NorthCoastOregon.com

On May 31, 5:19 AM, Ron wrote:

When School Board members resign from their position, it is an immediate lawful decision.
Both Foster and Rozinek gave dated written resignations for quitting their positions.
Now according to Jewell Interim Superintendent Jerry Jones school board member Allen Foster has taken back his resignation. Cathy Rozinek changed hers to take effect June 30, rather than the day after the election.
Both board members have verbally decided to take back their resignations according to Jerry Jones.
The Jewell School board would have to make a motion to reconsider reinstating their board positions in an open board meeting.
Both Foster and Rozinek could not vote because this would be an “actual conflict of interest” and the Oregon law prohibits voting.

The school board would not have a quorum to meet. The special meeting should not be held on Monday, May 2nd.

Who gave legal authorization to Foster and Rozinek to reinstate their positions on the Jewell School board?

On May 31, 6:20 AM, Help me, please wrote:

“Carolyn launched post-employment benefits that the school district must honor. The liability amount is $341,000 starting next year.” Samuelson was not pleased with the fiscal results of that program---------- can you please explain this and are future post-employment benefits increasing each year? Isn’t PERS enough?

On May 31, 7:05 AM, Ron wrote:

When was the post-employment benefits voted on and remember that it took a majority vote to be approved?
It appears that the two board members that resigned are trying to
reappoint themselves to their positions to approve the budget.
School Policy BBE states, vacancies will be filled through board appointment in an open meeting.
Foster and Rozinek resigned leaving two vacancies on the school board and did not consider good judgement for the school district to continue operation.
ESD should take charge of appointing board member positions. The two that resigned do not have good judgement and who would they appoint? This has become a conflict of interest!

On May 31, 10:13 AM, Please explain wrote:

Carolyn Eddy did not bring up the $341,000, Jerry Jones did.  Jerry please explain some details of this, Carolyn is neither a board member or administrator.

On May 31, 11:01 AM, Humble Pie wrote:

She’s not going to bring it up, she’s trying to hide it. what can jones do about past board decisions. Let’s have Carolyn explain it. It was her idea when she was on the board. Who was on the board with her and how did each member vote on it. C’mon start talkin.

On May 31, 11:41 AM, Big Difference wrote:

Think about it, maybe the astorian paper received the details who knows and who cares? Doesnt take a genius to figure out who to bark at on this one.  In Humble Pie’s own words he stated it as an idea.  Whos been in charge of acting upon this idea and which administrator is paid generously for the responsibilities of delivering the financial information to the public?  Carolyn does not fit into either of those most important titles.  OH MY I hope the public is reading this stuff, what did one commenter say on a related piece?  Something about calling your dogs in its not safe for them out there.

On May 31, 10:02 PM, Humble Pie wrote:

------ In Humble Pie’s own words he stated it as an idea.  Who’s been in charge of acting upon this idea and which administrator is paid generously for the responsibilities of delivering the financial information to the public------------------------------------------
Talk about a stretch, so you think a board member has an idea, and then the administrator takes over and executes the idea. Wow!!  Now who was the administrator when Eady was on the board. Well we know the board must have passed this retirement bonus. One of those secret executive session votes. It must feel good to have a few people try and throw you a little cover, albeit feeble as it was. 341 THOUSAND dollars on top of PERS.  Carolyn you were thinking of the kids, right.

On May 31, 10:18 PM, Hats Off wrote:

All the world needs is some Humble Pie.  Some comments have been pointing towards Carolyn Edy and Jerry Jones for answers.  Wake up folks we do not need either we have humble pie giving more details than either one.

On Jun 1, 6:41 AM, Ron wrote:

Do not beleive the news media about the Jewell school board retains a quorum.The recall was cerified on 5-26-08 leaving the school board with out a quorum.
Remember it’s all about Jerry Jones claiming that Foster and Rozinek claim to have recinded their resignations. Jerry Jones does not understand basice laws like conflict of interests,authorizing executive session or how important it is to follow school polices.
Is Jerry Jones understanding policy BBE (vacancies will be filled through board appointment.)Who could appoint without a quorum.
Policy BBFA ( A board member may not vote lawfully if an actual conflict of interset exists as defined by Oregon law.)Foster and Rozinek cannot vote themselves back on to the school board lawfully.

