The Butler School District is fortunate to have had someone with Michael Strutt’s extensive district experience and management skills in-house to succeed longtime Superintendent Ed Fink, who is retiring June 30.

Monday evening, the school board approved Strutt’s hiring under a three-year contract, effective July 1.

Strutt has been an assistant district superintendent since 1995. He began working in the local school system in 1989 as principal of Butler Intermediate High School, and he held that position until 1994, when he was appointed acting assistant superintendent.

Since March, when Fink began a medical leave for back surgery, Strutt also has held the role of substitute superintendent.

But while on one hand Strutt is a good choice to lead the school district forward — without missing a beat, as board president Don Pringle noted — the board can be faulted for laziness regarding a search for Fink’s successor.

With Strutt already aboard and already performing Fink’s duties on a fill-in basis, the board had an excellent opportunity to conduct a wide-scale search and evaluation for a long-term replacement for the outgoing school chief. There would have been no time pressures in conducting the search, with Strutt’s presence.

Looking at all available talent is not bad. And abandoning an insular attitude to consider outside talent, while time-consuming, can be beneficial in the longer term.

That longer-term consideration would have been a plus at this time since Strutt told the board he will stay in the superintendent’s position for no more than three years.

He said his plan is to help the district find a long-term successor to Fink.

In defending the board’s decision, Pringle said that an outside candidate would have set the district back six months — and, he’s right. It would take some time for a superintendent brought in from elsewhere to develop a good understanding of the district’s operation and issues, as well as familiarizing himself or herself with district personnel.

However, beyond that on-the-job training period, a superintendent skilled in dealing with issues and problems elsewhere might, because of no imbedded local loyalties, been able to make decisions that in some cases might be more difficult — albeit necessary — for Strutt.

“To begin a lengthy interview process, we would have to not only interview internal candidates but external candidates, none of whom would have the knowledge of the district as Dr. Strutt has shown,” Pringle said in a prepared statement. “This interview process could take months.”

But board members were elected to be open to all options, and by taking a get-it-done-quickly attitude they have cheated district students and taxpayers of the kind of consideration that the position deserves.

With Strutt planning to step down from the top position in 36 months, it’s not too soon to begin putting in place a foundation for the search for Fink’s long-term successor. And, that search should include no boundaries, no matter how time-consuming the process should be.

A superintendent must not be timid or lazy, and Strutt will not be. But neither should the board demonstrate those traits, which, unfortunately, it did this time.