Complaints about employees must be given in writing

The Albert Lea School Board approved revisions to its open forum policy Monday, which did not include a controversial provision introduced at a meeting last month.

The policy allows community members to speak about any item. The board last month discussed limiting public comment to agenda items.

The measure passed on a 5-1 vote. Board members Julie Johnson, Bill Leland, Dave Klatt, Mark Ciota and Linda Laurie voted yes. Jill Marin voted no.

The policy was changed after review by a district policy committee.

Included in the policy is a provision that the board will not hear complaints or discussion about an individual school employee during an open meeting. Charges or complaints must be presented in writing to school administrators or signed by the person making the complaint.

Other provisions included in the open forum policy are:

• Presenters can speak for a maximum of two minutes.

• The chairman may terminate the right of any speaker to continue whose behavior is deemed improper.

• No response, reaction nor action will necessarily be taken by the board.

• The School Board will take no action at a meeting on an issue raised for the first time by the public.

Marin recommended open forum time limits be increased, while Leland said he supported keeping open forums to two-minute speaking limits.

Klatt said the policy committee discussed implementing board listening sessions one hour prior to the board meeting to possibly include two School Board members.

Laurie said she liked the way the policy was written, and Ciota said the policy committee did a great job in presenting the policy.

“The policies are never about the right here and now,” he said. “Policies come into play a year from now, four years from now, seven years from now when none of us are here, there is all new board members and they need something to come back to and say ‘how has it been done in the past, how do we do this?’ That’s what policies are for. They give a framework that’s going to go well into the future, beyond our time on the board.”

In other action, the board:

Had a second reading regarding the legal status of the board.

Marin questioned a policy, which only allows her questions to be answered by administration if a majority of the board approves.

Ciota said the policy was from the Minnesota School Board Association.

“From my understanding, this was not about you … this limits the liability of the district to actions of individual board members away from board duties,” he said.

Funk asked Marin if as a board member she had any authority over an employee away from the board table. She responded that as a community member she has the same rights as other members of the public.

Listened to a report by Johnson, who said she received emails, text messages and calls from at least 30 community members who were disappointed that items were put on the Sept. 19 agenda without board members being able to review them, and were disappointed with how the meeting went.

“I would agree; that is how I felt also,” she said. “And it’s a horrible feeling when leaving a board meeting after feeling you have been blindsided, and when you have time to reflect on that, you feel like you would have handled things differently, and you may have made votes you regret.”

She said she has received complaints from community members about how Marin was treated at the board meeting.

She said she has tried to go through the proper channels and follow protocol to share her concerns about the board’s treatment of Marin.

“Jill is a valued member of our team, and deserves to be treated as we all do with respect and with professionalism, and in my opinion that is not happening,” she said, noting she thinks the board needs to work together to ensure the focus is on education with mutual respect.

“They expect and deserve the board they elected be professional,” she said. “I know I want to be proud to be a board member, and I want our community to be proud of us. And I am hearing that they are not feeling proud of us.” 

Had second readings of policies regarding public participation and videotaping board meetings. No major changes are included in the policies.