S.B. 269 School Board Meeting Notification Requirements: transcript

Thank you. I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to invite Melanie Mortenson to come to the table as part of my presentation. She's one of my constituents and I've been working with her on this issue. Uh, and I do have amendment that, uh, Melanie doesn't know about, but it would just clarify that, um, this new 72 hour notification, uh, for, uh, school board agendas to be published before meetings, uh, would not apply in, in the event of an emergency. Um, and there are just some emergencies where, you know, 72 hour, Let's, let's have Melanie, let's, let's have, we can't hear him. Hey, Todd, we can't hear you. You must be driving through a, driving Through Utah. Okay. Um, let, let me, let me kick it to Melanie. Okay. Melanie, for my presentation.

Um, thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. My name is Melanie Mortenson. I'm reporting, uh, representing myself today. I've been working with our, with my local, um, school district board members, um, because, uh, oftentimes I would say a, a vast majority of the time, they don't receive the agenda for their board meetings, um, until a day before their board meeting. And that gives them as board members very little time to be able to research the, the issues and the topics and very little time for us as constituents to contact them and, and weigh in. And so I asked Senator Weiler to help me, uh, adjust the, the statutes surrounding this. We have our, our USBE who gets a week at advance notice, and they admittedly have a, a exponentially larger amount of material to go through, but I think it's only fair to ask for some standardization for a local school board so that they have enough time, and that we as constituents have enough time to be able to contact them and, um, and they can represent us adequately. Thank you.

Uh, Mr. Chair, can you hear me now? Yes. Yes, we can. All right. So two things. Uh, thank you to Melanie. Um, first of all, um, I do have an amendment, amendment one, if the, that would actually opt out emergency meetings, because I think there could be emergencies where 72 hours is impractical. So I was asked by one of the superintendents if I would consider that amendment, and I thought that was a reasonable request. Number two, um, I recognize there may be some hypocrisy here because our committees during the legislative session, we only give 24 hours notice. And I will just just address that, um, upfront. Uh, we are working on a truncated schedule. As a part-time legislature, we couldn't function, uh, properly if we had to give three, three days or seven days notice. And so I recognize that this would be, uh, asking a school board to do something that we're not doing ourselves. But the bill board is not working on a truncated schedule. They have regular meetings throughout the year, and that's why I, I think that the, um, uh, the difference, um, uh, should be adopted. And that, that concludes my presentation. Thank you. Uh, we're gonna come back to the committee for clarifying questions.

Do you want to do that? Senator Baldry? So, move. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Lexi Cunningham. I'm representing the Utah School Superintendents Association and the Utah School Boards Association. We appreciate, um, Senator Weiler bringing this forward. While we have not taken a formal position, we would like to offer that maybe 36 or 48 hours would be, um, more ideal and more doable than the 72 hours. Many of our LEAs right now, um, meet early in the week, and they're getting their, um, agenda packets, agenda information out on Fridays, which gives their members over the weekend the opportunity to review those materials as well as members of the public. We do feel that in some parts of the state, the 72 hours, um, may be not doable for some of our boards, so we urge you as a committee to consider either 36 or 48 hours rather than the 72. Thank you.

Jenny Earl. Um, I am on the State Board of Education. I'm speaking on behalf of myself, but I just have a couple of clarifying questions. Currently, we do publish our agenda for the public, um, on Friday, and our meeting is the next Thursday. So that's our current practice. But I do have a question around open public meetings, because sometimes in the beginning of our meetings, which we have to have a 20 by through open public meetings, we have to have a 24 hour posting at certain locations, right. Um, according to the provision of the law. But that there's been occasions when during that meeting, um, we've, we've realized that we need to publish something because we do a Thursday Friday for that next day, and we still are below the 24th, so we're able to publish that for the public. So I don't know if that, it doesn't look like this actually impacts open public meetings, but this would just be a provision for boards. But I'm just trying to seek a little clarification around that. Thank you. Go ahead.

Good afternoon. I can't say it's good to be here. I agree with Senator Hinkins. It's time to go home. That being said, um, this is awkward for me for another reason, um, because it's a little bit weird that this singles out charter schools, and on some level I'm glad for it. But I also know that the next step is that someone's gonna run a bill that says, charter schools should, uh, provide 72 hours, and then it'll be the cities, and then it'll be the counties. And the question is, why? What I heard, and, and you know, Melanie is a good friend of mine, and Senator Weiler is a good friend of mine. But what I heard was that there was a school district that was, um, had a problem. And, uh, I would think that one could solve that problem with that school district rather than starting a, a, a line of dominoes that, uh, I don't want to get caught in. And I doubt anyone really wants to. 24 hours isn't best practice. Sometimes it's necessary, but as a charter school board chair, sometimes I get stuff and, and, uh, have to put it on the agenda with just 24 hours notice 'cause something happened that late. So, uh, I'm, I'm a little concerned, not with this specific proposal, but I don't like where it's seems to head almost inevitably.

