School Board Members Vote Down Opportunity for More Transparency

When it comes to transparency within our school system, actions speak louder than words. At last month’s school board meeting, board members had the opportunity to approve a policy change that would allow for a monthly pre-agenda meeting, but it was voted down.

A pre-agenda meeting and the associated discussion would bring additional transparency to actions being considered by the board. It would also help to not only open lines of communication between the Board and the public, but between fellow board members as well. Unfortunately  four board members voted against the policy change: Chairman Don Hayes, Ed Higgins, Janice Cavenaugh, & Jeanette Nichols.

On Monday, school board member Bruce Shell sent an email to fellow Board members advocating for the pre-agenda meeting. In a reply to Shells email, fellow board member Tammy Covil commented that she was profoundly disappointed the measure had not passed.

In his email, Shell listed the following benefits for our school system to have a pre-agenda meeting:   

• Provide elevated communication among board members as well as staff.  Individual board members benefit from the questions and comments of other board members.  Senior board members have the opportunity to share knowledge with the rest of the board and consider fresh perspective from newer board members.
• Give staff opportunity to educate board members more fully on a particular topic which ultimately enhances relations between staff and Board.  Often times there are merits to an issue that are not obvious that staff can provide for a more complete understanding prior to a vote.
• Media, staff, other elected officials benefit by questions and answers.  Since no vote is taken, the focus is on understanding the issues.  The pros, cons, and unintended consequences of a positive or negative vote are more fully known. I am sure you all have taken votes in the past that more information may have been beneficial in hindsight.
• Media benefits by this discussion and is in a better position to educate the public via coverage.  While Valita and Heather do an excellent job of public relations, I believe we can do a better job of educating our public.  County Commissioners for example make funding decisions based on their understanding of School accomplishments, needs, and future impacts.
• Clarify board questions that staff may not have anticipated.  Pre agenda unanswered questions can be researched and provided at the regularly scheduled Tuesday evening meeting.
• Can foster opportunities for the public to converse with board members prior to a vote.  While that can also be a challenge it is a transparency issue with the public we serve.
• Can also have some risk.  It could entice the board to approve of disapprove an item without Tuesday discussion for efficiency sake.  That was a concern that Jeannette had.  While that is a risk, our desire to keep the public informed should undoubtedly override that challenge simply by discussion to clarify the intent of the agenda item and communication of relevant information.

The media should ask board members why they voted against this policy. We hear these same board members say they want transparency, but when given the opportunity to vote for just that, they vote against it.

Bruce Shell has it right. A pre-agenda meeting should be standard policy. We need more transparency in our school system, not less.