Just to prove the point that the school board has proven to disrespect the Oregon law and school policies. Policy BBFA ( No person shall be employed by the district who is related by blood or marriage to any member of the board or administration without unanimous approval of the board members.) Can you smart people figure this one out?
It appears that Carrie Bartoldus has been all about Jerry Jones and the school board. It is sad that people do not care about the truth anymore.

On Jun 1, 7:48 AM, Ron wrote:

I know that the truth is painful, just suck it up. I know your veggies do not taste so S W E E T. Remember all that candy is not good for the soul.
I hope the one remaining school board member understands the law and school polices.The one remaining board member should contact Oregon Government Ethics Commission before being involved in an illegal school board meeting on 6-2-08.If the one remaining board member understood this to be true and refused to be involved, the school board would not have a quorum to hold a special board meeting.

On Jun 1, 12:03 PM, James Bond wrote:

Humble Pie, look at the title of this article by Carrie.  Does it not start like this ... Jewell School Board retains its quorum?  Wow, you say the ESD is going to clear this one up.  By law they have nothing to do with directing the decisions monday unless they are running the board due to lack of a quorum.  They can temporarily use their board to get the ball rolling.  I am concerned about the berries in that pie.
Onto a different topic, does anyone have a take on the issue of the employee at the school who according to various comments is the sister of Cathy Rozinek.  Is this sister the Debbie Brooks who wrote the article here on April 30?  Was there a change recently in the sisters employment classification and if all this is true seems like just one more pickle to deal with. If so call that one the Conflict Pickle?  Must be a big jar at Jewell School.

On Jun 1, 2:17 PM, Ginger wrote:

It will be interesting to hear from those higher up, above Mabbott, who can say (without conflict of interest) if the meeting this Monday night is legal or ethical. I would be surprised if they say that “Yes, they can recind their written resignations after the resignation date....coming back days later “JUST KIDDING!..I’m Staying!”. The rush to establish a quorum before or after the recall was certified is, yet again, a premeditated manipulation of the process. Mr Jones does NOT have the authority to reinstate board members...and unless an illegal meeting occurred w/o public notification Meier, Samuelson, and Skinner could not have given proper authorization to reinstate Foster and Rozinek before the recall certification on 5/26. Could a 3 way phone call constitute a quorum?

On Jun 1, 6:18 PM, Resident wrote:

Ginger,
Call Hillary… I hear she’s in Puerto Rico....

On Jun 1, 9:07 PM, Ginger wrote:

No guidance here...just lots of questions (Only legal minds inquire)

Q:If a school board resignation is sent and received, does the “effective immediately” resignation need to be accepted by the board in an open meeting to take effect (not to confuse this question w/ notification re: a vacant position) giving the resignee up until the next board meeting to change their mind? I can’t seem to find any kind of documentation supporting this suggestion/technicality.

Also, I am not aware of any letters I have written w/ Oly...? You’ll need to be more specific.

I would appreciate it if ESD helped us in the pursuit of new board members. The application process and selection w/ a fresh set of eyes and minds would be more comforting than going by someone’s address or last name. The qualifications may become a bit more prudent.

On Jun 1, 10:04 PM, Ginger wrote:

There is an itemized cost for fuel. Page 36 in my book, under Transportation Services, line item: VEHICLE FUEL for $32k...I think we may go over on that item this year. I too, would like an itemized list (approximate items) for the $600k. I don’t think that’s too much to ask from such “fiscally sound” people. That is a lot of money to approve, to not have some idea what it is going to be used for. Rumor: Some $ going towards a baseball field. I thought money was already spent to improve Foster’s land, now Meier’s land, for a baseball field? What ever happened to that? I’m sure there must have been some sort of contractual agreement to put money into improving a private piece of property, paid for by the school..? There was probably some sort of lease for 99 years, like I did for the fire department to build a fire station on my land so people nearby wouldn’t lose their home owners insurance...something like that, right?

On Jun 2, 2:10 AM, Humble Pie wrote:

Ginger, so what page is Eady’s retirement fund on?