Thank, thank you. My name is John Larson. I'm the business administrator at Jordan School District. I, I really just had a, a similar question as, uh, why, um, school districts and all government entities are subject to the Open and Public Meetings Act in a section. I think it's 54 of the Utah Code. So I'm not sure why school districts are the one entity that's being plucked out of that. And, um, uh, having different rules. If this is good policy, I'm curious why it's not good policy for all the other entities as well. Um, that's it my curiosity. Thank you. Thanks.

Go ahead. Jennifer Partridge, president of the school board in Provo. We have not discussed this as a board, and so I'm speaking for myself today. Um, think it is good practice to get agendas out sooner, but we need the flexibility to have that 24 hour window. And Provo, we decided we do wanna get them out sooner. We try to have them by Friday before our Tuesday meeting. Um, we work really hard. We meet almost two weeks before our board meeting, the leadership meets to set the agenda so we can start getting the packet information out to our board members, uh, so that they have that time and that we can get the agendas up early for the, the public as well. Uh, but sometimes you need that flexibility and I think it's important that we leave it as it is and that, um, if local communities have an issue with how communicative their boards are being, that they should work with them to change. Every district can set their own policy on how soon they get those out.

I apologize. I had to leave the committee, uh, to go to a school. Um, I wanted to thank the sponsor for I was the pesky, uh, superintendent requesting that amendment, uh, for emergency meetings. And those are an actual thing. I wanted to make note that our agenda for next Tuesday's meeting was actually sent out, uh, yesterday evening. And, uh, I, I do wonder again, as some of the other commenters have pointed out, that if this is in fact good policy and practice, which I think there is a good argument that could be made, why it is not applicable, uh, to other, um, LEAs and agencies. So, I, I echo Royce's, uh, statements on that. Thank you so much. The sponsor again for, uh, acquiescing that request.

Uh, thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I would like to just make a, a motion to pass this out. Has it been amended? Yeah, it's amended, yeah. Uh, with the, with the caveat that, uh, the sponsor gets with the, the school districts and stuff, because, you know, I don't wanna put a burden burden on 'em as well because a lot of our areas down, you know, rural areas might be different. I, I, I would just wanna make sure that they're happy with it, whether it's 60, 60 hours or 24 or 48, whatever. I just, I'll, I'll make the motion to move it outta committee 'cause it's got plenty of time to work on it with them. And there's also time to kill the bill if they don't like it. And so with that, I would make a motion that we pass this out favorably.

Yes. Go ahead. Yeah, this Fillmore, I'd be voting against that motion. Um, you know, I I, this 24 hour notice has been in place in Utah as long as I've been sentient about it. Uh, if we, we feel like that is not enough notice, and I think it's incumbent on us to get the stakeholders together, which would be much broader than just school districts. This should be, uh, cities and, uh, mosquito abatement districts, um, and, and counties and every other governmental entity that's subject to the same standard. Um, and then we ought to, you know, work together to try to come up with what we think is workable for the future. But to single out just school districts and the state board here, I think, um, is not the right approach. We either ought to do it all or, or nothing. Um, so, uh, in that, stating that and hoping to, to, uh, short circuit this, uh, I just mean, let's go, uh, can I make a substitute motion to adjourn?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I appreciate the discussion. Um, I guess I could amend the bill to include all government agencies. I thought, uh, we could start with school boards. 'cause that's where I'm hearing the complaints. And if it was successful in that, uh, smaller environment, we could look in a future year of expanding it. I've been on a city council, I think we usually did our notices more than 24 hours in Woods Cross. I'm sensitive to the argument that some rural areas, um, it may be more difficult. So I would like to talk to stakeholders about that. But, you know, I'm doing what we all do. I, I got a constituent, Melanie Mortenson, who I like and respect, who said, uh, this is a problem. We run the bill. And I said, sure. And so I, I would appreciate the bodies, um, the, the committee's support. And I'll, and I'll do exactly what ci uh, Senator Heen suggested, and I'll, I'll sit down with some stakeholders and, and get some more feedback.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, simple. Bill. Um, this would, uh, basically, uh, increase transparency by requiring, uh, school boards to post their meeting agendas at least 48 hours in advance, giving families and parents more meaningful notice. Um, uh, the original bill, um, asked for a 72 hour notice and we got some feedback from school boards and others and, and compromised down to 48 hours. Um, I think it helps parents to be able to plan ahead arranging for childcare adjusting schedules so that they have a fair opportunity to attend and participate. We also kind of set a precedent, uh, I think it was two years ago, it may have been three that we required school boards. If there's an ized item on their agenda that they have to allow some public comment. Uh, we haven't done that for the other public entities. And the last thing I'll say, and then I'll conclude my presentation, is, um, this may feel a little bit hypocritical, uh, because in the legislature we only give 24 hours notice. Now I will say for our Monday meetings, especially our Monday morning meetings, we usually publish it on Friday. So that's three days notice. But I think the difference between school boards and the legislature is we have to cram all of our work for the year into 33 days. We always say 45 days, but we don't hold meetings on weekends. So it's really 33 days. And so we have that truncated schedule. Um, and um, so that's my presentation. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Chair. A couple of just brief questions here are, isn't the school board already have to, uh, comply with Opma right now as far as their meetings?

