Republic file photo Bartholomew Consolidated School Corp. school board members listen to The Rev. Felipe Martinez speak out in favor of delaying reopening schools for in-person schooling during a Bartholomew Consolidated School Corp. school board meeting to discuss and vote on a school reopening plan in the BCSC Administration Building in Columbus, Ind., Monday, July 20, 2020.
An Indiana law loophole that did not require school boards to have public comment in board meetings has been closed with new legislation, set to go into effect July 1.
Gov. Eric Holcomb signed legislation requiring governing bodies of school corporations to allow public comment and the “taking of oral public comment on a topic must occur before the governing body takes final action on the topic.”
School boards are allowed to adopt “reasonable rules” and set time limits for comment.
The change comes after school boards saw a number of disruptive sessions at their meetings, with patrons angry about pandemic precautions, masks and other issues at times becoming threatening enough that boards decided to return to virtual board meetings.
While public comment will now be required at school board meetings, the law states, “Nothing in this section prohibits a governing body from taking reasonable steps to maintain order in a meeting, including removal of any person who is willfully disruptive of the meeting.”
Additionally, while the board “shall allow” public comment by individuals present at regular meetings — including those where some board members are participating electronically, as allowed by state statute — the board “may allow” comment during electronic meetings conducted under emergency guidelines.
Bartholomew Consolidated School Corp. returned to virtual meetings for one session in 2021 on Sept. 27, with limited public comment allowed, with school officials noting that public comment was not mandated by Indiana law.
“This change to a virtual format is driven by episodes of threatening behavior, profanity used during meetings, personal attacks directed toward various individuals, non compliance to meeting protocols that include maintaining appropriate physical distancing, wearing masks, and following public comment guidelines, and a substantial interference with the ability to conduct necessary business,” school officials said in a statement.
There was still an opportunity for public comment, but remarks had to be “specifically related to the agenda” and submitted via a Google Form. These comments were not read aloud at the meeting but instead shared with each board member before the meeting. The Republic also received a copy upon request.
Members of the public who wished to provide comments on the proposed budget for 2022 were given the opportunity to speak via Zoom during a time of public hearing; however, none chose to do so. The meeting was livestreamed on BCSC’s YouTube channel.
Before this, the time for public comment at BCSC board meetings had been tense and often lengthy during summer and fall of 2021. Comments were often related to masks and other COVID-19 protocols, with community members arguing for and against different restrictions.
One meeting, on Aug. 9, had a comment period that lasted nearly two hours as members of the public discussed the school corporation’s revised reopening plan, which included reinstating the mask mandate. During the board’s Sept. 13 meeting, a relative of a student made public accusations against a teacher, and the teacher subsequently resigned.
There were also instances during meetings where members of the public responded to certain statements with applause or vocal opposition.
Following the virtual Sept. 27 meeting, the school board returned to holding in-person meetings with the usual time for spoken public comment. Fewer speakers have signed up to speak in the months since, and there have been fewer disruptions.
One parent, Eric Grow, has repeatedly spoken during the time for public comment and expressed concerns regarding issues such as COVID-19 protocols, transparency, communication and explicit material in school libraries.
At the board’s most recent meeting on Monday, he emphasized the latter point by reading aloud from a sexually explicit passage he attributed to “A Court of Silver Flames.” Grow said the book is available to high schoolers but so far has not started the process in school policy to have it removed.
Despite the events of the past year, BCSC isn’t expecting the new law to change much about its procedures.
“While we will take the necessary time to digest the language of the new legislation, our initial belief is that our current policies and practices are already in alignment and no changes should be required,” said Superintendent Jim Roberts.
BCSC’s current policies reflect BCSC’s commitment to the “importance of respectful community engagement” during board meetings, he said.
“We believe the legislation allows for the presiding officer of the board to reasonably manage public input,” he said, when asked if the laws provided reasonable accommodations. “Our current policies and practices also include language that appropriately addresses this portion of our school board meeting agenda.”
Current policies
At present, individuals who intend to speak at BCSC board meetings are asked to sign in and provide their name, address and the agenda item to which their comment pertains. This information is asked to be shared by the speaker at the beginning of their comments.
Individuals wishing to speak are asked to read over a sheet describing the procedures for comment. The procedures state that speakers should be residents of the school corporation or parents of BCSC students. BCSC staff are also able to comment.
Comments are limited to three minutes. Speakers should “defer to a spokesperson if there is one for a defined group,” pass if their point has already been made and refrain from using the names of individual students or staff.
Additionally, BCSC’s public comment procedures state that the presiding officer may take the following actions:
Prohibit public comments that are frivolous, repetitive, or harassing.
Interrupt, warn, or terminate a participant’s statement when the statement is too lengthy, personally directed, abusive, obscene or irrelevant.
Request any individual to leave the meeting when the person behaves in a manner that is disruptive of the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Board policy also states that the presiding officer can “call for a recess or an adjournment to another time when the lack of public decorum so interferes with the orderly conduct of the meeting as to warrant such action” and “waive these rules with the approval of the board when necessary for the protection of privacy or the administration of the board’s business.” The presiding officer can also request law enforcement’s assistance in removing a disorderly individual.
BCSC’s public comment guidelines note that while the board is “always interested” to hear from the public, “the agenda is not established for a question and answer session.” Questions should be directed to the superintendent’s office for “proper responses or appointments for follow-up,” the policy states.
Additionally, “public participation may be prohibited at any meeting that must be conducted remotely or virtually due to an emergency declared by federal, state or local officials,” the policy states.
Flat Rock-Hawcreek
Flat Rock-Hawcreek School Corp. is not expecting changes to its public comment policies, said Superintendent Shawn Price.
“We have a public comment policy in place currently, and I don’t think this law really impacts that at all,” he said. “We have not had to suspend or postpone any kind of public comment over the course or the duration of pandemic or anything.”
Price said the school corporation is reviewing the legislation to see if it needs to rearrange where comment takes place in the order of meetings and will get a legal opinion before making any potential changes.
“As long as we have the freedom to look at our policies and tweak those as needed, I think that’s important,” said Price. “But I think it’s also important to protect the integrity of the reason for that public comment.”
Flat-Rock Hawcreek’s current public comment policies are largely similar to BCSC’s. Individuals wishing to speak should fill out a public comment form with their name, address, phone number(s) and topic. Remarks are limited to three minutes, and groups should appoint a single spokesperson. Points should not be restated, according to the policy.
Written statements are also allowed and “will be forwarded to the appropriate personnel for proper follow-up.” Space is provided on the sign-up forms to write these statements.
Furthermore, comments should provide “positive, constructive information for the betterment of the school district,” the policy states. Personal attacks — whether by name or implication — are not allowed. The board president can excuse a speaker who makes such an attack or is rude or abusive.
“Please remember your comments become part of the public record,” school officials stated. “The purpose of the board of school trustees’ meeting is to conduct the business and manage the educational affairs of the school corporation. It is not a place for an open forum.”