On Jun 2, 7:11 AM, The Pattern wrote:

Get over it WONDERING and like minded. A whole lot of difference exists between written with and did someone mention your name.  The public has seen comments in reference to Oly’s state of mind and supplements that might be influencing it.  Some of the anti Oly and Carolyn have been buzzing your opinions that the school leadership in the last couple years is so much better than before. There is a substantial amount that have heard you and wonder what you might be on?  Oly is not the subject of this article, present leadership is what this article is all about.  Oly does not hold any of the leader positions at the Jewell school, get over it.

On Jun 2, 7:37 AM, Hooeydetector wrote:

Thank you “The Pattern” for cutting through the “Bartoldus Bullshit Spreader”.

I would venture a guess that 90% of the responses here, trying to support the flagging political career of, get this, Clatsop County Commissioner Ann Samuelson, have been concocted by the writer herself.

On Jun 2, 8:21 AM, Ron wrote:

So the school budget shows on page 36 an itemized fuel expense of 32K but when it involves 600K there is no need to itemize the proposed budget, must be chump change.

Q:If a school board resignation is sent and received, does the “effective immediately” resignation need to be accepted by the board in an open meeting to take effect (not to confuse this question w/ notification re: a vacant position) giving the resignee up until the next board meeting to change their mind?

Answer: If we had 3 or more board members at the June 2nd school board meeting, the chairperson would have to announce the vacancies on the board due to resignations and or being recalled. The resignations were accepted as “effective immediately” on Foster dated 5-20-08 and “effective immediately” on Rozinek 0n 5-21-08. When Dave Samuelson resigned it was “effective immediately”, did the school board members vote to allow this or did they announce a vacancy on the board and appoint a replacement?

If the offices of the majority of district directors are vacant at the same time, the ESD shall appoint persons to fill the vacancies from qualified school district voters (policy BBE).
The meeting for Monday is called “Special Board meeting” on the schools web site. The board does not have a quorum as of 5-26-08; the recall was certified on this date. Board member cannot reappoint themselves to the board, this would be an actual conflict of interest.

The only meeting that would be legal at this point would be a proper notice from ESD to hold a public meeting.

On Jun 2, 10:15 AM, Temporary Permanent wrote:

At the time the former, latest, resigned, unresigned slash board members(actually I do not think that is an English word, call it for what is is). Whew, getting back to this precarious contract with the present administrator it appeared like he had about 6 months left on his contract at the time and the board approved 2 more years.  Help me with this one guys and gals does that sound very temporary?  I think a lot of people in the real world would feel pretty secure with that deal especially at his volume of money. As far as his 5 am to midnight appearances at the school we have all seen several of them out here, single employee or not, (heck we have seen some of the children of employees spend those hours there) that school has a little of everything to entertain yourself, do some of your own personal business, food to eat, drinks, frig, microwaves, stoves for that good ole convenience cooling or cooking, i think you get the picture. Where else can you find all that in Jewell, we will probably have someone someday bring a bed to school and spend 24 hours there, also showers and places to hang your clothing. Microsoft started that one long time ago, old school now, hee hee.  I think any common sense person would agree, hooeydetector hit the nail on the head.

On Jun 2, 5:13 PM, Shelby wrote:

Where are you all getting your “facts” regarding state laws and scholl districts’ policies for resignation of school board members?  Looking at the policies of schools that post theirs online they are really different across the state. Some send resignations to the Board Chair, some to the superintendent, some to the ESD. Some say verbal resignations are fine some say certified letters must be used some say that a resignation can be rescinded if done within 3 business days.

The original resignation letters, who were they delivered to and what date is on them? What does the Jewell policy say? Come on all you people that were so lax at attending the policy updates! What does the NEW Jewell policy say on resigning from the school board?

On Jun 2, 6:20 PM, Ginger wrote:

I still have no idea what Wondering is talking about. I signed my name to a letter...as in, at the bottom of a previously written letter that I had no input on, but agreed with at the time. I thought what was going on...all the BS...WAS BS. Did Mr. Seeley misappropriate money? The Department Of Justice doesn’t think so. And I don’t either...I never once thought for a minute that Patty would go along with ANYONE who would steal money, Seeley or ANYONE. I was very disgusted with the way things were handled...and I still am. No one deserves to have an investigation launched against them without more than what Meier and Sameulson had to show...or as the DOJ put it...didn’t have to show. The board at the time approved spending...as lavish as it may seem to someone else, they thought it was worth approving...End of story. And in the mean time the junk yard dogs are barking up the wrong tree, still! stupid dogs.