Yes. Opma, OPMA is 24 hours. So this is, this won't adjust opma in any way. We're just saying for school boards in particular, they just have to have their own Schedule C.

Correct. And let me just say, when I was on the City council years ago, I would get my packet like delivered to my house on Friday for a Tuesday night meeting. And then they would wait till Monday after hours to publish the agenda, even though everybody knew what was gonna be, you know, on there. And I, I think that's just a way of, of kind of keeping citizens uninformed and out of the loop. So, yeah. So this would ask the school boards to do 48 hours. Thank you. And then, um, uh, this wouldn't affect in any way their ability to caucus

or anything outside of their No, in fact, I changed the bill to clarify that they could still call an emergency meeting with less than 48 hours if, if it, you know, if they've met the definition of an emergency.

Um, but if they're having, as long as they're 11 or so scheduled meetings fall under this requirement here, any additional meetings outside of that?

If they are, I, I think that this not a forum. I think that this, if this bill passed, I think this would become the default for a school board meeting. Um, and then they would have the emergency exception. So.

Okay. And Juab, just to clarify then, Mr.

I, I, I guess recently, obviously by making the, the body, uh, partisan, they have the ability to caucus. Um, and that might include, they may have a quorum, for example, in a, um, majority caucus. So would this require them to change anything? Um, when it comes to their caucus ability?

And I, I, um, I'm, I'm familiar with that legislation. I'm not sure if the caucus requires an agenda to be published, but if there was an agenda to be published for the caucus, I think this would apply to it. But I know for our caucuses in the Senate, we don't publish agendas so.

Well, and, and Mr. Chair, if I may continue, because this section says that before holding a public meeting, publish an agenda. So this seems to do the opposite and says you have to publish an agenda if you're gonna have a public meeting. And I'm just, I I just want to clarify. Yeah. 'cause I don't wanna weaken their ability to, to caucus.

Yeah. I don't know that. I mean, and, and maybe someone else can inform me. I don't know that caucuses are public meetings. I, I don't think that's the intent. Right? Yeah. And, and I Juab I just was curious if that would, I don't see this having any impact on the ability to caucus.

Okay. I I think it's just, they're just like two ships passing in the night, so. Okay. Thank you. Alright,

Thank you. Senator Weiler. This Peterson over here. Um, so how come school boards but not a special service district, city councils, county commissions?

Well, because, um, my constituent only asked for school boards. And like I said, we've already set a precedent, maybe it's not the best precedent that we do treat school boards a little bit differently when it comes to public comment on agenda items. So I felt like there was a precedent for, for that. And I would say, um, so first of all, I'm only getting complaints about school boards. I'm not getting complaints about the sewer districts. But, but more importantly, I think this, this affects people's kids. And so, um, I, I think a little bit more notice is, is warranted.

Okay. Thanks. Alright. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Lexi Cunningham, representing USSA and USBA. First, I'd like to thank Senator Weiler for, for meeting with us and making the change from 72 to 48. We do appreciate that we are opposed to this bill. Um, we do not think that, um, school boards or the state school boards should be singled out. We, um, if there's gonna be a change, we think that it should affect all elected bodies that, um, have the 20, currently have the 24 hour, um, meeting notice if we're going to have transparency for one, let's have transparency for all. Thank you.

Um, my name's Jennifer Partridge. I'm president of the board in Provo. And speaking on behalf of our board, we are also opposed to this. Um, in addition to the, the reasoning mentioned before about being singled out, um, we also feel it is a best practice to publish our agendas sooner, and we try to do so. I've talked with other board members in other districts. Many districts already are publishing, um, multiple days ahead. Um, but it is important to be able to have that flexibility. Um, sometimes we think we have an agenda set one way, and then within, you know, 30 hours, 25 hours Right? Something changes. And it's nice to be able to be able to adjust, um, something here or there. Um, but we do believe in transparency. We also believe in local, um, control. And local school boards can set their own policy if they wanna work with their community members and set a policy to have, um, a longer time span. Um, but we don't think we should hold all school boards throughout the state to that standard, especially when other entities are not. So, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. Um, I, my name is Melanie Mortenson. I live in Davis County. And I love this idea because I think it's a good policy. I would love for cities and towns to follow up and to also join this, like Senator Weiler said, the reason that it's pulled out is because it seems to have worked that way. A few years ago, we had a, a conference committee that, um, that actually pulled school boards out to apply a rule to, and, and it, it passed that way. And so we thought we could start that way, this, this direction. But I believe that this allows for more time for constituents to reach out to their representatives. And it allows representatives to get feedback, um, on a more realistic timeframe. And I think we have a population who's used to not being able to do that because the timeframe is so short. And I would add that there are deadlines that happen every month. So whether it's this deadline or that deadline, um, I think that, you know, one day is not gonna make that big of a difference as far as preparing your materials. It'll make a big difference in allowing more transparency and to better representation from our elected officials. And I would ask you to please vote in favor of this bill, and thank you for your time.

