The Washington County School District has decided to curb the flow of information on issues before the board and will withhold information packets detailing topics up for discussion.
District officials say they're bothered because details on issues are being publicized before they have a chance to consider them."I'm offended that the newspaper knew about Channel 1 before we did," said board president JoAnn Balen, referring to a story that appeared in The Daily Spectrum before last month's board meeting.
The district has traditionally provided detailed information packets to parents, teacher groups and the news media several days prior to meetings. They included information on issues to be discussed during the meeting, and copies of committee reports and proposals to be presented to the board.
But that stopped this month, when packets were withheld until the day of the meeting, on the advice of school district attorney John Palmer. He said that withholding minutes until they are approved is legal and the law does not require release of information packets prior to the meeting.
The Utah Open Meeting Act requires minutes be kept of meetings involving public bodies and that those minutes must be made available within a reasonable amount of time. The intent of the law, according to the Legislature, is to make sure government entities conduct their business openly.
"I think we've always been very open," said board member Sheldon Johnson, who made the motion to withhold minutes until approval. "But now I perceive the situation has changed. We must pull in our arms and legs because we're in shark-infested waters.
"Otherwise," he said, "we are just feeding ammunition to those taking shots at us."
Regional legislative PTA member Effie Latschkowski said she has routinely viewed minutes of meetings prior to their approval. She believes the change in policy violates the intent of the open meetings law and is seeking an opinion from the Utah attorney general's office.
Latschkowski also asked the board`s permission to videotape meetings, in keeping with a portion of the law that allows for recording meetings providing the action doesn't interfere with the meeting. The request further angered the already strained members.
"Mr. Palmer has advised us there is no reason to take further questions," Balen said. "We'll let you know as soon as we make a decision."