TMI (probably) on Monday’s meeting

This is a short explanation of a continuing email exchange between me and Business Director Hanson.

With gritted teeth Annie and I are trying to negotiate how the Monday meeting will be run and ordered. Annie’s understanding is that although other’s have called the meeting and set the agenda she, per board policy, has the sole right to set the agenda. She wants it set up differently than Alanna, Art and I have ordered it. She called me to tell me she wanted to, had to, change it. We had a long conversation which left me in doubt as to her intentions. I decided to follow up with a call to our Finance man Bill Hanson as Annie suggested. Mr. Hanson is no parliamentarian. As you saw in a recent post Mr. Hanson did not seem inclined to allow us to hold the meeting we called. So much hinges on trust. Its a commodity that has been in short supply on our School Board for the last ten years. I will not happily allow a majority of four board members to short circuit our meeting. Before the current minority accepts any changes to our agenda we must be assured that we are not being set up to be shut down. Thus, the following series of emails. First its me to Bill Hanson the school board and others following my phone call with Chair Harala:

Harry Welty
3:23 PM (14 hours ago)

to william, School, William, Jana
Bill, Thank you again for reconsidering your memo.

On the subject of “reconsideration” I’ve just gotten a call from Annie. We had a lengthy discussion about what would constitute our agenda and about parliamentary procedure.

I told Annie I had reservations about tampering with the agenda although I did not object to skipping item 3 requiring the Administration to make a presentation.

Annie suggested that it might be alright to go into executive closed session after public comment but felt that our resolution would, as I understood her, not be permissible without a vote of renewal. Annie told me she got this advice from an MSBA parliamentarian. I told her I would call the MSBA on Monday myself. Because I can doubt that the Board will allow the full discussion we three expect such a vote is objectionable. Furthermore, notwithstanding Chair Harala’s conviction that only the chair can set an agenda I would only agree to changes that would fullfill the spirit of the meeting Alanna, Art and I have called. Annie was being helpful while we talked but couldn’t quite explain the changes she envisions to my satisfaction.

In any event I would like you, to the best of your abilities, to explain to me what exactly your understanding of the parliamentary rule is and how you expect Annie and the majority to enforce it. I can’t guarantee that I’ll agree with you or whoever it was at the MSBA that advised Annie over the phone.

Also, I have promised Annie that the new information, which was not apparent at the time of our vote on negotiations, will be provided to the board prior to the Monday meeting. Its rather a lot to compile but I agreed to do my best to get it emailed out 24 hours prior to our Monday meeting – Sunday night.

So, again, Please explain the procedure you anticipate our Board following and its legal and or parliamentary underpinnings.

Next comes a “clarification” from Mr. Hanson:

william hanson
4:45 PM (12 hours ago)

to me, School, William
I would say that the published agenda would provide the best reference
for any plan for the meeting. I know Robert’s has particular rules
for reconsidering items that have been previously decided, but I would
refer you to Chair Harala for any additional thoughts that she has.

Finally, Art Johnston, the parlimentary expert on the Board makes this skeptical reply:

Art Johnston
2:48 AM (2 hours ago)

to william, me, School, William
MSBA has never had a parliamentarian in the past. If this has changed, please let me know who they have hired, or on contract.

About the author