There are a couple District Policies regarding advisory committees, E08.00 and E08.01. E08.01 requires the appointing entity to respond to the recommendations from an advisory committee within three months. The Superintendent is the appointing entity for most advisory committees, and a number of them make their reports and recommendations at the end of the school year. If a committee made their report and recommendations in July, the Superintendent's response was due in October. The Superintendent, however, has yet to make some of these responses. They are a month overdue and approaching two months overdue.
There are, of course, a number of legitimate reasons that the Superintendent's response might be delayed - new Superintendent, new program managers, various outside evaluations, etc. Just the same, I would think that professionalism, courtesy, and respect would dictate that the Superintendent get in touch with these committees with an apology for the delay, an explanation for the delay, and a timetable for the response. If nothing else, the Superintendent should do it to keep the committee members positively disposed towards her. They are, for the most part, some pretty influential people in the District.
The responses that came from Mr. Manhas were terrible. They were essentially non-responsive. He would typically address only a few of the recommendations and, often, wouldn't address any of them. As more time passes, the expectations for the responses increases. If the Superintendent is going to take five months to draft a response it had better be comprehensive and specific.
These responses will be some of the first community engagement by the Superintendent and some of the first indications of the direction she wants to take the district. I think we're all looking forward to what she will do.