There were several very important outcomes to yesterday's (April 2, 2024) municipal races in Christian County. First, the Christian County Health Board has three new members who are dedicated to individual freedom. It is a huge win for citizens.
Second, the President-Elect of the Missouri School Boards Association, Ozark School Board Member Patty Quessenberry, was defeated. After 27 years as a school board member, the voters decided change was needed.
Now for the sticky part. According to the MSBA by-laws, the President of the MSBA must also be a current school board member:
"Article IV - Board of Directors Section 1 - Qualifications With the exception of the position of Immediate Past President and any ex-officio member serving as chair of the MSBA Council of Past Presidents, to be eligible to serve on the Board of Directors a person must be a member of an Active Member Board and shall have served at least two years on their local Board of Education."
Quessenberry has just been voted off the Ozark School Board. The by-laws further state:
"Art. IV, Section 8 - Resignation
Resignation, Automatic - A member of the Board of Directors who vacates a local board position, with the exception of the President and the Immediate Past President, shall immediately relinquish their position on the Board of Directors."
It's possible that Quessenberry can become an individual member according to Art. II, Sec. 5 of the by-laws, but she will not be able to hold elected office.
That she was elected President-elect last year may give the MSBA a little bit of wiggle room if they are adamant about retaining her as President in 2024. However, their own by-laws are clear. To keep her on as President of the MSBA when she is no longer a school board member, is problematic.
At last Tuesday's candidate forum in Ozark, a woman named Amy Cooper asked the candidates their opinion of Rep. Jamie Gragg's bill (HB 2885) that would make it a crime for a teacher to assist a child in their desire to transition from one sex to the other. An impossibility, of course. The term "social transitioning" is not what is happening. This is what is happening, and that's not the worst of it.
School Board member and president-elect of the Missouri School Boards Association, Patty Quessenberry, answered out of her "Christian" sensibilities. It's a doozy. Her pastor needs to help exorcise the progressive tendencies she expressed in her answer.
To suggest, as Quessenberry did, that a Christian is not supposed to make a judgment regarding the emotional and physical mutilation of troubled children, but to make sure they feel safe in their delusion, is depraved. She does say the right words at one point--that it's not for teachers to help a child to "transition," but her overall answer was anti-christian in its intent.
Quessenberry then defends teachers and says she wants teacher retention in Ozark. Okaaaay. What does Ozark teacher retention have to do with Rep. Gragg's bill? What is she saying?
God will ultimately hold her accountable for her "non-judgment" of the diabolical and profit-driven gender movement that is deeply harming the psyches and bodies of children. Is this the type of individual who should get another term on the Ozark School Board? For more on Quessenberry go here.
UPDATE: Example A of why our local school board elections are vital: Joe Biden has declared March 31, 2024 as Transgender Visibility Day. Gender ideology is a top-down imposition on our local communities. Resist.
The oft-repeated line that the Missouri Legislature has a Republican super majority is a terrible hindrance to the truth of the matter. When some Republican legislators vote, on average, about 50% of the time with the Democrats, that is not a super majority of Republicans.
That is called the Uniparty. And the Uniparty's interests do not align with the vast majority of citizens in Missouri who vote (often vainly) for Republicans who hopefully represent their interests.
This is also a problem on the local level with school boards and other elected offices. Uniparty influence easily reaches down to locally-elected positions. How else are their vast interests going to be implemented in local schools, health boards, city councils and libraries?
Citizens need to awaken to the understanding that the candidate or official you have known for years, who attends your church, whose business you frequent, or whose children go to school with your children, may not be the best person for the local school board or city council.
It is vital that you become educated on how they view the world, how they will or have vote(d), and what organizations and individuals they are affiliated with. For instance, the Chamber of Commerce is not what it used to be. It has been co-opted by globalist interests that seek to implement worker programs in the schools. They are more interested in worker bees than an educated populace.
