It’s only a 8 minute discussion, but did they really “pass” the resolution when they actually voted not to vote on the resolution?
I am the first to admit, the way the Madison School Board conducts itself is a complete mystery to me. I have multiple issues with the way this public body functions. This is just another example of how they don’t operate like other bodies, and I’m not so certain its legal.
Here’s the video that starts at 46:35 when the discussion starts
WHERE IS THE F-35 RESOLUTION ON THE AGENDA?
This was the first mystery, because it doesn’t appear to be an item on the agenda for a vote. I looked, I didn’t see it at first and was really confused. Here’s the agenda. if you look on-line and only look at the numbered items on the agenda, you won’t find it.
If you were to print the agenda, you certainly wouldn’t find it.
If you actually click on “Board President’s Announcements and Reports” item “3.1 News from around the district” you’ll find an item that says “BOE resolution on F-35’s at Truax-Final.pdf”
DID THEY “PASS” THE RESOLUTION, WITHOUT A VOTE?
If you watch the video, you will find that from 47:35 to 50:43 reading the resolution. The only comments made outside of reading the resolution were as follows:
Before reading the resolution:
Gloria Reyes thanks Cris Carusi and Savion Castro for their leadership.
Cris Carusi says that she wants to take a second to thank the “whole board for taking time to read drafts, then provide input.” She feels like this is a really important thing for the whole board to be saying. She also wants to point out that this is a different kind of resolution than the board usually puts forth. Most of their resolutions are usually in recognition of a student or a group of students or student rights. This one is actually taking a policy position. In the future she would request that we clarify when we vote on this type of a resolution when we are taking a policy position vs. when we just read a resolution in recognition of something. So that is just something she wants to put out there, is clarifying how we work as a group down the road.
Savion Castro and Cris Carusi read the resolution as follows:
Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education Resolution on the Proposed F35-A Operational Beddown at Truax
WHEREAS, the US Air National Guard has selected the 115th Fighter Wing, also known as Truax Field, in Madison as a preferred site for its F-35A Operational Beddown; and,
WHEREAS, in August 2019 the Air National Guard released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the F-35A Operational Beddown; and,
WHEREAS, at this time, the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) is reasonably relying on the accuracy of the draft EIS; and,
WHEREAS, three MMSD elementary schools—Hawthorne, Lake View and Sandburg—are situated immediately outside the 65 decibel noise contour shown in the draft EIS; and,
WHEREAS, in 2018-19, 73 percent of students attending these schools were students of color, 42 percent were English language learners, and 72 percent were considered low-income; and,
WHEREAS, the draft EIS states that increased noise levels resulting from the proposed action may interrupt speech and hinder the ability of students to learn and, contrary to the District’s commitment to Black excellence and racial equity, constitute an adverse impact on children, including low-income and minority children; and,
WHEREAS, the draft EIS omits Hawthorne and Sandburg Elementary Schools from its analysis and therefore underestimates the adverse impact of the proposed action on children; and,
WHEREAS, because the affected schools lie just outside the 65 decibel noise contour, Madison property taxpayers may bear the cost of soundproofing these schools as a result of the proposed action; and,
WHEREAS, the draft EIS states that 1,318 households lie within the 65 decibel contour considered potentially incompatible with residential use, and;
WHEREAS, many of the households in the area considered potentially incompatible with residential use are MMSD families; and,
WHEREAS, potential displacement of households and reduction of property values may decrease MMSD enrollment and the property tax base that funds our public schools; and,
WHEREAS, the draft EIS acknowledges the proposed action will have a disproportionate impact on people of color, and a City of Madison analysis further acknowledges that there are concentrations of poverty and people of color just outside the 65 decibel contour;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the MMSD Board of Education concludes that the issues identified in the draft EIS will negatively impact learning in our schools, reduce the property tax base, decrease school enrollment in the affected area, and disproportionately affect children and families of color and people with low incomes; and,
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the MMSD Board of Education requests that the Air National Guard reconsider Truax Field as a preferred location for the F-35A Operational Beddown unless the draft EIS is found to significantly misrepresent negative impacts on learning, children and the community.
