By Cliff Buchan

Is the ISD 831 School Board able to put a stop to  the blood-letting that has infected the board this winter? It’s a nasty situation that did not get any better when the board met on March 6.

At the center of the debate and now controversy is Board member David Gay’s insistence in January that Superintendent Lynn Steenblock be held accountable for his role in not requiring specific criminal background of two independent contracts who later became part of tragic incidents involving students.

Fearful of a potential data practices violation on the part of Gay’s discussion in January, the board on a 5-2 vote in February censured Gay and Board member Eric Langness. Langness had seconded a motion by Gay to further explore Steenblock’s role. The 5-2 vote supports the majority opinion that Steenblock’s employee rights under data practices may have been violated by the January discussion.

The February meeting was not pretty as colorful and inappropriate language was used and tempers on more than one part flamed too hot. Some of the same was heard last week as the public argument over what was said and what was alleged. As a board, there is no unanimous agreement over what is true.

Members Gay and Langness were unsuccessful last week in having the board minutes from Jan. 3 corrected to reflect the intent that Gay now says is misconstrued. The issue is expected to come to the board again for more discussion on Thursday, March 27.

Gay and Langness are right on a couple of counts. The action to censure was sloppy and poorly devised. The first name of Member Langness was incorrectly spelled and a statute number listed for the data practices law apparently was wrong. In serious matters of this nature, there should have been better homework.

There is more here, however than sloppy board work and insinuations that the top school district officials could have or should have done more to keep students safe.

There is a matter of data practices and what the public should know.

The situation in Forest Lake was put before the legal counsel who represents Minnesota newspapers. Attorney Mark Anfinson said the following: “The Data Practices Act (sec. 13.43, subd. 1) does classify ‘the existence and status of any complaints or charges against’ an employee as private. Furthermore, the Open Meeting Law states that a public body must close a meeting ‘for preliminary consideration of allegations or charges against’ an employee.”

As a newspaper, we can see how someone looking at these provisions might conclude that a violation had occurred in the case of the superintendent.

We will give David Gay the benefit of the doubt that his comments in January were not based on any personal or political motive in going after the superintendent, but involved a legitimate policy discussion. In Anfinson’s judgment, issues involving who should be subject to background checks and whether officials acted improperly do not yet constitute specific allegations or charges against the superintendent.

We also believe there would be a significant loss of public access if a governmental body could completely close a discussion about the need for, and the wisdom of, background checks, simply because the outcome of that discussion might reflect badly on a top executive with the public body.

That said, the board as a whole has had several cracks at improving its background check policy and more changes are coming that will cover more employees and volunteers. In a perfect world, it would have been better for the school board and Member Gay to refrain from slapping on censures and pointing fingers at a time when there is responsibility for all to share. But that is what happens when emotions rise and tempers flare.

After all, it was the full school board during numerous meetings at the committee and board level that declined to impose broader rules on its criminal background policy as Steenblock had suggested. If Superintendent Steenblock had a crystal ball, he most certainly would have used it and the same might be said for the school board.

The full board needs to stop the bleeding, patch its wounds, stop playing the blame game and move on from here. It can start by making sure that its final choices on Policy 438 governing criminal background checks are the right ones.

---

Social Bookmarking ...