Dick Spotswood: Mill Valley School District’s elected officials need to communicate with constiuency
Transparency is a key element that builds trust. Confidence is facilitated when the public is told the whole truth regarding the management of local governments.
A lesson on how a lack of transparency inhibits trust in institutions is offered by the Mill Valley School District.
Last week, the district released a statement that Superintendent Kimberly Berman and the board “mutually agreed” upon a decision that Berman would leave at the end of this school year. So far, Berman has not commented beyond a statement that was included in the district’s announcement.
Why is this happening? The public doesn’t know because the district won’t tell us. Despite being legal, the lack of information about the “separation agreement” for the agency’s chief executive officer inevitably leads to ugly rumors, innuendo and distrust.
There may be a valid reason why Berman either chose to leave or Mill Valley trustees felt that the school district needed a fresh start. Berman did herself no favor in failing to give even a hint of why she’s departing. Likewise, the Mill Valley district – whose schools enjoy a justifiably high reputation – didn’t foster continuing confidence with its silence.
No doubt, pandemic-related conditions caused the district’s old sense of stakeholder collaboration to dissolve due to conflicting goals emerging between parents, the teachers’ union and staff.
Presumably Mill Valley’s trustees knew what they were getting into when they hired Berman four years ago. Of course, with an entirely new school board, the district’s governing board is entitled to set the district on what they believe is a route to excellence.
Berman’s departure comes at a high price. She’ll depart with an impressive golden parachute worth over $350,000. Her $299,534 salary plus generous benefits will continue for a full year.
Blame for that expensive outcome can’t be laid at the feet of current school trustees. Board Vice President Sharon Nakatani told me that the board had no choice. Berman signed an overly generous three-year contract a little more than a year ago. She was automatically granted this grand package if she left her post for any reason after one year, no matter what the cause. That dubious deal was approved by the prior board and its attorney.
Do you have questions about what happened to Berman (or why)? The board’s policy, as stated on MVschools.org, makes it clear that reaching out to a board member won’t lead to a direct response.
The policy says that trustees should speak with “one voice.” Further, “If a board communication is sent to a board member, the board member will forward that information to the superintendent. The superintendent or board president will respond.”
These five school trustees are elected officials. Their duty is to you, their constituents, not to their colleagues or even the institution. Voters didn’t elect “one voice.” They elected five school trustees and are entitled to hear five individual voices. Their rule applies not just to personnel matters, but to any school district issue.
Mill Valley isn’t unique. There are similar policies in multiple Marin school districts. Citizens are entitled to know the motivation of their individual elected representatives when they make decisions.
Trustees state that they were required to adopt this board policy under the advice of the school district’s lawyer. If I was a trustee and our attorney told me I had to surrender my right to free speech and to not communicate with my constituents, I’d get a new attorney.
There’s no justification for this “sealed lips” policy under the Brown Act or any privacy law. Imagine if your representative in Congress, the state Legislature, city council or special purpose district board couldn’t respond directly to citizen or media questions, but instead had to defer all queries to a communal spokesperson.
That’s the opposite of transparency and the antithesis of good government.