You can see the letters of resignation online at the DA. They both have dates on them as to the intentions of when they are effective. According to the Secretary of State Elections office today, Effective Immediately and An Effective Date are just that...Effective Immediately or by the date indicated on the resignation. I guess it would be interesting if the current/recalled/resigned board actually took the time to change the resignation policy in the book...good question.

On Jun 2, 9:01 PM, Elsie, OR wrote:

adrian congrats! you officially meet all the requirements for a “young skull full of mush” Maybe you should brush up on roberts rules of order and boardmember duties as outlined in policy book before you start telling the board how to act.

On Jun 2, 9:28 PM, Ginger wrote:

Hey Kristen,

Sorry to laugh...The paper I was reading had nothing to do with the meeting. I think people SHOULD be able to raise their hand or submit questions re: topics. It’s a public meeting. Were you raised to be seen and not heard...? See you tomorrow : )

On Jun 2, 9:50 PM, Town Stands wrote:

I saw a comment early today that mentioned intelligence drops 80% on blogs when real names are used.  I wonder what the statistic are on people that use towns for their blogging name. Think about it, representing a whole town on something as serious as communication quality of resigned and unreigned people running a board meeting.

On Jun 2, 10:49 PM, prove the problem wrote:

Please, do point out where it says, either in the policy manual or in state statutes, that: “Just so you know board meetings aren’t meant to be speedy and simple, their suppose to discuss issues that people may have, if the meetings are too long then you can simply choose not to attend! If you don’t want a say then by all means continue to sit back while the board does whatever they want.” Where does it say that is what the board meeting is for???

Oregon’s Constitution Article VIII, Section 3, requires the state legislature to “provide by law for the establishment of a uniform and general system of common schools.” Article XI, Section 11b, Oregon’s property tax limitation adopted by voters in 1990, shifted the primary responsibility for funding schools from local property taxes to the state’s general fund. Article VIII, Section 8, requires the Legislature to “appropriate in each biennium a sum of money sufficient to ensure that the state’s system of public education meets quality goals established by law, and publish a report that either demonstrates the appropriation is sufficient, or identifies the reasons for the insufficiency, its extent, and its impact on the ability of the state’s system of public education to meet those goals.”

These constitutional requirements make public education a state responsibility. However, under Oregon law school districts were created and are empowered to carry out the state’s responsibility to educate children. In practice, local districts operate as nearly autonomous units of government with relatively little interference from the state unless they engage in flagrant violations of state regulations or statutes.

Local School Governance

A school district’s board of directors (school board) is responsible for providing an education system to serve the needs of district children. It also has the authority needed to fulfill that responsibility. This includes the power to:

* Construct, equip and furnish buildings
* Hire and determine the wages of employees
* Prescribe courses of study
* Provide instructional materials
* Operate student transportation systems
* Provide food services for students
* Acquire real estate for school purposes
* Enact rules and regulations governing the operation of the schools
* Enact rules and regulations governing student and employee behavior
* Enact rules and regulations governing the use of school property
* Levy taxes approved by the voters
* Ensure district compliance with state and federal regulations
* Do other things necessary to carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to school boards by the state

(See Oregon laws governing schools: ORS Chapter 332.)

<n\b>Where in there does it say, “Listen to constant gripes of people who don’t want to listen to answers you have repeatedly given” ???</b>

On Jun 2, 11:27 PM, prove it wrote:

It isn’t a “theory” it is a fact, it is a law, it is what school boards are responsible for per state mandate.

They are not mandated to listen to the community. That is your “theory” of what a board member “should” do to get their job done.

On Jun 3, 5:08 AM, Resident wrote:

The audience is there to observe board business.  Your school board members are elected to function as a board for the school, not a group of people for target practice for a small group in the community to take their best shot at every meeting.  It is obvious that this group of people don’t understand the damage they do to the community and the future of the school.  Go anywhere else and visit another school board meeting, or a meeting of any other kind that is public for that matter and you will not see the disrespect you see here at Jewell during a board meeting directed at the administration and the board.  Any future Superintendent will probably google this district, talk to current and former board members about their service here, and probably run. 