Many local schools are deeply intertwined with the local chambers of commerce. School board members, past and present, and even superintendents are members of the local chamber of commerce. They represent the public/private partnerships that purport to have a mutually beneficial relationship that helps students as well as the chamber.
Think.
The chamber is a business-oriented entity. It desires what most benefits businesses in the area. Do the benefits of a culinary program outweigh the negative aspects of turning a school into a business that churns out workers and not educated citizens who can reason and determine their own future?
There are plenty of culinary schools around. Why start a program in a high school? Ask yourself the hard questions. Who benefits most from a bunch of kids that know how to work in hospitality, typically a relatively low-income career? Why aren't schools turning out kids who can read well, write well, and do mathematics? The scores are awful in many local districts, yet programs that ultimately benefit business are an expanding focus. Why?
On a similar note, David Rice has written an excellent article about Dustin Kirkman, a candidate for the Ozark School District School Board. Rice asks some important questions and he exposes some important information. His article deserves to be shared around.
From his article: "Dustin Kirkman has made questionable statements about schools, has
supported two men who had felony charges against them (and in Christian
County, they received a slap on their wrists), and belongs to an
organization that does good and services, but leans left and doesn’t
believe in absolute truth. Even the ancient Greeks understood truth
better than Rotarians seem to understand it."
David Rice has written an excellent article regarding questionable benefits packages and payouts in the Ozark School District. Also a great exposure of the NGOs that have undue influence on school districts, robbing them of local control.
From the article:
"The School Board adopted the "PRIME CHOICE® Plan" offered by
Precision Retirement Group, which allows public employers to convert
certain forms of compensation like accumulated sick leave, vacation
time, and incentive payments into contributions to either a medical
trust called the "PRIME Plan" or special deferred compensation plans
like 401(a) or 403(b) accounts. Copies of the Prime Plan are at the end
of the article.
The materials promote these conversions as
allowing tax-free reimbursements for retiree health expenses in the
PRIME Plan trust, or opportunities to defer federal and state taxes in
the deferred compensation plans. They also advertise eliminating FICA
tax obligations for both the employer and employee.
While
portrayed as benefits for employees, such specialized retirement plans
allowing favorable tax treatments on back-end payouts have been
criticized by some as forms of excessive "golden parachutes" for
highly-compensated public officials and administrators."
Well worth reading, with links galore to get you up to speed on the issues.
There are many ways in which publicly-funded entities limit and
suppress the right of the public to speak freely.
Art. I, Sec. 8 of
the Constitution of the State of Missouri states: “That no law
shall be passed impairing the freedom of speech, no matter by what
means communicated: that every person shall be free to say, write or
publish, or otherwise communicate whatever he will on any subject,
being responsible for all abuses of that liberty…”
Right behind that is
“Sec. 9, Rights of peaceable assembly and petition. – That the
people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good,
and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for
redress
of grievances by petition or remonstrance.”
According to the
article, “Former Springfield City Attorney Howard Wright, who has
written about the subject on
his website [website is no longer active], said courts have found
that citizens must be given a "meaningful opportunity to
comment" when a public hearing is required. But as long as that
happens, "I think council has a lot of discretion to adopt rules
and procedures."
The article then
shares some of the rules and regulations local governing bodies have
applied to public speech at their meetings.
If you have attended
a public meeting lately, you may have run into some of the ways
boards limit and suppress speech. It is usually couched in terms of
timeliness, application to the current agenda, distractions and so forth, but what
actually occurs is an undue limit on the rights of citizens to
communicate to and with their elected and/or appointed boards in a
public setting.
The rules and guidelines seem geared toward troublemakers, but give precious little evidence that
citizens in general are not already acting in an orderly and polite
manner. Public forums can get boisterous, passionate, even
contentious at times, but citizens usually do a wonderful job of
policing themselves, and should not be made to suffer for a board of
thin-skinned individuals who want to control every action of the
audience and can brook no distraction of any kind.
