I'm not sure whether my comments at Monday night's board meeting were targeted in this article but if that's the case I stand by them. My comments were specific to procedure. Prior to speaking I had emailed my board member, Ms. Cole, with my concerns and I included a cc to each member and to acting superintendent Guempel. I asked for a response to all in my cc as to whether they were in receipt of the email.
One may wonder why I believed that request necessary. For the past two years my emails, which were not frequent but were sent on occasion, were not addressed by the superintendent or the majority of the board. I believe my concern is significant I wanted to know if it was read and not merely deleted by board members.
My concern is how closed session is handled and it is valid concern. I'm not an attorney and don't pretend to be. I have however looked through VA code in an attempt to find whether this is addressed by VA law. I am concerned that members are allowed to attend closed session remotely, specifically by phone. I asked that if this is required by VA Code to please inform me of that. From what I can tell, VA code allows for remote attendance but does not require it. If that's the case, my ask is that the board prohibit remote attendance in closed session.
It is my understanding that closed session is intended for the board to discuss and consider confidential matters including hirings, firings, and other HR issues, to address disciplinary actions to include those involving students, and to seek legal counsel on confidential matters. Students, staff, and board members should have their privacy protected. How can that be insured if members attend remotely? There's no guarantee the member attending remotely is alone during the meeting and there is no guarantee the closed meeting is not being recorded if someone attends by phone. The opportunity for a breach of confidentiality exists and should be mitigated.
My concern about this matter was heightened after the new board took over in January. During January's meeting one of the members attended remotely. Additionally, it has been allowed for members to vote to certify closed session when they were not in attendance for all or part of the session.
Per my email to Ms. Cole with a cc regarding this matter and a reminder email about the same issue a few days prior to the meeting, I received respectful responses of receipt from the acting superintendent and five of the members. Neither the acting superintendent nor the members who responded made promises of action though some did write that they understand and/or share my concerns. Mrs. Phelps and Mrs. Gillespie did not respond.
I agree that meetings need to be controlled and civil. I also believe that some of this can be handled not only through Robert's Rules of Order but through school board policy, including who is allowed to speak at meetings and what the parameters are for civil discussion. However, the parents, students, and voters in Spotsylvania do have a right, and indeed a responsibility, to weigh in on matters of importance and how that may relate to school board policy, including privacy protections for students, staff, and board members.
I stand by my public comments and hope this will be addressed in a public explanation of VA code regarding closed session attendance and, if allowed by VA code, by a motion to change school board policy to dictate attendance and participation in closed session.
Everyone should read the guidelines from the Village in Illinois...and how they will run their meetings. Expectations for public comments are clear and how the "presider" or chair will handle all comments and time limits! GREAT SUGGESTION Marty!!
I appreciate the column, but I think school boards—or any public body—should be wary of restricting “ad-hominem attacks” or speech they consider offensive or not constructive. The First Amendment protects offensive speech, though school boards can limit vulgar speech, defamatory speech, speech that provokes violence, etc. But a school board needs to very clearly define the prohibited speech or run the risk of losing a First Amendment lawsuit.
I'm not sure whether my comments at Monday night's board meeting were targeted in this article but if that's the case I stand by them. My comments were specific to procedure. Prior to speaking I had emailed my board member, Ms. Cole, with my concerns and I included a cc to each member and to acting superintendent Guempel. I asked for a response to all in my cc as to whether they were in receipt of the email.
One may wonder why I believed that request necessary. For the past two years my emails, which were not frequent but were sent on occasion, were not addressed by the superintendent or the majority of the board. I believe my concern is significant I wanted to know if it was read and not merely deleted by board members.
My concern is how closed session is handled and it is valid concern. I'm not an attorney and don't pretend to be. I have however looked through VA code in an attempt to find whether this is addressed by VA law. I am concerned that members are allowed to attend closed session remotely, specifically by phone. I asked that if this is required by VA Code to please inform me of that. From what I can tell, VA code allows for remote attendance but does not require it. If that's the case, my ask is that the board prohibit remote attendance in closed session.
It is my understanding that closed session is intended for the board to discuss and consider confidential matters including hirings, firings, and other HR issues, to address disciplinary actions to include those involving students, and to seek legal counsel on confidential matters. Students, staff, and board members should have their privacy protected. How can that be insured if members attend remotely? There's no guarantee the member attending remotely is alone during the meeting and there is no guarantee the closed meeting is not being recorded if someone attends by phone. The opportunity for a breach of confidentiality exists and should be mitigated.
My concern about this matter was heightened after the new board took over in January. During January's meeting one of the members attended remotely. Additionally, it has been allowed for members to vote to certify closed session when they were not in attendance for all or part of the session.
Per my email to Ms. Cole with a cc regarding this matter and a reminder email about the same issue a few days prior to the meeting, I received respectful responses of receipt from the acting superintendent and five of the members. Neither the acting superintendent nor the members who responded made promises of action though some did write that they understand and/or share my concerns. Mrs. Phelps and Mrs. Gillespie did not respond.
I agree that meetings need to be controlled and civil. I also believe that some of this can be handled not only through Robert's Rules of Order but through school board policy, including who is allowed to speak at meetings and what the parameters are for civil discussion. However, the parents, students, and voters in Spotsylvania do have a right, and indeed a responsibility, to weigh in on matters of importance and how that may relate to school board policy, including privacy protections for students, staff, and board members.
I stand by my public comments and hope this will be addressed in a public explanation of VA code regarding closed session attendance and, if allowed by VA code, by a motion to change school board policy to dictate attendance and participation in closed session.
Everyone should read the guidelines from the Village in Illinois...and how they will run their meetings. Expectations for public comments are clear and how the "presider" or chair will handle all comments and time limits! GREAT SUGGESTION Marty!!
I appreciate the column, but I think school boards—or any public body—should be wary of restricting “ad-hominem attacks” or speech they consider offensive or not constructive. The First Amendment protects offensive speech, though school boards can limit vulgar speech, defamatory speech, speech that provokes violence, etc. But a school board needs to very clearly define the prohibited speech or run the risk of losing a First Amendment lawsuit.
Here’s an example:
https://www.journal-news.com/news/madison-schools-to-pay-107500-in-federal-free-speech-lawsuit/2F4FQNBTIZG3VB2U6MQPTGSZZE/
first paragraph correction Marty....Megan Jackson (Livingston) not Belen Rodus
I think he does mean Belen, because he mentioned the open seats being.