Tips for community members:

Respect the board process
Appreciate your Superintendent
Stop living in the past
Recognize this is a school, that’s it, help make it a good one

On Jun 3, 7:21 AM, Enough already wrote:

Ginger,
Kristin Kuhnly is sharing here from the standpoint of a concerned parent, and is sincere in her posts here.  You on the other hand continue your demeaning and bullying behavior.  Same stuff different day from you.  I suggest you read up on behavior in general, not just in public meetings you could use it if you ever expect to be taken seriously.  Not that anybody expects you to move on this idea, but we all have chances to grow and this might just be yours, I know the rest of us would be grateful for the change.

On Jun 3, 8:30 AM, Ron wrote:

Enough Already

Why the personal vendetta against Ginger? Ginger is a concerned parent asking reasonable questions and not getting any answers.
If the school board chooses not to allow public comment at board meetings, the community should live with that issue or consider recalling more board members
I have followed the chain of command and have sent 2 letters of request to Mr. Jones and have had no reply yet. Who is holding Mr. Jones accountable? So now I have a bullying behavior for asking for information!
Are we following policy BDDH? I would also like to know more about the 341K, that is blamed on Carolyn Eady.
Why not hold a community meeting and have mediation available to work on the differences in our community.

Recognize this is a school, that’s it, help make it a good one. How do we start the process? We could start with using real names here and being more constructive or those that choose not to should consider moving!

On Jun 3, 8:50 AM, Ron wrote:

Had enough ten times over

You are teaching children how to hate by your behavior here alone, what a legacy.

On Jun 3, 7:02 PM, Kristin Kuhnly wrote:

Okay Ron.... Lets just keep recalling board members because the public cant speak at board meetings.  Give me a break.  What good does that do for our kids?  You know..... The kids’ education that you should be thinking about???  You people make me sick!!  No matter who the board is you will never be happy.  Its got to be your way or no way.  Maybe you should take a seat on the board since you know everything!

On Jun 4, 6:31 AM, The Voice wrote:

When people, viruses, etc. are making you sick the wise thing to do is take care of yourself.  When sick we do not function properly.  When we have the voice of the leadership in our school district and their following placing at the top of their priorities shutting down the communities voice you have some serious problems.  This one should not be handled by the sick.

On Jun 13, 11:12 AM, Jennifer wrote:

All I would like to know is what do you feel are the real issues everyone is complaining about or supporting?  (Short simple answers not long novels.) So far in most of the blogs I have read only about petty arguments about supposed violations of this and that, and none of them make any real impact to the problems facing the school.  What does everyone want for the kids?  What are the major problems facing the School? Not just the legal or illegal meeting violations of when a resignation is a real resignation and so on. What do you hope for the school as it moves forward? (Key word “forward” lets all move beyond all of this and attack the real issues not our neighbors.  What has been done is done, move on.)

On Jun 15, 12:47 PM, Ron wrote:

The problem is a lot of you do not care if the school board is doing things correct or incorrect. The parents should set good examples for their children and teach the difference between right and wrong. I believe I have done that with my children. Our oldest son served in the Air Force for your FREEDOM. We work hard and pay our bills, but everyone should understand that I am proud of my family. We as a family have done things the correct way. We stood against the massaging program, Seeleys corruption, school board corruption and incorrect treatment towards community members. For years you people were sucking the insanity at the Jewell School, so-called Seeley lovers.

You mentioned Kristen, the fact is I do not know anything about her. You also mentioned I should give her a chance like everyone gave me. You must be very confused about this; I was never given a chance. I fought for the hearing impaired equipment which benefits others as well. I fought over incorrect and outdated policies and was barred from the school and missed my son’s graduation. I could not treat anyone like that!
The issue is the school board gets to appoint who they desire not the community. Karl Meier was recalled and now what a slap in the face to reappoint this person. Talk about ultimate arrogance, the majority said recall and now 3 school board members might disrespect the majority vote of the community.

A lot of you are so shallow saying things like; you do not even have children in the district. Everyone has a right to there freedom of speech. I wish people would research OSBA and understand that public comments are not to be considered a disruption or so-called target practice. I brought up issues about illegal executive sessions at the local level according to school policy under public comment. Will the issues be resolved at the local level or a complaint filed with higher authorities? We need to judge all things, the bible talks about testing all things to see if they are true! We also need to realize that there are two sides to every issue and in some cases we need to make an ethical compromise.