Time limits on
public speech—giving citizens as little as three minutes to speak
on a topic—is one way in which free speech is suppressed. That is
not a “meaningful opportunity to comment.” Three minutes to
address a grievance or inquire of the board is often not enough time
to fully express an issue. Also, boards tend not to respond to the
issues addressed. They sit mute before the public, presumably hoping
the person and therefore the issue will disappear.
“The board encourages residents to utilize the process for placing
items on the agenda but will also specifically designate time for
district residents to provide public comments at regular meetings of
the board. The following rules will apply to the public comment
portion of the meeting:
The board will establish a time
limit for the public comment period.
No individual will be permitted
to speak more than once during this period.
The board will establish a uniform
time limit for each speaker.
Discussion will be limited to
items from the posted agenda.
All speakers must provide his or
her name and address prior to speaking.
If there is insufficient time for everyone to speak,
the board will encourage participants to submit their questions
in writing or utilize the process for putting an item on the
agenda.”
Regarding public
concerns and complaints, the District has this to say: “The district
encourages parents/guardians, students and other members of the
public to first discuss concerns with the appropriate district staff
prior to bringing the issue to the Board so that the issue may be
thoroughly investigated and addressed in a timely fashion. The
Board will not act on an issue without input from the appropriate
district staff and may require a parent/guardian, patron or student
to meet with or discuss an issue with district staff prior to hearing
a complaint or
making a decision on the matter.”
If citizens cannot
go to their elected officials without first going through what is
undoubtedly a filter, then who is truly representing the
people?
That very few individuals attend most public meetings may
have something to do with the extra burdens placed upon citizens. A
citizen should not feel as if their speech is of such low concern as
to merit a three-minute time limit for hearing an issue, or that the board “may require” a citizen to meet with
intermediaries (district staff) before addressing the board. (Note: the OSD time-limit policy is five minutes though they had been limiting individuals to three minutes as stated in the video below.)
The school board at
the Ozark School District has questionable requirements, even going
to so far as to suppress the speech of their own members through requiring points of order in order to address citizens and calling for the question before sufficient time to discuss the issue has occurred. Citizens have a right to hear the speech
of others, as well as to speak.
At an October 2023
board meeting discussion regarding addressing citizens in a public
meeting, it was decided that individual board members must first
address the board president for permission to speak with a citizen.
If you watch the whole discussion, it becomes clear that the board
intends to keep tight control of not only citizen participation, but
of the board itself. Watch the discussion (prompted at 12 minutes):
....
If you have attended an Ozark school board meeting, it becomes clear that the tight
control is not because there are routinely violent, or otherwise
inappropriate outbursts (although the News-Leader reported boardmembers accusing the public of such things.) If you watch the online
board meetings, it is clear the board as a whole is not comfortable
with any type of disagreement, even with other board members.
Attorneys, in particular those of the Missouri School Boards Association (MSBA)
have been involved. At about 34 minutes in, Patty Quessenberry, who
is running for re-election to the school board again after serving for 27
years and who is currently the president-elect of the MSBA, even
mentions that the board has conferred with an attorney about the
new policy they are discussing.
At 39 minutes in
Quessenberry actually asks how to proceed if one of the dreaded
outbursts happens but she hasn’t noticed
it happened. Board Member Christina Tonsing even mentions she has not
heard a lot of what the other board members claim are outbursts.
The discussion then goes on to what certain audience members said or
didn’t say, whether it was rude, and whether the board members had
actually heard what they thought they heard.
Board Member Guy
Callaway suggests that some of the citizen comments were misconstrued
by not only board members, but others in the room. Apparently, board members
are conferring with others present, many of whom are
school employees.
This is some nasty
uprising from citizens, eh?
In November's meeting, a citizen questioned the board about an incident that occurred in October, when a citizen was removed from the meeting in violation of the board's new policy. See his comments here (video prompted). You will see the board attempts to shut him down:
The ever present timer rings while he is still speaking. He was the only public speaker for the meeting, which is very common. No one responded to the citizen's comments. The board moves right on to the next agenda item. It is as if he didn't exist.
