From bad to worse
It's hard to tell what afflicts the General Brown Central School Board of Education. Is it a strange, collective adult learning disability? Or is it a misplaced arrogance of power that leads them to wade further and further into the muck of bad policy?
The board, which famously banned district residents from speaking the names or positions of students, staff and administrators at a prior meeting, has now determined that residents wishing to address the board may do so only if they wish to praise something or someone at the school. District counsel Keith Caughlin explained the board's position: "Compliments, nice things — there's no problems with that," he said.
You have got to be kidding me. Has the entire board started drinking happy juice? Do they actually think that this policy is going to improve their school district? The only way a democracy can work is with a robust, rollicking exchange of ideas and positions. The government has an obligation to hear the complaints and opinions of its citizens. In the General Brown district, however, the Board of Education has decided that if it doesn't smell like roses and fresh-baked chocolate chip cookies, it can't be aired.
The board's new policy even directly violates state law because it says that complaints must be heard in executive session. Public Officers Law, which governs freedom of information and open meetings, has a very narrow set of criteria for when meetings may be closed. Airing complaints about how a government body, including a school district, is run is most definitely not among those criteria.
Almost as disturbing as the new, improved public comments policy is the complicity of the district's legal counsel in setting up a procedure that muzzles legitimate public discourse and violates state law. Mr. Caughlin, in the same meeting, first told the board and the public that it's OK to require that complaints be aired in executive session, and then admitted that his previous advice that the board could enter executive session to discuss position cuts in the coming budget was, in fact, a violation of the open meetings law.
The fact is, Mr. Caughlin's advice in regard to open meetings and freedom of information has been woefully lacking. If a lawyer assisting you in buying a house or probating a will made this many mistakes, you'd fire him. At General Brown, the board's response is to keep looking to Mr. Caughlin for further advice on when and whether it can conduct public business in private chambers. They do so, I suspect, because he tells them what they want to hear.
Disturbingly, the Board of Education seems able only to circle the wagons as this maelstrom of anger and controversy swirls around them. They could very quickly and easily clear the air if they simply said "You're right; we're wrong. We'll start actively soliciting and listening to your comments." That will be hard, because they'll have to swallow their pride. And they may have to consider actions that they find unpleasant. But when you run for public office, you agree to serve the people. And the people in the General Brown Central School district are not being served well right now.
