School Board continues calling practice

Terry Webster

Monday, July 24, 2000 | 11:19 a.m.

Nearly a year after the state attorney general's office called the practice improper, the Clark County School District continues to require taxpayers to pre-register before making public comments during School Board meetings.

As part of a long-standing practice, taxpayers who wish to address the School Board have to call in and register at least 3 1/2 hours before meetings, giving their names, addresses, telephone numbers and topics they intend to speak on.

Before board meetings, the speakers' personal information is compiled into a list in the superintendent's office. Then, the list is faxed to all of the district's assistant superintendents, who review the list and call people who have signed up to speak.

"We fax the list to all of the assistant superintendents before the meeting," said Candace Montoya, an administrative specialist in the superintendent's office. "They are encouraged to call and ask the speaker if there is any problem they can help with, so that time isn't taken up during the board meeting."

The district has been calling the speakers for about seven years, said retiring Superintendent Brian Cram, who served as head of the district for the past 11 years.

"We certainly were attempting to help people," Cram said. "We just wanted to supply information to them. We have never told them not to speak at the meeting."

At the request of the school district's legal team, the attorney general's office rendered an opinion on the use of the sign-up sheet.

"We conclude that, in its practical application, the practice of requiring persons to sign up in advance to speak at a public meeting can have the effect of unnecessarily restricting public comment, and therefore does not comport with the spirit and intent of the Open Meeting Law," Deputy Attorney General Victoria Oldenburg wrote in an August 26, 1999, letter. "Consequently, we cannot approve of such a practice."

The opinion is even cited under section 8.04 of the Nevada Open Meeting Law Manual, a document published by the attorney general's office.

Oldenburg's initial response to taxpayers being called before meetings was, "That's interesting." She added that the attorney general's office refrains from commenting on issues it has not investigated.

"We cannot comment on potential violations until a complaint is filed with our office and we investigate it," she said.

Ann Bersi, the School Board's attorney, still believes the district is right.

"The attorney general's office disagreed with us, and they sometimes do," Bersi said. "But I still think we're right. The reason for using the sign-up is so we can be prepared to address the public's concerns. All of the constitutional and due process issues are still being met. If a person comes to the meeting and has not signed up, one of the board members will recognize them."

Superintendent Carlos Garcia, who arrived July 5 as the new superintendent, looked baffled when he learned of the district's treatment of speakers.

"This is the first I've heard of this," he said. "Why would you want to do that? I believe the reason for having public speaking during a public meeting is so people can just go up there and say whatever they want."

School Board member Shirley Barber takes the issue a step further.

"I think it should be a violation of the Open Meeting Law," she said. "I have never agreed with it. Plus, some people are called and some aren't. If they are going to do it, they should do it for everybody. They'll deny it, but I think they also are telling people what not to say."

Taxpayers agree that the process is more intrusive than helpful. And they want it to stop.

"It's outrageous," said Patricia Cunningham, a member of the Alliance For Social Justice. "This is one of the worst things I have heard about the school district. This needs to stop and I'm going to call for a meeting of the Alliance to breathe down the neck of the district until it does stop."

The situation also riles Glen Nelson of the group Parents in Education.

"Sometimes, I may not want them to know what I'm going to speak on," said Nelson. "I've had people call and ask me questions about what my topic is and if they can be of assistance. If I wanted their help, I would have called them in the first place."

Nelson said administrators have even asked him to "step into the hall" when he arrived at board meetings.

"They had no business to pull me aside," he said.

Linda Palmer has the same sentiments about the time she brought an issue about her son before the School Board.

Palmer said school staffers called her to ask what she was going to speak on. They persisted, she said, by calling back and asking to speak to her son.

"I don't think this is something they should do," Palmer said. "They do this so they can be prepared. Instead of waiting to hear what you say, they start researching right away. (An administrator) told me at the meeting that she had documentation about my son. I asked for a copy of it, but I never received it."

In some cases, staff spent considerable effort to compile informational packets or other documentation on people who publicly blast the district.

School Board member Lois Tarkanian said the district started a file on her when she began raising questions that ultimately led to a special education audit.

"The information they had in the file was incorrect," Tarkanian said. "I don't care if they keep a file on me, as long as the information is right."

Tarkanian said she never had access to the file, but other School Board members told her what was in it.

"It involved different things I had said at different times," Tarkanian said. "But it was not accurate."

And information gathering was conducted on at least two other taxpayers -- one of them a local attorney -- who have challenged the bureaucracy.

"I signed up to speak before the board, and the attorney for the school district wrote an awful memo about me," said Richard Segerblom, an attorney who handles labor issues and has sued the school district in the past. "They attacked my credibility. Basically, it was preparing the board so they wouldn't listen to anything I said. They already had formed an opinion of me before I even spoke."