It isn't until Board Member Christina Tonsing brings up the issue some time later that it is addressed. If she had not brought it up through the Community Engagement Plan on the Agenda, it would not have been referred to at all.
At approximately 1:04:00 in the video, Board Member Tonsing requests the Community Engagement Plan be pulled from the Consent Agenda, so it can be discussed. The board seems reluctant but Tonsing is allowed to share her views on the plan and how it came about, and she makes a connection between that and the issue of public comments in her quest to have the item pulled from the agenda.
Also, please note that though the transcript repeatedly states it is Board Member Amber Bryant speaking, it is actually Tonsing. The item was pulled from the agenda and Tonsing asks the board for their responses. Crickets, except for Guy Callaway who felt that the board had done their duty to solicit community engagement, of which there was apparently very little. The motion is quickly approved to accept the consent agenda.
At the December 2023 board meeting, a very important subject comes up, that of due process for teachers. Board Member Tonsing begins to make a case for modifying the MSBA's proposed changes in district policy, as it may violate the "federal process" for teachers going through a suspension or termination process. (It is helpful to read the transcript of the video clip.) The proposed change reads:
"The fourth potential change/addition in policy - A
member of the community has requested the following be placed into
policy: Teacher and staff discipline - Any administrator, teacher, or
staff of the district who is disciplined has the right to fair
treatment. Therefore, any performance improvement plan presented to a
district employee must be presented to the board at the next meeting by
the superintendent. The superintendent will establish a timeline for the
improvement required and update the board monthly on the employee's
progress or lack thereof. Further, no Notice of Deficiency will be
presented to a district employee until that employee has been invited to
a board meeting to be heard and the board has approved the notice. At
the hearing, the superintendent must present the failures of the
Performance Improvement Plan in correcting the employee's shortcomings,
including a summary of follow-up on the PIP."
In a clip from the board meeting (see below), which was recorded by the Ozark Schools Support Team and is not available at the district's YouTube Channel (interesting, eh?), you will see Board Member Bryant quickly shut down discussion by 'calling the question,' which is typically used when debate and discussion has been extensive. In this case, the board immediately voted to accept only the changes that had been proposed by the MSBA, completely suppressing any discussion.
The public was given no chance to hear a response or discussion of the issue, even though Ozark School District has an elevated turnover rate of teachers, with some controversial personnel decisions in the recent past. The board shut down Tonsing and simply voted the changes as recommended by the MSBA.
In conclusion, there are a myriad of ways that public boards suppress free speech. They do the voting public a great disservice by attempting to control narratives and stop discussion of matters that are of interest to citizens. Indeed, by limiting the free exchange of ideas, on both the part of board members, as well as citizens who have a right to speak, these publicly-elected boards undermine their communities and the well-being of their constituents.
The Ozark School Board had a big vote to purchase property for up to $8.65 million on January 8. The banker on the school board and the real estate guy on the school board didn't bother showing up, oddly enough. And the third guy was:
Photo: Dan Hill
They aren't quite sure what they're going to do with the building (wink wink), but you can bet your bottom dollar it will need lots more of your Ozark property tax dollars to make it ship shape.
You have to spend money to save money, right? As Assistant Superintendent of Operations Curtis Chesick says, "This is an opportunity to save money on future growth."
School boards DO have a lot of power. When they give up their power by submitting to the MSBA's decrees, our children are harmed and school boards become the tool of powers that are bent on implementing policies that reach far beyond the classroom.
The
Missouri School Boards Association (MSBA), a private quasi-governmental
organization whose purpose is to assist Missouri school boards, recently
held their 2023 Fall Delegate Assembly.
The
MSBA works in conjunction with other state-level professional
organizations and alongside the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education (DESE) to implement top-down agendas that are not only in
direct conflict with local control, but seek to implement and
advocate for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI), Social Emotional
Learning (SEL) and Critical Race Theory (CRT).