So lets move forward
1.  Do we have a plan for dealing effectively with the community?
2.  Is there a plan for feedback from both staff members and the public?
3.  Who holds the superintendent accountable for processing letters of requests for information that has been requested?

I wish others would use their real names here, so we could communicate more effectively. It is our freedom of speech that everyone should respect.

On Jun 15, 5:31 PM, Ron wrote:

In the last year can you point out which board meetings allowed constant interruptions from the audience? OSBA recommends that school boards allow 30 total minutes for public comments or 5 minutes a person.
Check the records and you will see that I attended a lot of meetings before the hearing equipment was purchased.  It is a shame that the school felt a need to try and stop my request. The school spent a lot more money trying to side step a federal law.

The Board is not doing everything according to the policies, rules and statutes. You of all people Shelby should understand the consequences of not following the laws. You continue to misinform people but you do not even understand the laws.
So the people that attend board meetings are confused, but the silent majority that never show up for meetings and did not vote know the truth? It sounds like you are still bitter over the recall.

Shelby you said, it takes wisdom to listen to those who don’t use the ballot box to speak their mind. To call people up and ask them what they think. These are most likely the people that choose not to attend board meetings. Most likely these people have only heard your story and remember a story is just that a STORY.
I would recommend that anyone seeking the truth attend school board meetings, ask a lot of questions and demand answers.

Shelby did you fall for this statement? According to the elections division there is no law that prohibits a recalled official from applying for the vacated position.
The election division has no jurisdiction after the election or recall is over! Since the school board is doing everything according to the law, I guess no secret tips are needed for this one.
So when is Richard Lee going to be reappointed by the county commissioners?

On Jun 15, 8:59 PM, Shelby wrote:

Ron, to state, “You of all people"… implies you know me. I can guarantee you that you do not. I am one of those faceless people who were not powerful enough for you to notice. I didn’t have anything you wanted nor did you perceive me to have the ear of anyone you cared about.

I have talked with Jerry Jones, I know that he is an honest and forthright person who has absolutely nothing to gain by breaking any laws or policies in Jewell. I know he is well respected through out the state and more than likely those that know him are telling him to get out of Jewell because people obviously don’t appreciate the job he is doing (please, don’t listen to the vocal minority).

He is doing a tough job in a community where those who are ungrateful are twice as loud as those who are grateful, mostly because per norm we are quiet when we are content.

You continue to say I don’t understand the laws. So, two non-lawyers can quibble. I say you don’t understand them.

“The election division has no jurisdiction once the election is over.” That shows your ignorance. The election division continues to have jurisdiction. Quit making blanket statements.

Which law says a recalled person is ineligible to be appointed for a board position?

You never have specified the exact law that anyone on the school board has broken and the proof that you have that it was broken. If you have this proof, why haven’t you pressed charges with the district attorney?

The Election Division uniformly interprets and applies the election laws that allow our democracy to function. This doesn’t mean they “quit” the day after the election is over. This doesn’t mean they only have “authority” on the day of the election.

Regarding OSBA “recommendations”
OSBA meetings FAQs
In terms of ‘good practice’:

1. It is good practice to allow public comment, but to limit the amount of time for any one speaker, and to limit the total amount of time spent on public comment. This allows the board to proceed with their planned agenda and necessary work. Typical limits are 3 minutes per speaker, 30 minutes total for the session.
2. Public comment should be just that, and NOT a discussion with the board. The board should not answer questions on the spot unless they are very simple obvious ones regarding well established agreed on facts, but should refer questions to the administration or board chair for answer at a later time. If an initial answer by the board chair causes a follow up question then the chair should definitely refer the speaker to an administrator for further answers - the answer wasn’t quite so obvious as seemed, or the speaker’s intention is just to get the chair involved in a discussion.
3. The board should clearly state that they will not hear complaints against individuals in public, and that all complaints must go through the chain of command as spelled out in policy KL. This statement can be made in writing on the agenda, or by the board chair as an announcement at the beginning of the public comment session. Example:

“Speakers may offer objective criticism of district operations and programs, but the Board will not hear complaints concerning individual district personnel. The chair will direct the visitor to the appropriate means for Board consideration and disposition of legitimate complaints involving individuals.

