The Johnstonville School Board drew criticism for restricting public comment that concerned the school administration when court decisions have upheld the right of the public to criticize school employees under California’s open meeting law, the Brown Act. -db
Lassen County Times
September 28, 2010
Parents and other concerned community stakeholders were given an opportunity to speak their mind at a special meeting of the Johnstonville School Board Wednesday, Sept. 22 — one week after the board shut down public comment because it thought it was following proper procedures and school policy.
At the regularly scheduled Wednesday, Sept. 15 meeting, numerous parents were in attendance to share concerns regarding how the school was being run under the current administration.
When parent Stacey Jones started expressing her concerns, the board stopped her.
At that Sept. 15 meeting, board member Maggie Reuck said personnel items could not be discussed in open session and there were policy and procedures in place that must be followed.
She also said, “We encourage you to meet with the personnel that is of your concerns and if at the point in time if it cannot be resolved then the superintendent or the board can then bring this back to closed session where you can be heard, but it cannot be heard unless you want to speak about policy and procedures with regards to personnel. We cannot discuss an individual in open session.”
Reuck said she did not mean that in a negative way. She said if any accusations are made in public and it impacts the individual outside of school, that person could sue the school and the school is liable for that.
However, per the Brown Act, every agenda for a regular meeting shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the governmental body, which also applies to closed session items as well.
The Brown Act says, “Accordingly, this office believes that it would be prudent for legislative bodies to afford the public an opportunity to comment on closed-session items prior to the body’s adjournment into closed session. The only exception to the public testimony requirement is where a committee comprised solely of members of the legislative body has previously considered the item at a public meeting in which all members of the public were afforded the opportunity to comment on the item before or during the committee’s consideration of it, so long as the item has not substantially changed since the committee’s hearing.”
It also says, “Where a member of the public raises an issue which has not yet come before the legislative body, the item may be briefly discussed but no action may be taken at that meeting. The purpose of the discussion is to permit a member of the public to raise an issue or problem with the legislative body or to permit the legislative body to provide information to the public, provide direction to staff or schedule the matter for a future meeting.
In addition, the Brown Act also addresses comments directed toward employees, “As such, members of the public have broad constitutional rights to comment on any subject relating to the business of the governmental body. Any attempt to restrict the content of such speech must be narrowly tailored to effectuate a compelling state interest. Specifically, the courts found that policies that prohibited members of the public from criticizing school district employees were unconstitutional.”
Sept. 22 meeting
During the Sept. 22 meeting, parents and teachers had the opportunity to voice their concerns to the board. However, the board could not take any action because the issues were not on the agenda.
Attorney Tom Gauthier, who is from the school’s firm, was in attendance and board member Skip Jones said he asked the attorney to attend to ensure proper protocol was being followed.
Parent Stacey Jones read a statement expressing her concerns regarding Superintendent Sally Clark.
“We have lost good staff and good families because of the way things are being done. Departing staff is not willing to say it out loud for fear of how it will affect future job prospects and current staff will not say anything for fear of some kind of retaliation,” Jones said.
At a site council meeting, Jones said it was mentioned that teachers had called parents encouraging them to attend the board meetings. According to Jones, Clark voiced concerns that if so many people started to attend, protocols would have to be put in place.
Jones said Clark said something to the effect that meetings are not public meetings, they are publicly held meetings.
“And that kind of reflects the attitude in which I feel the school is being led and I think it’s wrong. Johnstonville School no longer seems to possess that sense of community where parents want to be involved. With the elimination of stipends for sports we need parents now more than ever, ” Jones said.
Jones also said it seems every little thing needs to be micromanaged by Clark.
Clark’s contract is up for renewal this year and Jones said there are four new board members ready to be seated in December.
Jones said she hopes the board will not take any drastic action that the next board will have to deal with.
In December, new board members Amy Castro, Linda Meusch, Michael Kelley and Terry Mallery will be seated on the board. Incumbents Scott McCullough, Skip Jones, Carol Growdon and Joan Schmidt did not seek re-election and the new members ran unopposed.
Jones added she thought Clark is good on the business side of the job.
However, she said, “Our school, I think, needs more than that. The concerns circulating among parents and staff leave me with serious reservations of whether or not you can deliver what we need.”
Jones did note the positive aspects of the school and the hard work of the staff members. She also thanked board clerk Growdon for seeking her out and apologizing for what occurred during the Sept. 15 meeting.
Other parents said they were considering pulling their children out of Johnstonville School and parent Janet Davenport encouraged the board to talk with the teachers.
Another parent said she felt the board was losing credibility with the whole mess. She pointed out the board had approved June minutes where her dialogue had been left out.
She said it makes people think either board isn’t looking into what it supposed to be doing and doesn’t have all the information or the board is being sneaky.
The parent also expressed concerns with the board holding a public hearing on the budget several hours after the meeting began.
“I don’t agree with doing that. If you have a public hearing on a budget where you want people to be involved, I think you need to do that at the beginning of the meeting at 6,” the parent said.
Parent Heidi Floyd also expressed her concern with the board going into closed session first while parents and staff wait around for open session.
During the Sept. 15 meeting, Floyd said parents and staff waited for an hour and 10 minutes.
“It felt like the board was trying to outlast the public,” she said.
Clark said notes were taken during the meeting and she has an action plan to address each and everyone of the concerns.
The Johnstonville School board meets at 6 p.m. on the third Wednesday of the month at Johnstonville School.
