City Nashville Public Schools Limits What the Public May Say at Board Meetings

The Metro Nashville Public Schools (MNPS) Board changed how it hears from its constituents.

In Chairwoman Rachael Elrod's view, this is less a modification in policy and more of imposing a policy currently in existence. As an outcome of this new analysis, the public will be approved more opportunities to resolve board members publicly however less freedom in what they can talk. Public participation is scheduled at every meeting, however the only topics open during public participation are those included in the published agenda.

In a Facebook post dated January 10, Elrod lays out her reasoning to constituents. She composed, "Our public participation policy has been in location because 2017 (before I was on the board) and was most recently upgraded in March 2022. It has actually said, considering that 2017, that public involvement should "attend to the board on an item on the program."

She included, "After ensuring that internal groups could handle this change in enforcement and with no coworker proposing changes to the policy, I revealed that I will begin enforcing this policy in 2023."

The referenced public commentary policy is 1.404, and the passage mentioned checks out in totality:

If a private wishes to address the board on a product on the agenda, he/she may register on the form provided before the beginning of the board conference to request time to speak.

No further assistance is given on how often public participation should be held or where it needs to fall on the agenda. Remark length is limited to three minutes, but provisions are laid out for longer remarks. These comments might be sent in written form.

The policy sets a process by which the public can include products to the program, specifying, "Staff members or residents of the district may recommend products for the agenda."

It is board policy 1.403 that establishes the guidelines for how MNPS programs are set. The board chair, in connection with the school superintendent, develops the program based on input from members. Any member might put an item on the program, but it needs to be submitted 8 days prior to the day of the meeting. All conference programs should be offered to board members and the general public 5 days before the scheduled conference.

A chance to sign up to speak is available up until the time of the conference's call to order.

Elrod argued that her objective is to establish the board as "efficient experts." Some members of the public argue that she is compromising openness and public input in pursuit of that efficiency.

Amy Pratt, a parent of 3 kids enrolled in MNPS, informs The Tennessee Star through e-mail, "Elrod sets the board's program (what they can go over) and now she only allows the general public to discuss matters she authorizes."

Pratt said that Elrod's analysis allows the board an opportunity to prevent responsibility. She said, "If this policy remained in place the past two years, the public couldn't talk about Metro's long school closures, no-bid contracts, and universal masking. It's hyper-controlling and suppresses public discourse."

She dismissed the chairwoman's commitment to openness.

" It's particularly fretting that she claims this produces open and honest public conversation when she restricts what individuals can state. Should not a board wish to hear from its stakeholders about their issues and issues?" she stated.

Nationally, in the wake of COVID, school boards have come under increased analysis from the general public. At the heart of that analysis is a growing disconnect over what should be thought about top priorities for schools. This has actually led to disruptive school board conferences and districts altering their public participation policies.

On one side, moms and dads feel cheapened by school leaders. As voiced by Clarice Schillinger, creator of a moms and dad advocacy group, the Back to School PA PAC, who is now running for lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania, in an article in the Washington Post, "Parents have been boxed out; they've not been included. They've been turned off and shut down at school board conferences."

Others take a various view. As described by the New York Times, "The conflicts at school board meetings, though still framed as arguments over what is best for trainees, have turned into a practically self-perpetuating conflict, with moms and dads rising to decry their challengers' posts on social media or list the insults that have been directed their method."

In her Facebook post, Elrod uses assistance on communicating with board members, "Each board member, like all elected authorities, deals with constituent services in a different way, but please know that public participation is never your only, nor even your finest, opportunity to talk to your representative."

That suggestions will not please everyone. MNPS moms and dad, and Elrod constituent, Sean Root informs The Star via text, "I have actually tried to reach out to Mrs. Elrod, my Daughter was attacked in 2015 and she didn't respond to my e-mails and fortunately another school board member stepped in, and assisted in getting a favorable resolution! Fortunately my Daughter is a Senior and we can put city schools in the rearview mirror in May!"

The August 10th board meeting was the very first in which the brand-new interpretation of the policy was applied. The next board conference where neighborhood members will have an opportunity to speak is set up for Tuesday, January 24th.