On Tuesday, February 16, 2021, the Nashua Board of Education Policy Committee meets at 6:00 pm via Zoom. Proposed policy change to BoE policy, BCA School Board Member Ethics, makes Board members subservient to the Superintendent.
The Board proposes to amend BCA as follows:
ADD: 2. Understand that the Board, as governing body, does NOT manage the District, but rather sets the broad goals and standards for the District by way of policies adopted by a quorum of the Board at proper meetings under the Right-to-Know law.
The proposed policy recognizes that the Board “governs” the District, yet claims the Board “does not manage” the District. Given that “govern” and “manage” are synonyms, that statement is contradictory.
“Govern” (v.) — “conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (a state, organization, or people).”
“Manage” (v.) — “be in charge of (a company, establishment, or undertaking); administer; run.”
Consider the statutory duty of a school board:
NH RSA 189:1-a Duty to Provide Education. –
II. Elected school boards shall be responsible for establishing the structure, accountability, advocacy, and delivery of instruction in each school operated and governed in its district.To accomplish this end, and to support flexibility in implementing diverse educational approaches, school boards shall establish, in each school operated and governed in its district, instructional policies that establish instructional goals based upon available information about the knowledge and skills pupils will need in the future.
According to state law, a school board has a duty to operate and govern, thus manage, each school in its district.
ADD: 11. Understand the chain of command and refer problems or complaints to the proper administrative office per applicable school board policies.
This proposal is designed to prevent the Board from considering a systemic problem that arises or even discussing a complaint received from frightened parents.
Sometimes, a problem or complaint is given to a Board member anonymously to prevent retribution. Anonymous problems can no longer be addressed by the Board.
Superintendents often dismiss such complaints, denying their existence unless the parent places himself or herself and the child in harm’s way.
ADD: 15. Present personal criticisms concerning District operations, staff, etc. to the Superintendent, not to District staff, the public, or unnecessarily at a Board meeting
This policy prohibits Board discussion or investigation of a report of impropriety by the superintendent himself. Again it gives inordinate control of the District to the Superintendent.
REMOVE: Avoid being placed in a position of conflict of interest, and refrain from using my Board position for personal or partisan gain.
Ethics policies always include a warning against voting on any issue where the member has an existing conflict of interest. Removing this provision is unwise, as it ignores situations where members should refrain from discussing or voting on an issue brought before the Board.
REMOVE: Remember always that my first and greatest concern must be the educational welfare of the students attending the public schools.
How is this no longer the most important statement in any ethics policy for School Board members? Has the Board lost sight of its mission to educate children?
ADD: A requirement to certify that a member has read this ethics policy and will adhere to these rules.
This is ridiculous. Each member has already taken a formal Oath to uphold the Constitution and State Laws when they are sworn in to serve. There is no requirement to sign a statement that you’ve read the Constitution or education laws and will adhere to them. Why require this certification?
Proposed policy change to BoE policy, BEDB, Agenda Preparation and Dissemination, undermines Board members, empowers the Superintendent and censors the public.
The Board proposes to amend BEDB as follows:
KEEP: The Superintendent or designee, after consultation and agreement of the Board President or designee for BOE meetings REMOVE: [and the appropriate Standing Committee Chair or designee for committee meetings,] KEEP: shall prepare the agendas for all meetings of the Board.
Committee Chairmen can no longer control their own committee agendas, stripping them of any authority over what is discussed in their own committees. Committee Chairmen are demoted to Parliamentarians. The Superintendent now prepares all agendas with the Board President. The rest of the Board can go pound sand.
REMOVE: Approval of Board of Education meeting agendas shall be performed by the Board President. In the event that the President is not available, approval shall be by the Board Clerk or the Board President’s designee. Approval of standing committee meeting agendas shall be performed by the Committee Chair or his or her board member designee. Only approved agendas shall be presented to the Board.
Once again, the proposal removes authority from the Board Clerk and Committee Clerks. For whose benefit?
REMOVE: Committee recommendations shall be taken directly from the motions found in the draft minutes of the meeting. If the draft meeting minutes are unavailable, inclusion of the recommended motions for that committee report shall be deferred to the following board meeting.
This is critical because mistakes are often made when drafting a Board agenda without written committee meeting minutes from which to obtain the exact wording of a motion. Motions are often long and complicated, and require accuracy, especially when dealing with funding. This change will result in unnecessary agenda errors.
ADD: Items placed on the agenda should be received by the Superintendent at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. Every Board member has the right to place items on the agenda. Matters not included in the agenda may be presented during the meeting provided the Board agrees to discuss the matter. The Board may choose not to deal with every agenda item.
Previously, Board members submitted their agenda items to the Board President, not the Superintendent. The Board governs the District, not the Superintendent.
Each Board member was elected to represent them by thousands of Nashua voters. Denying any Board member the right to place new items on the agenda for discussion will disenfranchise all those voters who elected him or her. It is extremely poor form to encourage Board members to reject a New Business item submitted by another Board member.
ADD: Additionally, the Board reserves the right to limit public discussion at Board meetings to agenda items only.
Censorship, anyone? There are currently two (2) public comment periods on the agenda for each Nashua Board of Education meeting. The first comment period is restricted to items on the agenda. The second comment period is for any issue the public deems appropriate, not the Board. This proposal authorizes the Board to censor the public and limit their public comments to that which the Board deems appropriate.
By submitting this series of District policy changes, the Nashua School Board has shown itself to be anti-democratic, and willfully deaf to the voters who elected them.