Copyright 2010 Lassen County Times FAC Content Use Policy
Northern California: Citizens criticize Johnstonville School Board for shutting down public comment
The Johnstonville School Board drew criticism for restricting public comment that concerned the school administration when court decisions have upheld the right of the public to criticize school employees under California’s open meeting law, the Brown Act. -db
Lassen County Times
September 28, 2010
Parents and other concerned community stakeholders were given an opportunity to speak their mind at a special meeting of the Johnstonville School Board Wednesday, Sept. 22 — one week after the board shut down public comment because it thought it was following proper procedures and school policy.
At the regularly scheduled Wednesday, Sept. 15 meeting, numerous parents were in attendance to share concerns regarding how the school was being run under the current administration.
When parent Stacey Jones started expressing her concerns, the board stopped her.
At that Sept. 15 meeting, board member Maggie Reuck said personnel items could not be discussed in open session and there were policy and procedures in place that must be followed.
She also said, “We encourage you to meet with the personnel that is of your concerns and if at the point in time if it cannot be resolved then the superintendent or the board can then bring this back to closed session where you can be heard, but it cannot be heard unless you want to speak about policy and procedures with regards to personnel. We cannot discuss an individual in open session.”
Reuck said she did not mean that in a negative way. She said if any accusations are made in public and it impacts the individual outside of school, that person could sue the school and the school is liable for that.
However, per the Brown Act, every agenda for a regular meeting shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the governmental body, which also applies to closed session items as well.
The Brown Act says, “Accordingly, this office believes that it would be prudent for legislative bodies to afford the public an opportunity to comment on closed-session items prior to the body’s adjournment into closed session. The only exception to the public testimony requirement is where a committee comprised solely of members of the legislative body has previously considered the item at a public meeting in which all members of the public were afforded the opportunity to comment on the item before or during the committee’s consideration of it, so long as the item has not substantially changed since the committee’s hearing.”
It also says, “Where a member of the public raises an issue which has not yet come before the legislative body, the item may be briefly discussed but no action may be taken at that meeting. The purpose of the discussion is to permit a member of the public to raise an issue or problem with the legislative body or to permit the legislative body to provide information to the public, provide direction to staff or schedule the matter for a future meeting.
In addition, the Brown Act also addresses comments directed toward employees, “As such, members of the public have broad constitutional rights to comment on any subject relating to the business of the governmental body. Any attempt to restrict the content of such speech must be narrowly tailored to effectuate a compelling state interest. Specifically, the courts found that policies that prohibited members of the public from criticizing school district employees were unconstitutional.”
Sept. 22 meeting
During the Sept. 22 meeting, parents and teachers had the opportunity to voice their concerns to the board. However, the board could not take any action because the issues were not on the agenda.
Attorney Tom Gauthier, who is from the school’s firm, was in attendance and board member Skip Jones said he asked the attorney to attend to ensure proper protocol was being followed.
Parent Stacey Jones read a statement expressing her concerns regarding Superintendent Sally Clark.
“We have lost good staff and good families because of the way things are being done. Departing staff is not willing to say it out loud for fear of how it will affect future job prospects and current staff will not say anything for fear of some kind of retaliation,” Jones said.
At a site council meeting, Jones said it was mentioned that teachers had called parents encouraging them to attend the board meetings. According to Jones, Clark voiced concerns that if so many people started to attend, protocols would have to be put in place.
Jones said Clark said something to the effect that meetings are not public meetings, they are publicly held meetings.
“And that kind of reflects the attitude in which I feel the school is being led and I think it’s wrong. Johnstonville School no longer seems to possess that sense of community where parents want to be involved. With the elimination of stipends for sports we need parents now more than ever, ” Jones said.
Jones also said it seems every little thing needs to be micromanaged by Clark.
Clark’s contract is up for renewal this year and Jones said there are four new board members ready to be seated in December.
Jones said she hopes the board will not take any drastic action that the next board will have to deal with.
In December, new board members Amy Castro, Linda Meusch, Michael Kelley and Terry Mallery will be seated on the board. Incumbents Scott McCullough, Skip Jones, Carol Growdon and Joan Schmidt did not seek re-election and the new members ran unopposed.
Jones added she thought Clark is good on the business side of the job.
However, she said, “Our school, I think, needs more than that. The concerns circulating among parents and staff leave me with serious reservations of whether or not you can deliver what we need.”
Jones did note the positive aspects of the school and the hard work of the staff members. She also thanked board clerk Growdon for seeking her out and apologizing for what occurred during the Sept. 15 meeting.
Other parents said they were considering pulling their children out of Johnstonville School and parent Janet Davenport encouraged the board to talk with the teachers.
Another parent said she felt the board was losing credibility with the whole mess. She pointed out the board had approved June minutes where her dialogue had been left out.
She said it makes people think either board isn’t looking into what it supposed to be doing and doesn’t have all the information or the board is being sneaky.
The parent also expressed concerns with the board holding a public hearing on the budget several hours after the meeting began.
“I don’t agree with doing that. If you have a public hearing on a budget where you want people to be involved, I think you need to do that at the beginning of the meeting at 6,” the parent said.
Parent Heidi Floyd also expressed her concern with the board going into closed session first while parents and staff wait around for open session.
During the Sept. 15 meeting, Floyd said parents and staff waited for an hour and 10 minutes.
“It felt like the board was trying to outlast the public,” she said.
Clark said notes were taken during the meeting and she has an action plan to address each and everyone of the concerns.
The Johnstonville School board meets at 6 p.m. on the third Wednesday of the month at Johnstonville School.
Copyright 2010 Lassen County Times FAC Content Use Policy