This is precisely the attitude of three new board members of the local school board. The Board is a board of trustees. The members are supposed to place the interests of the schools above their own interests. Instead, these members think they are large and in charge, and intend to prove it.
I love when art contains only direct moral instruction and I become good by consuming it. https://t.co/4Q2gl84GBv— Matt Bors (@MattBors) June 23, 2022
Thursday, June 23, 2022
The prior board passed a comprehensive curriculum plan after months of meetings with constituent groups, discussions, review, and consideration. The new board members threw it out almost immediately and will replace it with their own plan by next mont that is, within a month of taking office.) It is a plan that will make them happy which, after all, is all that matters.
They are also making decisions on vendor contracts based on personal opinions, not on what serves the best interests of the district. I mean that directly and literally. They want to cancel a contract with a local bookstore because it promoted Pride Month in its online advertising. Nothing to do with performance under the contract, and the board didn’t even tell staff to contact the store. They mean to just vote on it and move on. They have the power and they should use it, right?
(The irony is the board has to hold a “special” meeting after the last regular meeting because a new board member screwed up the parliamentary procedure of the board meeting so badly the board has to go back and hold a meeting just to re-cast all the votes of that meeting to make them official, rather than in complete violation of board rules.)
They are, in short, declaring they have a responsibility to act, when what they actually have is a responsibility to serve. The distinction is a critical one. Not being burdened with knowledge, they think their ignorance makes them smarter than the administration and teachers who have made this their careers. But these board members see the schools on fire. Don’t they have a responsibility to act?
Or is it not as simple as either/or?
Posted by Rmj at 5:42 AM