With
a 2023-2024 revenue budget of over $12 million (some of which is in
the form of federal tax dollars), the MSBA is a powerful presence in
Missouri schools. According to their own explanation, “Since 1936,
MSBA has been the unified voice of school board members throughout
the state.”
Why
would school board members in Ozark want to have a unified
voice with school board members in St. Louis or Kansas City? Why
would local school board members want a unified voice with
those in any other locale for that matter? One unified voice for all
Missouri school board members is not local control.
Just
the tip of the School Borg, the MSBA is a full-service provider:
“MSBA
offers Basic and Full Maintenance policy
services to our member districts. Our team of experienced policy
editors and lawyers will work with your district to develop policies
that drive excellence.”
If you look at MSBA-member school boards across the state you will indeed see a uniform structure of policies and guidelines that are amazingly...unified. Certifications,
training, resources, personnel, financial services, business
connections, education safety, emergency operations, and legal aid are
some of what the MSBA offers. It’s a one-stop shop that makes it
easy for school boards to justify paying membership fees that reach
into the thousands of dollars annually.
If
your local school board is seeking a new superintendent, the MSBA is happy to provide candidates. The MSBA’s school
board policies also hand over most of the school board’s authority
to superintendents.
In the video below Ozark School Board members Amber Bryant and Guy Callaway at the Nov. 16, 2023 Ozark School
Board meeting, advocate for school personnel control by the superintendent and not
the school board. Involving a new position, that of Human Resources Executive Director, discussion included who the new director would report to. Board Member Christina Tonsing suggested that the board might have oversight over this employee and not the superintendent. She reasoned that if there was an issue with the superintendent, there was nowhere for staff to resort since the position would be under the direct supervision of the superintendent.
This policy puts the superintendent, an employee of the school board, in a position of authority so complete that there is little to no recourse for school employees who may have issues with the superintendent. Board member Amber Bryant stated, "The only person who reports to the board is the superintendent." Callaway concurred. "I don't think they should report directly to the board," he said.
Interestingly, Bryant is the human resources director for Christian County. She reports to a "board," the citizen-elected Christian County Commissioners. Why wouldn't the elected Ozark School Board provide for a similar personnel structure? They have voluntarily given their authority to a non-elected individual. It is well known that Ozark school employees have been victims of this structure in the past. You can read about them here.
Readers should know that the policy Bryant stated is simply that, a policy. It does not have the force of law. The school board could easily adopt a policy that allows for certain other employees to report to the board, thus placing ultimate authority in personnel matters to the board and not the superintendent--a non-elected position. Here is the Missouri Statute regarding how school boards govern.
The video below is prompted to the discussion at around 47 minutes:
This is what 18 hours of MSBA training will get
taxpayers—school control in the hands of administrative staff and
not the elected school board.
It
is organizations like the MSBA, working alongside state government
agencies, that have created a veritable Borg system of rules,
regulations, and guidelines that drain away local control, and put
power in the hands of state-level trade organizations and often handpicked administrators instead of
elected board members.
Unfortunately, it is often school board members who are unwilling to utilize their authority for the good of the students and staff that allow for the MSBA to control what happens in local schools.
Guy Callaway & Patty Quessenberry, Ozark School Board members
MORE ON THE MSBA BORG
The
MSBA Assembly is held annually. Member delegates gather to confirm the
MSBA’s annual budget, its advocacy position proposals, give
reports, adopt the agenda, and other business. Although the MSBA is a
voluntary organization, it rules school board members through a
maze of guidelines and regulations that are enforced on the local
level by ignorant and/or complicit school boards.
