A school board vice president makes a number of recommendations for making the school board business more open and transparent. -DB
Press Banner
April 2, 2009
Commentary
By Jondi Gumz
It’s time to press the reset button on the Scotts Valley Unified School District.
The board’s governance handbook says: “We want to be perceived by our community as a governance team that is open and transparent in decision making.”
Unfortunately, that might not be the case.
Let’s learn from experience and improve our practices. We need to ensure our school district is following the intent and spirit of the Brown Act and the California Public Records Act.
When I saw public comment had been omitted from an agenda prepared by a consultant for a March 6 strategic planning meeting, I brought it to the attention of our superintendent.
The subject of strategic planning is not a closed-session matter. It is potentially the most important meeting of the year, other than budget workshops and the superintendent’s evaluation. It is an excellent opportunity to be open with our community.
When a majority of board members receive a paper or online copy of a document, it is considered a “disclosable public record” and “shall be made available upon request without delay.”
If an agenda is prepared for a meeting attended by a majority of board members, the agenda is a “disclosable public record” and should be made available to the public, whether prepared by a district consultant or a district employee.
If a document is presented at a meeting attended by a majority of board members, it is a disclosable public record and should be made available to the public.
What else does the Brown Act say? The salary of the superintendent must be discussed in open session. When the board meets in closed session with its labor negotiator, the agenda item must specify the name of the organization representing employees or the position title of the unrepresented employee who is the subject of negotiations.
A board committee must follow the Brown Act, but a committee created by the superintendent doesn’t.
My preference is for board committees for facilities and finances, as it provides community involvement with transparency.
Attorney Terry Francke, founder of Californians Aware, is recognized statewide for his expertise on the Brown Act and the California Public Records Act. He provides training for $250 plus travel expenses.
This investment would pay dividends to ensure the school board is following state law. The cost is minimal compared with the $100,000 in legal fees that Coalinga-Huron Unified School District, for example, allocated in 1998 to cover costs related to Brown Act violations. Scotts Valley cannot afford that.
Knowing the severity of the state budget cuts for schools, I ask our city officials to consider taking advantage of Francke’s expertise and share the expense.
In addition, did you know Scotts Valley Unified gets $69 less per student than the average school district in California? With our enrollment, we’re being shorted approximately $175,000. Yet we face the same budget cuts as other school districts.
This is just another reason why I favor televising school board meetings — to make it easier for parents, teachers and community members to learn about district finances and facilities issues.
Our meetings take place the same night as the Santa Cruz City Council, so we can’t get live coverage on community television. However, it is possible to record meetings for airing in a regular time slot. The cost would be similar to what the city of Scotts Valley pays — $110 for each City Council meeting.
Wouldn’t these ideas be good ways to demonstrate to our community that we are open and transparent? I have asked the superintendent to place these items on the April 14 agenda.
See you there.
Jondi Gumz is vice president of the Scotts Valley school board. This represents her personal opinion rather than the opinion of the board as a whole.
Copyright 2009 Press Banner