Public be damned Litchfield latest example
A school official, this one the superintendent in Litchfield, is not having his contract renewed by the school board. Why? The school board, officially, won't say.
"I can't disclose or discuss the contents of the board's discussion, or the rationale behind the vote," said school board chairman Dennis Miller, sounding very much like someone pleading the Fifth Amendment before Congress
Chairman Miller and a majority of the board have decided this is a "personnel matter" and therefore not for the public's ears.
Well, of course it is a personnel matter. But it involves a public employee, paid for with taxpayer dollars and not only responsible to the citizens of the school district, but in charge of the district.
Yet again, we have a case where elected officials, acting on the public's behalf, refuse to tell the public the reason for their actions. Such cases are happening too frequently.
The public has limited, but powerful, recourse. It can decide not to renew the employment "contracts" of school board members.
Some argue that they are elected to represent the public, which needs to just trust their judgment. But without knowing their reasoning for such important decisions as the hiring or firing of key personnel, how is that judgment to be assessed?
To his credit, board member John York, one of the two board members who opposed not renewing the contract, said it was more personality than anything else.
Supt. Brian Cochrane also spoke out to the Union Leader. And the world, surprise, didn't end.
The public doesn't need great specificity or gory details in such cases. But officials like Miller who won't explain their actions either don't care to take the time to do so or they really don't have a strong case in the first place.
Continued here:
Public be damned Litchfield latest example