HYA, the district’s search firm, hosted a community forum to collect public input as Chandler Unified School District #80 begins its superintendent search. The firm said nearly 2,000 responses have been collected through two surveys and multiple focus groups that will feed a leadership profile used by the board to screen candidates; finalists are expected to be in the district the last week of January for community events.

"So your voice truly matters," said Chris McDuffie of Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates as he described the transparent, inclusive process the board requested. HYA said the leadership profile will be shared with the governing board and used to shape interview questions and selection criteria.

At the forum, parents and volunteers highlighted program breadth and staff responsiveness as strengths. Corina, a parent of a kindergartner with an individualized education program, said staff "always have time to answer my questions," and multiple speakers praised gifted programs, career-and-technical academies and extracurricular options as assets that attract and retain families.

Speakers also urged the board to prioritize teacher recruitment, retention and instructional quality. "Our teachers really need to be appreciated," said a community speaker who has volunteered in the district. A parent noted that post-COVID restrictions reduced in-school volunteering and urged restoration of those opportunities.

Several attendees raised financial and enrollment concerns tied to Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts. One participant said, "the state government is basically paying people to keep their kids at home," summarizing a common worry that ESAs reduce district funding while overhead costs for facilities and staff remain fixed. Multiple commenters recommended coordinated marketing with the city and targeted retention efforts to limit enrollment erosion.

Attendees also pressed academic priorities. One community member said statewide proficiency levels are too low and cited Arizona Revised Statute 15-241 (as referenced in the forum) when urging a renewed focus on reading, math and STEM fundamentals. Others warned that some families left the district for perceived emphasis on non-academic issues and said the new superintendent should re-center instruction where appropriate.

Safety and transparency surfaced in the discussion as well. A commenter recounted a local violent incident and criticized the district’s past public statements about a nearby student beating, saying the handling demonstrated a need for stronger, more transparent leadership. That speaker told the board the superintendent must have "fortitude and the courage to stand up when it's not convenient and address issues." The forum transcript records the allegation; the district did not offer a response during the meeting.

Participants outlined preferred superintendent attributes that the board should prioritize: accessibility and responsiveness to parents and staff; ethical leadership; knowledge of and compliance with state statutes; and the ability to listen to teachers and balance academic improvement with social-emotional supports. One attendee with HR experience said the district needs a leader who is "mature, honest, ethical, intelligent, transparent" and not a "rubber stamp."

HYA described the engagement strategy that will inform selection: standardized questions across student, staff and community focus groups, an open online community survey launched Oct. 30, and optional comment cards for attendees. The firm said community-submitted questions for finalist forums are a routine option, subject to the governing board’s planning and legal review. Facilitators reminded attendees that index cards were available behind the tech crew for those less comfortable speaking publicly.

Next steps: HYA will compile input into a leadership profile and submit it to the board; finalists are expected to visit the district in the last week of January (community events likely between Jan. 26 and Jan. 30). The board will determine the format for finalist interviews and any community question submission process. Organizers encouraged those who have not yet taken the survey to do so.

No formal board action or vote took place at the forum; the session was a public input session to inform the board’s upcoming candidate screening and selection work.