Overview:
Following a 5-4 vote by the Athol-Royalston Regional School Committee to extend Superintendent Matthew Ehrenworth's contract, Chairman Lee Chauvette and committee member Kiley Hall submitted their resignations.
ATHOL – Following a 5-4 vote by the Athol-Royalston Regional School Committee to extend Superintendent Matthew Ehrenworth’s contract, Chairman Lee Chauvette and committee member Kiley Hall submitted their resignations.
The vote at the June 17 meeting extended Ehrenworth’s contract by three years, effectively keeping him in the role for five more years. Voting in favor of the extension were Mitch Grotsky, Tammy Duquette, Frank Visco, Eric Jack and Bobbi Newman. Voting against were Chauvette, Hall, Emily White and Christopher Deveneau. Committee member Christie Wehmeyer was absent.
Attempts to reach Ehrenworth for comment were not successful by press time.
After the vote, Chauvette announced his resignation as School Committee chairman, chairman of the Massachusetts School Building Authority Athol High School Building Committee and as a member of the School Committee.
In his resignation statement, Chauvette said he had previously left the committee for health reasons and returned primarily because he wanted to be involved in the potential high school project.
“Reflecting on the past week regarding events that have transpired within my role as chairman, I have decided that it is not really worth my time and effort to continue in that role, nor as a member of the committee,” Chauvette said. “It’s rather disheartening to be placed in this mindset.”
Chauvette criticized the decision to extend the superintendent’s contract.
“I do not support the fast track/railroading through of a contract extension for the superintendent when we just did it less than a year ago,” he said.
In information provided to the Athol Daily News, Chauvette noted that Ehrenworth is a finalist for the superintendent position in the Blackstone-Millville Regional School District.
In a public statement, Hall stated the committee was more focused on the superintendent’s experience in the district than on the experiences of students and employees.
“There was no need for us to entertain an extension at this point in the superintendent’s contract cycle,” Hall’s statement read. “There has been no measurable progress toward any of the shared objectives since last year’s renewal of the superintendent’s contract.”
She also criticized the decision to move forward with the contract extension vote, which she described as a “last-minute addition to the agenda,” and noted that one committee member was absent.
“To vote in favor of an extension for a superintendent whose commitment to the district is questionable and who hasn’t demonstrated an ability to provide transformative leadership in a high-needs district is not just irresponsible, it’s indefensible,” Hall said.
Duquette said no raise or additional compensation was approved as part of the action.
“The decision on whether or not to renew the superintendent’s contract was not required until June 2027,” she said. “However, over the past year, the parties failed to establish goals, conduct evaluations, and follow the performance review process required by the contract, leaving insufficient documented evidence to justify denying the extension request.”
Duquette said she supported the extension because it “provides stability for the district, avoids the disruption and cost of a superintendent search, and reflects a correction to procedural shortcomings between the parties.
“Based on the curriculum and instruction data provided to the committee at the June 17 meeting, the district is moving in a positive direction,” she said.