After reading the resolution:
Nicki Vander Muelen says it’s an excellent resolution and she asks if there is a way to move it to an action item so they can vote on it, perhaps adding it to other workgroups.
Gloria Reyes indicates that Matt Bell, Attorney, answer the question. Vander Muelen re-asks the question.
Bell asks if she means other workgroups so they can vote on it at another time or does she mean other business?
Vander Muelen clarifies she means “other business”
Ali Muldrow turns to her and says something off camera which I presume was that she thinks it would violate open meetings law, because Vander Muelen says that “it wouldn’t invalidate our notice because it was within two hours of the meeting, therefore it falls under the emergency statute”
Bell says the board would have to vote to move it to another part of an agenda, so that would require a motion to move it to other business. As of right now its a resolution that doesn’t require a vote but if moved to other business it could be voted upon.
Vander Muelen moves that the F-35 resolution be moved to other business so that a vote can be taken on such an important topic. She feels the board should have a vote on expressing their beliefs on such an important topic. A woman off camera seconds, I believe it was Cris Carusi, but I can’t be sure.
Ananda Mirilli says that there are currently a lot of our children, a lot of our students that are being impacted by environmental injustice in our community. I’m in opposition of a vote because I want us to be unified on this, we decided to move on a resolution together. We crafted the resolution as a collaborative. She doesn’t necessarily feel strong about moving it to a vote. And actually don’t feel strong about continuing to have this conversation in the absence of a lot of other conversations about how we are going to move to support the children currently being impacted by other environmental injustice in our community.
President Reyes starts to call for a vote and then asks the attorney if he has something to say and he says “move forward with the vote”. Reyes starts to call for the vote but stops.
Ali Muldrow says she thinks its important to say that the resolution was crafted in solidarity and has the full support of the board, that is her understanding. She thinks that the vote about whether or not to vote on it later in the meeting is about whether or not we want to allocate greater time and so she thinks voting to vote on it is not a matter of supporting it. The resolution has her full support, having it spill over or carry on throughout the meeting doesn’t feel like a necessity of the board making that statement or supporting the statement. So Cris, Savion, I deeply appreciate your work.
Vander Muelen says she also appreciates their work.
Reyes agrees, says that she believes they are in solidarity on this and thanks them for their work behind this, then calls for a vote again.
There was a voice vote, the only votes that could be heard was Vander Muelen in favor and Kate Toews against. They then do roll call again and we can’t see everyone. The only two people on camera voted no – which were Gloria Reyes and Kate Toews. I presume Mirilli and Muldrow also voted against based on their comments. I presume Vander Muelen voted aye and then Cris Carusi abstained. No clue how Savion Castro voted.
So, did it pass?
I looked in their policies for “resolutions” or “rules of order” but there was nothing there.
So I went back and read through all the titles of their policies that they have on line. Luckily I only got to the B’s and found this:
I don’t think it would fall under policies and procedures. Or many of the other policies I read. The closest I came was the “Proposals for Board Consideration” where is says:
Any BOARD member can introduce a proposal for consideration by the entire BOARD. Prior to final action, the proposal:
-
- Will be communicated to the SUPERINTENDENT for reaction from the STAFF;
- Will be developed as a written document;
- Will include a fiscal note where relevant.
OPEN MEETINGS VIOLATION?
The more disturbing thing to me is the way the board operates in general. They all read drafts and edited the document they either did or did not vote on or pass and praised themselves for their good work and the collaborative nature of that work. And then voted not to vote because it would take too much time.
Ahem, perhaps the public, who was not privy to all that great work, might want to know about it? Who said what, could it have been stronger, was there better wording that got cut out? Was it really collaborative if they couldn’t agree if they should vote or not? Clearly some wanted to.
I suspect the board frequently works like this, violating open meetings laws and deciding everything before they get to the meeting. In fact, I’ve heard they do. I don’t pay a whole lot of attention to school board matters, mostly because they meet on Monday nights when I’m recording for WORT and if I’m attending a meeting its a city or county meeting. But between their ethics lapses and open meetings violations and complete lack of transparency, I find myself getting dragged in from time to time. I’m clearly not an expert on their matters, but I can tell you one things, I can’t understand how they operate. It’s clear as mud to me. I seriously think they need some better legal advice.