Throughout
the MSBA’s 2023
delegate
handbook is a constant drumbeat for increased taxes. In fact, in
their first policy proposal, the MSBA advocates for “Adequate
and Equitable Public School Funding...MSBA supports increasing state
revenues available to adequately fund public education by
bringing certain taxes on tobacco, e-cigarettes, imitation tobacco or
cigarette products, recreational marijuana, alcohol and
alcohol-related products, and internet sales to a level
consistent with the national average.”
Regardless
of the desired tax on marijuana and internet sales, the word
“equitable” is the word to focus on. This is the term that
Marxists use to take money from one group and distribute it to
another group. Now
just remember, that approximately 75% of property taxes go to fund
public schools in our local school districts. But this isn’t
enough for the MSBA. They come right out and say this about the
current tax on tobacco products:
“The
recreational marijuana-specific tax rate is not currently used to
fund public schools. The Missouri Constitution specifies that the
taxes are used for a) administration costs, b) the costs of expunging
criminal records for marijuana-related offenses, c) costs of health
care and other services to military veterans and their families, d)
to increase access to drug addiction treatment, overdose prevention
education, and job placement, housing and counseling for those with
substance use disorders, and e) to provide legal assistance for low-
income Missourians through the Missouri public defender system.”
The
MSBA wants to take tax dollars away from military veterans and their
families, treatment for drug addiction, and other programs for
low-income Missourians. You can’t make this stuff up.
The
handbook then moves on to the MSBA’s advocacy positions. We will
focus mainly on the highlights of their advocacy positions that
involve centralized control. Within the verbiage the word “equitable”
or “equitably” occurs at least five times regarding the funding
of public schools. The MSBA:
Supports
legislation to “fund state
and local programs to eliminate disparity in achievement among all
students.” (Utopian
silliness.)
Supports
legislation to provide “relief” to school districts that have a
“significant amount of tax-exempt property. (Like
churches and
some job-providing businesses?)
Urges
an increase in state
funding “to allow districts to provide free early childhood
education programs.” (You
can say good bye to small independent childcare businesses.)
Supports
a state
program to provide “low-interest loans to school districts during
difficult financial times.” (In
addition to the bonds and levies that taxpayers already provide?)
Supports
a “constitutional amendment permitting the increase of a school
district’s bonding capacity to 20 percent. (Let's help the taxpayer accrue more debt on the school's behalf!)
Supports
legislation exempting “public school districts from paying state
motor fuel tax for fuel consumed by school buses.”
Supports
an increase in the state
motor
fuel tax in Missouri!
That’s
just some of what you will find in the delegate handbook. It must be
noted that the MSBA also desires to have government control over tax
abatement projects, including: “School boards shall have legal
standing to participate in all phases of the process, including any
legal appeal relating to any tax abatement application for property
located in the school district...School boards shall have veto power
over their portion of any tax abatement project.”
Let’s
ponder that for a moment. The MSBA wants school boards to be able to
have legal standing over a city or county’s tax abatement
processes, including having veto power. I wonder if our tax assessor
and other elected city and county officials know about that. This
seems like an outright usurpation of the authority vested in other
elected officials.
This is the bloated, centralized tick that is sucking tax dollars from wherever it can and attempting to accrue political power wherever it can.
Moving
on, the MSBA:
Supports
“legislation mandating accurate real property assessments and
practices to ensure comparable assessments and practices throughout
the state.”
(So
much for local governance.)
Moving
quickly through the positions, the MSBA also advocates for a state
accreditation system that forces any schools that receive state
funding to be under the system.
States
student curriculum must be inclusive to educate the whole student.
This is DEI language.
Says
local districts can come up with goals and objectives for learning
as long they meet state
and national
standards, but then says
the local districts are not allowed to prohibit or mandate specific
curricular content. (Doublespeak.
Schoolspeak. Centralized control of curriculum.)
Wants
standardized kindergarten readiness tests.
Advocates
for state
licensing
requirements to all public preschools, as well as full certification
for all
Missouri preschool teachers.
Advocates
for a single, statewide
reporting system to be funded, for “safety” reasons.
Advocates
for a State
school safety coordinator.
