I’d like to clear up a possible misunderstanding about an issue that came up at a recent School Board meeting as the board discussed a contract with the proposed Premier Charter School.

I didn’t abstain from voting to approve the contract because I’m opposed to the charter school. Anyone who attended last week’s Board retreat in New Orleans knows that I don’t oppose the school.

I abstained — neither voting for nor against it — because I was upset over the way the issue was handled.

For all the years I’ve been on the Board, people have been allowed to speak on every agenda item the Board was voting on.

The process worked like this:

1. The item was announced.

2. It was explained to the Board and the audience.

3. Audience members were allowed to speak.

4. Board members discussed the issue and

5. The vote was taken.

Our legal advisor, the District Attorney’s office, suddenly said we’d been doing it wrong.

According to the D.A.’s interpretation of the law, #3 should come before #2.

In other words, people must speak about an agenda item before it’s even been explained.

This is important.

An example: under the D.A.’s standards, local taxpayers would have to express their opinions about the School Board budget without even knowing what was in it.

After the explanation they would be forbidden to talk or ask questions.

It’s always been my understanding that “introducing” an agenda item included having it explained. The D.A. seems to feel that simply reading the name of the topic is enough.

I have asked the Board to seek an Attorney General’s opinion, because making people speak about something before they understand it seems silly to me.

— Russ Wise, 

St. John the Baptist Parish School Board, District 8