An ethics lesson for school board

Laguna Beach Board of Education members expressed great interest in learning about the role of technology in board affairs at a recent Brown Act and ethics workshop held by the county educational department.

The state Brown Act requires openness in the decision-making of elected and appointed government officials. The act doesn’t apply to employees of public agencies.

In the case of the school board, whenever a majority (three or more of the five board members) gathers to discuss board business, it is considered to be an “open” meeting, with the public required to be allowed to attend, and an agenda posted in advance in a public place.

Three or more board members are prohibited from coming to any concurrence outside an official board meeting, such as at a party. If two board members discuss an issue privately, without mention of the opinions of others on the board, it is not considered to be a violation of the Brown Act.

This description caused several board members to question the role of e-mail in such situations. It was explained that if an announcement or informational material was e-mailed to the board, there would be no violation. If, however, three or more board members discussed an upcoming agenda item in a series of e-mails, it would be in violation.

Veteran board member and clerk El Hathaway mentioned that he never conducts board business in e-mail form for just that reason; he explained that he prefers to communicate “up” rather than “across,” for example to the superintendent, who would then share his thoughts in a weekly correspondence with all board members. As the superintendent shared the information, rather than Hathaway himself, he wouldn’t be in violation.

This also applied to telephone calls; if one board member called all four other members separately to discuss an issue, there would no violation.

If, however, the first board member mentioned that another member agreed with them while talking to a third member, there would be a clear violation of the Brown Act.

The members also went over proper the notice and location of meetings.

New board member Theresa O’Hare asked whether a meeting would have to be moved if many visitors were expected.

The county representative explained that if a visitor can’t hear or participate in the meeting, it is in violation of the Brown Act. If this became the case, he suggested that the meeting be adjourned for 15 minutes and moved to a larger location.

Any member of the community who feels that there has been a Brown Act violation is able to make a demand to cure or correct the alleged action. If the request is unsuccessful, they may open a lawsuit in order to stop or prevent the violation.

“What I like about it is that the Brown Act is intuitive and is fair,” Board President Betsy Jenkins said. She added that she had previously regarded it as “this big, looming thing.”