Advocates
that all
students
MUST attend school until 18 or a diploma.
Wants
to require homeschooling parents to annually report to the school
district where their child(ren) reside.
Wants
more control over releasing information regarding emergency
operations, school safety hot line, and to have limited financial
penalties when schools “inadvertently” break the law.
Ozark School Board Member Patty Quessenberry, who has been a board member for 27 years, is also the president-elect of the MSBA. She has recently spoken of the MSBA in glowing terms. She has been assimilated. She is most likely running for another term on the Ozark School Board.
At the Oct. 19, 2023 Ozark School Board meeting, a demographic report was presented to the board. You can access the slides of the report here. The News-Leader wrote about the "destination district" here.
However, a new video just dropped from Missouri Freedom Initiative. Looks like there are two sides to the data.
It looks like the Ozark School Board has called on their friends in the media after Right to Win Ozarks published an article detailing recent events at the Oct. 19, 2023 school board meeting. Since the News-Leader does not have pictures of the meeting and instead used a photo from the poorly-attended Oct. 10 town hall, it would seem the news outlet was not in attendance.
According to Riley in her published article, "parents and community members have shouted, talked out of turn, mocked the board and chanted "D-E-I" -- an acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion efforts -- or "D-I-E" in meetings."
The article goes on to say "Board members admitted they were not sure if "D-I-E" was just a transposed version of the DEI acronym or a threat, but noted it was unsettling for others in the audience." 🙄
One would hope that the school board and the News-Leader would identify those who chanted "D-I-E" in the meetings. In the interests of truth, please do. It should be a relatively easy thing to do since the board has recently been recording and archiving all the meetings.
Board member Amber Bryant is "demanding" respect. A two-way street when "patrons," as the school district refers to taxpaying residents and parents, are involved. "How many times have we been in these meetings since I've been on the board when people are talking and people are saying things that are rude?" she was quoted as saying.
A school board meeting is not a classroom. It is the local forum of the republic and its elected representatives, working out how best to conduct the business of the school district. Just ask Sen. Mike Moon, who was taken to task by a constituent at a recent work-study meeting of the County Commission. He listened quietly and managed to not call the police in to haul off the resident. In other words, he knows how to govern.
While Riley's apologia of the Ozark School Board mentions the Oct. 19-approved "rules of order for patron participation," she does not address that there was not a public reading of them at the meeting, nor does she say at what point in the meeting the rules were approved and publicly posted.
Let's move on.
Board member Patty Quessenberry is quoted as saying the "primary purpose of a school board's work session or business meeting is to conduct the public business in an orderly and efficient manner."
I wonder how many "patrons" are aware that these meetings can be marathon endeavors, the Oct. 19 public portion beginning around 3:35 p.m. and ending around 9:15 p.m. That a public business meeting, with very few public comments, can last over five hours is not a testament to efficiency.
Ozark School Board Member Amber Bryant
Later in the article, board member Amber Bryant states the "...board has received complaints about disruptions and "cuss words" from others in the meetings."
If either the Ozark School Board or the News-Leader is unwilling to name who is making complaints or cussing and causing disruptions, then one can only surmise that the paper is publishing what is termed hearsay. And it should be immediately discounted.
One of the few helpful sentences in the article states, "The board tweaked the list during the Thursday meeting and the final version has not yet been posted."
Very, very problematic since that new final version not yet posted was used to remove a taxpaying citizen from the meeting.
One last point. A board member is recorded as saying the school board agreed they heard three outbursts. The comment is on the published video. That is very interesting, since I have almost three-and-a-half hours of audio recording that shows almost complete silence except for the moment when the board voted not to table the agenda item with the student data sharing/agreement (which you can read about here).
If any board member would like to listen to the recording, they can contact me and I will play it for them.
A simple definition of communication can be expressed as the act of
exchanging information and ideas through verbal or written means. It
implies a two-way exchange. It doesn’t have to be
agreeable--disagreement is allowed--but the process of communicating
should include a give-and-take with equitable footing for both
parties.
