Sarasota County School Board Report Card
The League of Women Voters of Sarasota has established an Observer Corps to monitor the Sarasota County School Board meetings. The goal of the Observer Corps is to objectively evaluate meetings for ethical, legal and professional conduct on the part of the board and chairperson. This evaluation will be shared with the Board and the public following each meeting.
Meeting Date: March 19, 2024
A = Consistently B= Frequently C= Occasionally D= Rarely F= Not at All
Board follows and advances a written agenda. The published agenda was amended for two action items to accommodate concerns raised by community members about potential conflicts of interest prior to the meeting This was presented by the Superintendent and approved by the School Board.
|
A |
Board limits citizens’ comments only to opinions on topics that are in the Board’s purview. Most citizen comments at this meeting were repeated requests to address concerns of inclusivity, book restrictions and the charter school approval of the previous meeting. Many comments addressed the proposed legislation to allow chaplains in schools. While this may be perceived to be not in the board’s purview prior to a legislative action, it was clear that community members wanted to urge board members to refuse to allow chaplains in our schools, should the governor sign the bill. Comments urging the Board to build trust within the community continued from previous meetings. Requests for the resignation of Ms. Ziegler also continued. |
B+
|
Board Chair does not allow speakers to personally attack board members or use abusive language. The board chair stopped one speaker saying her comment “touched on the private life of the board member.” It was not clear to the public how the comment related to abusive language or attacks on Board members. Chair continues to allow attacks on Ms. Ziegler (hypocrite, fascist). |
C+ |
Board Chair treats speakers equitably. The Board Chair appeared to make an effort to greet and thank each speaker. She displayed less physical reaction to community speaker comments with which she appeared to disagree than in the previous meeting. However, the Chair does not treat her colleagues equitably. The chair interrupted Mr. Edwards several times as he was seeking clarification on issues raised by the public concerning conflicts of interest and other matters on the agenda. She did not, however, interrupt Ms. Ziegler when she was commenting extensively without an apparent topic. That disparity is very apparent to the public and leads to questions of motive and objectivity on the part of the Chair.
|
C |
Board adheres to Robert’s Rules of Order. One of the tenets of Robert’s Rules of Order is that only one speaker speaks at a time and that only urgent matters are cause for interruption of the speaker. There was a clear violation of that tenet by the Board Chair in interrupting Mr. Edwards.
|
D+ |
The Board Chair runs an orderly meeting. The chair did cut the mike for speakers who ran over their time. However, she cut off a colleague and the colleague expressed frustration at being unsupported by the other members of the board.
| C+ |
Board delegates operational and educational decisions to the professional staff. After one student spoke of harassment, the Chair asked the Superintendent if that was something he should follow up. Several other speakers requested follow-up on certain administrative items and they were not referred to the Superintendent.
|
B+
|
Board gives evidence of being responsive to public comment. Board seems dismissive and uninterested in public comment and does not clearly address them. They do however defend their positions. Mr. Enos did attempt to explain why he voted yes on the charter school in response to community concerns. Speakers often refer to never getting responses to emails sent to Board members. Several citizens were upset and concerned about Ms. Ziegler’s prior comments about Equality Florida. She never addressed that concern. Community members express feelings of being demeaned when a board member comments that the public really does not understand an issue. |
D+ |
Additional Comments:
It is apparent that individuals speaking at the Board meetings have done extensive research on topics brought before the Board. The time and effort put into that research is apparently never recognized by the collective board. In fact, it appears as though it is summarily dismissed.
Also while most board members state publicly that they want to keep politics out of the Board room, at least two of the board members at this meeting proposed the appointment of district committee members that gave the public the impression of political placements. Whether valid or not, the mistrust grows.
Mr. Edwards made it clear in the board member comments at the end of the meeting that he does not feel support by his fellow colleagues. He also said he felt the board attorney did not support him. This is a concern.
Recommendations:
If the Board truly wants to keep politics out of the board room, the board individually and collectively need to be aligned around being non-partisan in its decisions and act accordingly. Seeding mistrust with direct actions that initiate public skepticism is keeping the district from moving forward.
The board needs to find a way to address the concerns raise in public comment, even if it’s only to say they will give the issue further study or to thank them for the research the public has done on various issues.
If at all possible, Ms. Ziegler should remain in her seat during board meetings. She has left in the past two meetings which might give the impression that the public comments are unimportant.
Submitted by: Sarasota League of Women Voters School Board Observer Corps.
