School Committee to Discuss Public Input Policy & Public Records

Based on the posted agenda for the Monday, Nov. 7 School Committee meeting, three key topics are planned for discussion involving public engagement in district matters:

• Public input policy;
• Public records requests; and
• Community engagement and communication.

This article takes a look at each topic, and provides historical information based on previous School Committee actions, as well as new developments.

Policy Could Change to Reduce Public Participation

After a failed attempt in early 2015 to curtail opportunities for public input at School Committee meetings, the topic is back on the agenda more than seven years later.

Under the "New Business" section of the Nov. 7 School Committee meeting agenda, is this item: "MPS Policy BEDH/MASC Policy BEDH and BEDH-E Discussion" (the agenda provides no mention of the actual policy title: Public Participation in School Committee Meetings).

The most significant difference between the current School Committee policy and sample BEDH and BEDH-E policies developed by Massachusetts Association of School Committees (MASC): Medfield School Committee currently permits public input at the conclusion of each "discussion" item and prior to any voting, while MASC sample policies do not allow for that same level of engagement.

The current protocol to allow compliant public input throughout Medfield School Committee meetings and increase overall community engagement has been in place for decades. It is also a protocol that is currently followed by Medfield Board of Selectmen.

The last time School Committee discussed a policy change related to public input was at its Jan. 12, 2015 meeting at the request of Superintendent Jeffrey Marsden who cited a recommendation by School Attorney Andy Waugh to remove the ability for meeting attendees to provide input prior to voting. Unlike other school policies that were out of compliance with state laws and required updates, there was no legal reason to change the public participation policy.

Even though an "amended" policy was published with a Jan. 12, 2015 date stamp, there was no difference between the old and "new" policy. According to feedback from school committee members at the time, they had no desire to change the policy and take away opportunities for public input, so it was essentially left intact; they just did not feel comfortable stating their opposition at the public meeting.

Public Records Requests Also Up for Discussion

The Massachusetts Public Records Law mandates the public disclosure of government records (including school district and town records), with limited exceptions.

"Public records" is broadly defined by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to include all documents and materials "regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any Massachusetts governmental entity." Photographs, recordings, e-mails, text messages and social media messages sent to or from government officials are also considered public records under the law.

On January 1, 2017, numerous changes to the Public Records Law were ratified to strengthen the ability of citizens to obtain records. Massachusetts had previously been considered by journalists and transparency advocacy groups to have one of the weakest public records laws in the country.

Shortly after the revised law went into effect, Medfield School Committee invited its attorney, Andy Waugh, to talk about its impact and provide recommendations. The topic did not appear on the Jan. 9, 2017 meeting agenda, but the Medfield TV meeting tape can be viewed here.

Waugh shared a number of recommendations and relayed key points to School Committee about the importance of district compliance with the Public Records Law, including the need to post commonly available, "common sense" documents on the district website to avoid fielding "a lot of public records requests."

Waugh also warned the committee that the Commonwealth had made it harder to charge fees, that the financial penalties of not complying with the new Public Records Law were "significant" (noting court and attorney fees), and that he wanted to put the "fear of God in everyone" so that School Committee understood potential consequences of noncompliance. Waugh also noted that capturing and storing public records was required under the law.

Examples of public documents cited by Waugh and/or the Commonwealth that should be readily posted on a district website include contracts, annual reports, hearing notices, winning public contract bids, awards of municipal/district grants, and budgets.

As of this writing, and based on other district examples, documents that would fit the "commonly available" and/or "of significant interest" definition, but are not available or not clearly evident (i.e., hidden in various meeting folders) on the Medfield Public School website, include:

• Enrollment projections;
• Bus contracts;
• District capital budget/facility planning documents;
• Superintendent evaluation and contract;
• School Committee self-evaluation and goals;
• Assessment and survey reports (such as MCAS, VOCAL and 2021 Metrowest Adolescent Health Survey results);
• Financial audits; and
• Annual Year-End Financial Report submitted to Department of Elementary & Secondary Education.

Based on the Nov. 7 meeting "narrative" available in the document packet on the district website, School Committee member Leo Brehm requested having "Public Records Requests" on the agenda. He had expressed concerns at a previous meeting about the time and cost involved with responding to public records requests and appeals to the Commonwealth.

(Anyone unsatisfied with a response, or lack of response, to a public records request can file a simple e-mail appeal to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. There is no cost associated with this step. And while involvement of an attorney is not typically needed, state records show districts often use legal counsel to fight appeals. Towns can seek a reprieve from public records requests if they view them as harassment or frivolous, however, such rulings by the Secretary of Commonwealth are rare and typically only in cases in which the citizen has filed hundreds of requests in a short period of time.)

Over the last several months, and without School Committee authorization, the district has begun to charge fees for the electronic public records they requested. In at least two instances, citizens were quoted fees of more than $400.

According to Next Request, a communications compliance consulting firm, "There are pros and cons to public records fees. They help to offset the costs of expensive record keeping and discovery, but they also keep important public information from being public."

The Secretary of the Commonwealth guide to the Public Records Law can be found here.

As stated in the guide, "The founding fathers of our nation strove to develop an open government formed on the principles of democracy and public participation. An informed citizen is better equipped to participate in that process."

Community Engagement Another Item

Also noted on the Nov. 7 meeting agenda is a continuing discussion about ways to increase communication and community engagement with Medfield Public Schools.

One idea, as presented in the meeting document, is a potential forum with two School Committee members that has been described as a "community engagement initiative." (With only two school committee members present, such a forum would have no requirement under Open Meeting Law for public posting at least 48 hours in advance, and as such, could be deemed a private event.)

(The author of this article was recently accepted by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education as a Medfield District community partner for its Oct. 28, 2022 "Better Together-Strengthening Family School Partnerships Summit." With more than 300 educators, parents and community representatives in attendance, and with keynotes by DESE leadership, the full-day gathering focused on the critical importance of parents, community members and educators forming a strong partnership for the ultimate benefit of students. Examples of ways to increase community engagement included building parent/community member advocacy and leadership skills, and implementing channels for meaningful two-way communication.)