Dear Fellow School Committee Members, In the closing moments of our June 23 Joint School Committee meeting, the Regional Committee Chair announced that “....Over the summertime we are going to be engaging in mediation” with the local chapter of the NAACP. He did not say why mediation was necessary or what it was about. This topic had never been discussed by the committee in either a previous public meeting or an executive session. Nor had it been included on the publicly posted June 23" agenda. And so when it was brought up by the chair right before adjournment of our business meeting, I was completely unprepared to ask for further clarification and discussion. In the days that followed, I decided to email the entire committee to recommend that we have the kind of public discussion that we did not have on June 23". I wanted to be sure that each member of our elected body gained the information they needed to have an informed and thorough deliberation of the subject, and the time to take any and all necessary votes in a legally prescribed manner. I therefore sent the following email on July 7", Dear Fellow School Committee Members, At our last School Committee meeting, our chair made a brief comment at theend of the meeting that I would like to refer to now, in this email. He stated that he was going "into mediation" with the NAACP. No Committee member commented on this statement at the time. | take responsibility for my own action It was the end of a long meeting and | wish | had been thinking faster on my feet, because upon reflection, there are several things | should have said as a responsible Committee member. The first of which is, "what mediation are you talking about? " "What is the purpose of the mediation?" "What is the advice of our legal counsel?" and finally "What process has been taken to hire a mediator and does it comply with required procurement standards?” As we are all well aware, no decisions of this type can or should be made without full Committee participation and vote. | have attached our policy below which states quite clearly that no individual can act on behalf of the Committee without the Committee authorizing such action. Certainly this includes mediating on behalf of the Committee. The full Committee is the authorizing body and should have full knowledge about the content of the mediation and be in majority agreement about the position the Schoo! Committee would like to take in such a mediation. At this point it is my understanding that we haven't addressed any of these issues, so therefore, no such mediation should occur. | would request of the Chair that he answer these questions for the Committee as soon as possibleand organize a discussion and vote of the full body prior to any action being taken on behaif of the Committee. Best, Katherine In response to my July 7 communication, Ms Douangmany Cage, a fellow committee member, filed an Open Meeting Law complaint against me and thus against this entire body. She contends that my request for an additional meeting to discuss mediation expressed an opinion via email and thus violated Open Meeting Law (G.L.30A section 20). I do not believe I violated Open Meeting Law. Rather, I was attempting to ensure that our chair and committee follow the law and district policy. My purpose was to call for a public meeting about a specific agenda item, the sort of scheduling information that I understood to be exempt from the statutory definition of “deliberation.” (See G.L. 30A. section 18). I believe my email carefully indicated my understanding not my opinion that our chair gould very likely be legally compromising the district and the Regional School Committee. Indeed, had we not met again for a public discussion of possible mediation it would have certainly been a serious violation of law and policy. I wassimply requesting more information from the chair, as well as a public discussion and, if necessary, a recorded vote by the entire committee. However, if the Office of the Attorney General decides that my email constituted an expression of opinion on public business within our jurisdiction and thereby violated Open Meeting Law, I will stand admonished. EE ee eee eee But consider this: what do you believe is a greater concern to this committee and our community (A) that our chair had apparently decided to enter into behind closed door discussions and a potentially binding agreement on behalf of the district and the School Committee regarding matters to which the School Committee and the public were not privy or (B) My suggestion that we discuss things beforehand in a legally posted business meeting? I respectfully suggest that the answer is (A) and that it is far more disturbing that our chair would act unilaterally. [Siac ainnfisonr TES ar SAR) LCOS Rat STE 1am also disappointed that a fellow School Committee member chose to file an Open Meeting Law complaint rather than to reach out to me personally with her concerns. This lack of a collaborative spirit does not advance the interests of students, it only perpetuates adult politics above the needs of our kids and signals skewed priorities. It is my continued hope that this current School Committee can focus more fully on our jobs as elected officials whose charge it is to work together to improve public education forall our students. As we go forward we should be constantly mindful of what is in the best interest of our students, the public and the committee. Thank you for your time and attention.