|
School Board censures Gay, Langness for actions |
|
|
|
Wednesday, 13 February 2008 |
Cliff Buchan
News Editor
Censures have been handed to ISD 831 School Board members David Gay and Eric Langness for their actions in January when Gay presented a motion for disciplinary action against Superintendent Lynn Steenblock.
The board voted 5-2 for the censures at its regular meeting on Feb. 7, sparking a heated debate over the actions by Gay and Langness on Jan. 3 and charges by the two that the censure was political retaliation.
After 30 minutes of banter, the board approved a resolution that accuses Gay and Langness of violating the state Government Data Practices act by making a complaint about Steenblock’s job performance during a public meeting and for not following appropriate chain of command by not taking their concerns about the superintendent to the personnel committee rather than the board room.
“This is an issue of how you do business,” said Board President Bill Bresin who offered the censure as a last-minute agenda addition on Feb. 7. Bresin, with the help of board member Joe Grafft, brought the resolution after conferring with the Minnesota School Boards Association and Patricia Maloney, an attorney who is hired by the school district.
Their conclusion was the motion and tone of Gay’s motion on Jan. 3 could put the full board in a position of responsibility should Steenblock elect to sue. Bresin and Grafft concluded, after conferring with Maloney, that Steenblock’s rights as an employee had been violated by the open discussion of a job performance issue.
Gay and Langness, who had seconded the motion on Jan. 3, argued loudly last week that the intent of the motion was misconstrued and Steenblock had not been wronged.
The issue
The issue revolves around last year’s struggle to approve new criminal background check procedures for volunteers and contract employees. Also involved are two incidents involving staff and students.
Gay raised the topic on Jan. 3 as a late agenda addition approved by Bresin to discuss the background check issue. But Gay went further, asking for “disciplinary action” against Steenblock regarding his role in not requiring background checks of certain individuals, according to board minutes approved by the full board Feb. 7.
One incident raised by Gay involved an independent contractor who has been criminally charged with sexual misconduct involving a juvenile female who was in a Community Education class that he taught last year.
The second involved the death of a Scandia student last spring who was riding in a van that was involved in a car crash. The van was driven by a contract employee hired by a firm that provided student transportation services to the district.
In both cases, criminal background checks were not required at the time the contractors were hired.
Langness offered the second to Gay’s motion on Jan. 31. The motion was withdrawn after discussion.
Round two
Still bothered by the Jan. 3 incident and a subsequent guest commentary written by Gay and published in the Forest Lake Times on Jan. 31, Grafft and Bresin said it was appropriate to visit the issue again.
“I was furious,” Grafft said, describing his feelings after reading the Jan. 31 column in which Gay called for Steenblock to be “held accountable.”
Bresin and Grafft found support from fellow board members Rob Rapheal, Julie Corcoran and Dan Kieger.
“We can not do that in public,” Grafft said, pointing to public questions of an employee’s job performance.
Kieger described the tone of the Jan. 3 discussion as “appalling” while Corcoran said the actions were an “embarrassment” to the board and the district.
Rapheal accused Langness of having “no responsibility” for his role on Jan. 3. Langness, upon questioning by Rapheal, denied any prior knowledge of the matters Gay would raise on Jan. 3, nor had he seen Gay’s written comments in advance.
Rapheal said a key problem in the matter is the board’s actions on the policy governing criminal background checks. He said it was fact that the administration brought the topic to the board for consideration and that Steenblock had recommended a broader level of background checks than the board would support.
“The board took it back,” Rapheal said of the policy recommendation.
Counterpoints
Gay argued on Feb. 7 that his criticism was focused on a failure by the district to protect students. He said his points aimed at the superintendent were taken wrong.
Gay said he did not intend for his comments to have been seen as a surprise attack.
Langness, who was visibly angered by the board action last week, accused Bresin and Grafft of springing a surprise attack. He questioned the late addition of the agenda item, the contacts with MSBA and consultation with an attorney retained by the district without full board knowledge as proof.
He questioned why he was being censured when he simply seconded a motion for purposes of discussion.
“I don’t know why my name is on here?” he asked. “You are grandstanding.”
His frustration became very clear later in the discussion when Langness referred to the censure as “bulls---.”
Langness said he thought the action was a political attack aimed at Gay and himself because of friends they have in the community and would only result in the board becoming more divisive.
He disputed the assertion that Steenblock was harmed in any way by the discussion on Jan. 3. “The motion didn’t violate anyone’s right,” Langness said.
Bresin said he took the action because he felt it necessary to protect the board and hopefully put a stop to future such incidents. It was time to acknowledge the mistake and move on, Bresin said.
Steenblock, when called on Friday, declined any comment on the discussion that took place at the board table.
|
