the situation can provide the most accurate insights. In this case, that would be the teachers and employees of the Park City School District.

This presents a dilemma.

To address this, we have created a button at the bottom of this page for PCSD employees to show their support for allowing the new school board to decide on renewing Superintendent Gildea’s contract. This way, employees can express their opinions without fear.

Please note, Parkrag will not track your identity, IP address, or location when you click this button. We encourage you to use your personal phone, laptop, or iPad to do so.

Historically, when feedback is requested from employees, the Park City School District often responds by trying to limit employees’ freedom of expression. They usually send an email advising employees not to respond, claiming uncertainty about how their responses will be used.

Let’s circumvent that argument. Here’s exactly how your response will be used: When reporting on the petition and votes, we will state that X number of people have signed the petition. We will also note that we have received X number of anonymous votes from individuals who support the petition but cannot provide their names due to fear of retribution.

That’s it.

I don’t know if you’ll trust Parkrag to vocalize your support. I would hope we have earned your trust.

If you’d like to support the petition without providing your name, please click the button below.

Thank you for your consideration.

Update: Originally, I had written that “A group of advocates surveyed school employees about the Park City School District in 2022 and now again in 2024.” I received comments that felt this implied that all of the same people who were involved with this survey in 2022 were also involved in this iteration. I checked with a member of the group , and not all people involved in 2022 were involved in this survey.

I am sorry for the confusion. I have updated the language. Please see a note at the bottom of this page for information from Educational Advocates.

In April, school employees were surveyed about the Park City School District. This was an anonymous survey from an outside group called Educational Advocates.

I found several interesting takeaways from the survey:

• Principals scored better than the Superintendent in all areas.
• Board members scored very poorly in all areas surveyed.
• The Superintendent scored poorly in all areas.
• 64% of participants either don’t know, disagree or strongly disagree that workplace conflicts are addressed promptly and professionally.
• 32% of participants feel they have the resources and tools to work effectively.
• 48% of participants either don’t know or disagree that serious issues, such as bullying, hate speech, and discriminatory behavior, are addressed quickly, fairly, and professionally in the workplace.

For transparency, I want to disclose my personal background and biases. I ran for the school board in 2022 but did not win. Additionally, I have concerns about the Superintendent’s leadership, believing that her tenure has been marred by numerous scandals in Park City.

With that context in mind, let’s examine some charts and data related to the board of education (school board).

It’s scathing. I had hoped that the new board members would improve the school district, but that’s not apparent in this survey.

• 70% believe the Board members don’t keep their commitments
• 84% feel the Board isn’t transparent
• 70% feel the Board doesn’t understand employee needs

The Board’s best metrics were “The district policies that impact my job are reasonable” and “My Board members know and adhere to education laws, codes, guidelines, and rules” with 30% agreeing on each.

For the Superintendent, it is almost as bad.

• 62% of respondents feel the Superintendent isn’t informed about their school’s issues
• 66% feel the Superintendent doesn’t communicate transparently and openly to keep employees informed
• 61% feel the Superintendent doesn’t keep her promises and commitments.

The Superintendent’s best metric was “My Superintendent knows and adheres to district policies” with 41% agreeing.

When I receive a survey like this, I look for indicators of potential bias. For instance, if all responses are overwhelmingly negative, it raises suspicion that the results may be skewed by disgruntled employees.

However, in this particular survey, it is noteworthy that Principals are generally well-regarded.

I would think disgruntled employees would rate their closest “superior” negatively. That’s clearly not the case. So, the fact that Principals and Assistant Principals were rated so highly tends to confirm the low ratings of the Board and the Superintendent.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t call out one problem with this survey: participation.

In 2024, 453 employees were emailed, 297 opened the email, and 46 responded with answers. That’s a 16% response rate for those who opened the email, which is not great.

According to the survey, “within hours of survey delivery to employees, the PCSD District Office and Principals issued emails or verbal warnings to employees discouraging participation or urging employees to use caution, which we believe had significant impact in survey participation.”

Regardless of the reason, it isn’t as complete a view into the world of our schools as one would hope. Perhaps the other 84% that didn’t respond don’t have an opinion.

My takeaway is that there is value in the opinion of the 16% — especially since feedback was both positive and negative.

If you are interested, I would encourage you to read the survey. Near the end, you’ll get great feedback from survey participants like:

• “My job would be more satisfying if I had less meetings and data graphs to fill out. I need more time to create and personalize lessons.”
• “I feel that we as a system cater to those who resist change. This is why we have seen so little change to our education practices in my 25+ years in education. We can do sooo much more. We have the knowledge. We have example schools. We have the skills. We have the talent… We need to do it. What are we waiting for?”
• “I’m living the dream”
• “I’ve already commented quite a bit on this! PCSD is not only top heavy, it’s top heavy with people that don’t directly impact the children in our district. It’s so frustrating, and the community should be alarmed.”

Overall the survey provides a glimpse into how some employees view the district. I would encourage you to read the the entire survey here.

A note from Educational Advocates on the Survey:

This PCSD employee survey was prompted by the need for employees to speak up without fear of retaliation from upper management.  It was created initially by a group of about twelve stakeholders, including a few PCSD employees who consulted on the questions posed, an employee of the State BOE, a survey expert consultant, and members of the PCSD parent and taxpayer community.  This group came together with a singular goal of implementing a high-quality, unbiased employee survey wherein employees could provide positive and negative feedback about our local school system. The anonymity of all parties involved is not just a requirement but a condition for personal safety and the survey’s integrity.

For creators, anonymity:
– reduces bias and influence
– minimizes the risk of respondents being influenced by who is conducting the survey
– protects from potential harassment or retribution
– maintains objectivity of the survey process, focusing on data collection rather than the individuals collecting it
– enhances credibility of the survey results, underscoring impartiality and confidentiality of the data collection process

For employees, anonymity:
– encourages honesty, leading to more accurate and valuable insights
– reduces fear of retaliation from peers and supervisors
– generally increases participation rates
– demonstrates that the survey conductors value and respect employee privacy
– increases diversity and detail in responses, providing a richer dataset and more actionable insights for improving the workplace environment.

We urge PCSD and our community not to speculate about the identities of creators and participants.