The question on the meeting notice handed out at the start of 3-25-08 the meeting of the Community Engagement Task Force was:
"What can the School Board do to better communicate with the community?"
Ignoring the question on the meeting agenda, the chair (Mary Ellen Havel-Lang) suddenly adopted a members' interpretation of the basic question. The objective before the committee did not state "help the school board to do a better job of communicating." BUT the chair suddenly adopted that phrase, which was offered by one committee member. This then served as justification to avoid a logical step by step analysis and allowed the chair to make unilateral decisions.
As the meeting continued, the chair stated that "they" [the School Board] follow Robert's Rules Modified. That is not correct. There is no such publication. The district policies state, "Robert's Rules of Order will be observed except when modified by the board"--which means an individual chair or board member cannot deviate from Robert's Rules, without the board voting to do so. [SP-EYE Note: THAT never happens!!!]
"It seems the chair of these communication meetings, Mary Ellen Havel-Lang, has adopted the ideas in the book, "BREAKING ROBERT'S RULES" by Lawrence E. Susskind and Jeffrey L. Cruikshank, Oxford University Press, copyright 2006."
How else to explain the chair's actions? Rather than hand the gavel over to someone else, the chair offered her opinion, direction, and conclusions on communication subjects being discussed. That violated Robert's Rules of Order, big time. It also raises the issue of conflict of interest?
The chair inserted her opinions and conclusions, attempting to release the board of their specific responsibilities defined in State Statutes, DPI Administrative codes etc. It seemed to me, as a board member she should have been listening, not trying to lead to pre-determined conclusions.
No wonder her ground rules for this committee on communication between the board and the community included no discussion. She could start any discussion she wanted to, and cut it off once she offered her conclusions.
I can accept rulings of a majority, but I do not accept conclusions based on changing the objective the committee is being asked to address without a discussion and taking a vote.
Unless the board adopts and follows required procedures, there will be no clear communication.
Read the recent minutes of this group at:
http://lms.spasd.k12.wi.us/gems/home/Minutes21908.pdf
Posts