At the October 19,
2023 Ozark School Board Meeting, the definition of “full and open
communication” as expressed in their Policy
BDDH-1 Public Participation at Board Meetings means something
entirely different.
Let’s keep in mind
that the taxpaying voters in Ozark elect the members of the Ozark
School Board to represent their interests regarding the education of
Ozark children and the governance of the school district.
Thursday night, a
citizen was removed from the meeting for merely murmuring from her
seat when the school board discussed renewing a data agreement that
gives students’ PII (Personal Identifiable Information) to both
DESE (Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education), and
a third-party entity, NWEA.
That the data
agreement and data transfer has been ongoing for many years is an important point.
Have
parents authorized
or have
they beenproperly informed
about theamount and type ofprivate
information sharingof
their students and families? Have they been informed of the implications for the children?
The citizen did not jump up
and down or scream or yell. She did not stop any board proceedings.
She threatened no one. Hertwo
chair neighbors simply
corresponded their disappointment.She
merely gave voice to her disappointment. Additionally, as the person
who was sitting next to her, I also expressed dismay over the
decision to give away student data, which can be used to determine a
child’s future (see here).
In fact, I was the
one who actually said, “Shameful” when the board voted against tabling the issue. This was after another citizen had spoken
to the board about the danger of sharing students’ PII. Two board
members, Mark Jenkins and Christina Tonsing, voted against signing
the agreement until it had been looked into further, however, the
motion to table the item was defeated on a 5-2 vote.
Apparently, the
school board had also passed a new “decorum” policy earlier in
the meeting (the public part of which began soon after 3:30 p.m. and
lasted until after 9 p.m.). The targeted citizen was not present at the meeting nor did either of us see the flyer on the door when we
arrived at the meeting at approximately 5 p.m. and 5:30 p.m,
respectively.
Board President Sarah Adams Orr
A few hours later
the new policy was enforced by a police officer who threatened to
arrest the targeted citizen if she did not immediately leave the
meeting. It was a shameful spectacle of board overreach.
That the school
board is unable to act with the decorum and respect it is insisting
others use, and is unable to handle the least criticism speaks
volumes about its own fitness to serve the public good.
Instead of
forbearance and professionalism, instead of reading the brand new
policy in the meeting so that all were aware of the restrictions, they essentially laid a
trap for an active citizen who has been questioning the board for
some months regarding a variety of issues.
Isn’t the essence
of education the ability to communicate knowledge in a way that
brings understanding, that fosters confidence in one’s position and
the ability to defend it?
The Ozark School
Board’s action at the Oct. 19 school board meeting betrayed a
weakness of both character and confidence in their decisions. Board
President Sarah Adams Orr objected to the “outburst,” and said the
offending individual would be removed if there was one more incident.
But within a moment or two, the board suddenly took a recess, only to
return with a police officer who demanded removal of the citizen.
While the video did not catch the whole event, there is almost 3 ½
hours of audio that prove the complete innocence of the ousted
citizen. It is clear and conclusive. And the live-stream of the
meeting should be released as soon as possible to reflect that.
Patty Quessenberry, member since 1997
In my opinion, the
citizen was targeted because she is critical of some of the board’s
actions and is not afraid to say so. In fact, I would suggest that
the new “decorum” policy was approved and hastily posted on the door (it’s
hard to say when it was actually posted and I cannot find an online
version of it), and then used to justify removing her from the public
board meeting.
She was targeted by
a school board that is arrogant and unused to being challenged. We
have seen this across the nation as citizens begin to take back the
political power that resides with the People. If the school board had
an ounce of decorum and understanding of their public role, they would publicly apologize to the citizen.
Barring that, they
should attend a County Commission meeting to learn how to conduct a
public meeting, where the People’s business gets accomplished and
freedom of speech is not feared, even if it's disagreeable.