4. The board should limit the public’s participation to the public comment section of the agenda. There should not be cross discussion between the board and the public during other agenda items.
5. All public comment should be directed respectfully to the board through the chair. Comments should not be directed at any one individual board member.
6. The board should clearly explain the ‘rules’ for public comment in their policy - usually policy BDDH, in writing on the agenda or a handout, and verbally by the chair at the start of the public comment section of the meeting. It is common to ask each speaker to identify themselves by name, or name and address, and many boards ask that speakers fill out a form with basic contact information before they are recognized to speak. All of that should be covered in policy BDDH.

Board meetings are meetings of the board held in public, not meetings of the board with the public. There is no legal requirement for the school board to take public comment or input. The board is required to hold their meetings in public, where the public can observe discussions, deliberations and votes by board members on public business. It is good board practice to allow a time for public comment during regular board meetings once a month. Your board may have a policy that specifies the process to be followed and limits each speaker’s time. It is not a good idea to engage the public in a discussion at this time. All comments should be directed to the chair. It is appropriate for the chair to direct the superintendent to answer any questions or concerns with the speaker at a later time. It may also be appropriate for the chair to refer the speaker to a policy regarding their question or concern.

If there is a topic about which the board wants to engage the public in discussion about or get input on, I recommend the board schedule a “listening session” and invite members of the public to attend and speak. You’ll have a better chance of hearing from all sides if you advertise this session. Make clear the board’s expectations for this session and inform attendees that the board will make decisions at a later school board meeting, not at the listening session. If all members of the board (or a majority) plan to attend the listening session, it should be posted as a special board meeting.

What should the board chair do about audience complaints of personnel that should be handled during executive session
The chair should make every effort to end the public complaint against an individual immediately. This means using the gavel to demand the outburst end or recessing the meeting. It can be awkward to shut down a speaker, but it is important to do so in order to protect the rights of the staff member and limit the district’s liability in the situation.

If using the gavel gains control of the situation, the chair can then explain WHY the board won’t hear the complaint in public and instruct the individual in the proper steps, as outlined in policy KL. Some chairs keep copies of policy KL on hand to give to individuals who want to bring complaints.

It is possible (at least theoretically) to move immediately into executive session to hear the complaint, but that is dangerous, and I recommend you don’t do it. The staff member being complained against may have the right to be notified about the hearing of the complaint, be present and have representation present. Going directly to executive session and hearing the issue would not allow those steps to be taken nor does it allow the administration to research the situation and present all the facts to the board. In addition, it sets a precedent that anyone who wants to make a complaint can get an immediate “audience” with the board.

A good practice is to have written on the agenda the board’s policy language (usually in BDDH or BDDH-AR) expressing that the board does not allow public complaints to be made against individuals. Read that statement out loud before the start of the public comment portion of the meeting.

“Speakers may offer objective criticism of district operations and programs but the board will not hear complaints concerning specific district personnel. The chair will direct the visitor to the appropriate means for board consideration and disposition of legitimate complaints involving individuals.”

Ron, to your knowledge have five or more budget committee members met together, without a public announcement of a meeting?
This means that committees formed by the board – whether they consist only of board members or consist of only non-board members – that report to the board with their advice, recommendations or decisions, are subject to public meetings laws.

On Jun 15, 11:03 PM, Shameful wrote:

Shame on you Jennifer and still here pondering.  You attack a citizen by name who is clearly defending the rights of the people and accuse them of the ones that are attacking you.  I hope you reread your contradicting statements and go to bed and pray for forgiveness as we all do make mistakes. I do not know who you are and I do not care, your words speak clearly against humanity.

On Jun 16, 1:43 PM, Shelby wrote:

“9:50 She’s Back” & “10:32 Shelby” Ron opened the discussion with OSBA being the authority as to how the meetings were to be held and we should study OSBA’s guidance. I responded to his declaration.

“It is that simple and we who have been going very lightly on your likes bull - - - - in putting us down have had enough.”
Who do you speak for that I am supposedly putting a down? Who is this “us”? When did you become their spokesman?

“sending success off the straight and narrow.”
Which straight and narrow was that? Before OSBA and ESD became involved? Seeley’s straight and narrow? The straight and narrow that had no state sanctified curriculum or textbooks?

I am pretty tired of this constant demonizing of people who just