You probably want me to do it. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to hold, uh, s SB 2 69.

Yes. Um, well, I appreciate, um, opportunities to increase transparency opportunities for public to be involved. Having also been on the city council prior to coming to the legislature, um, and having participated enough with school boards. I know that there, there's, um, there needs to be some sort of drop dead date by, or, or time by the, by which an agenda needs to be published. But there are issues and things that come up in that, you know, intercepting period. And so, so making it too far before or making it too close, um, you're trying to find the sweet spot. And, um, I guess in my mind, if the sweet spot is not 24 hours, it is 48 hours, then that sweet spot would apply to everyone. And, um, I, I like the idea of consistency and application. And the, also, the reality is, if, if a locally elected official is hearing from their constituents that they need more time, they can set a policy to say our agenda's gonna come out earlier. Um, they have that flexibility. They have the ability to do that by their, through their own board policy. And, um, and so when, when they can and when they maybe should, if sounds like in Davis, then, um, then they should work with our locally elected officials. I mean, that's when we take everything away from our locally elected officials and everyone comes to the legislature to solve their problem, then we take away, um, our public's ability to hold our locally elected officials accountable for the decisions that they make. And I also think that's an important principle. So, um, with that I'd motion to hold

Oh, thank you. Um, uh, I appreciate, um, the good representative. I, I would ask the committee to oppose the motion to hold. Look at, I'm doing what you all do. I, I had a constituent who had a problem. Uh, her school board doesn't wanna solve the problem. Uh, so she came to me. Um, we've compromised on this bill and one thing I failed to mention is this is, uh, supported by Utah Parents United. So I would ask for a no vote on the motion to hold. Thank you, uh, to the members of the committee.

Alright. Seeing no further lights, uh, I'm just gonna note that, uh, I'm supportive of the motion, um, primarily for the reason that we're already articulated. We've got, uh, we're setting a, uh, we're setting a standard that's different for all of our other governmental entities.

I'll waive.

Representatives er Yes. Lyon? Yes. Hayes? Yes. McPherson? No. Millard? Yes. Moss Peterson? Yes. Thompson? Yes. Welton? Yes. Vice Chair Defay. Yes. Chair Walter?

Thank you, Mr. President. Um, this bill would require, um, um, school boards to like the State Board of Education and local school boards to publish an agenda, um, so many hours before holding certain meetings. Um, the bill outlines 72 hours in lines 26 and 55.

Um, and I'd like to make a verbal amendment at the, probably displeasure of our amendment clerk, but a verbal amendment.

It's gonna be okay in lines 26 and 55. I'd like to amend the number 72 to 48. So on lines 26 And 55 And 55, strike the words. Yeah, the number we're gonna replace seven two with four eight. In both instances, You're gonna strike seven two and replace it with four eight. Yes. Which means, uh, seven instead of 72 hours.

I'm trying to keep our staff on their toes, so,

Um, there were some complaints during COVID and since COVID that sometimes, um, parents didn't have a reasonable amount of notice, uh, some important issues infecting their children's education. So the intent of this bill is to try to give a little bit more notice. And the reason I made the verbal amendment, I should have done a written one, but we got some feedback and committee, this was the Friday before President's Day, um, that maybe 72 hours would be, um, hard, uh, to comply with in some instances. So I'm, I'm trying to respond to that, uh, feedback. And, uh, that, that is the bill. It just, uh, right now it's 24 hour requirement, like the legislature has, this would be 48. And, and I wanna deal with that, that, that may seem hypocritical, but the legislature, we have to do all of our work in the 33 business days that we have of the session. And we couldn't, we couldn't do our work if we had to do, you know, longer notice. Um, but the school boards, they meet all year long, um, and I don't think it's, um, overly burdensome to ask them to provide 48 hours notice before their meetings of their agenda items. So with that, um, Mr. President, I conclude my presentation. I'll yield to any questions.

Thank you. Uh, Mr. President to the sponsor. Why only schools?

So, Senator Fillmore, um, has a good point. Uh, this wouldn't affect city councils and county councils. Um, and, uh, I would say I'm responding to a constituent that had concerns with the school board, uh, but not with the city and the county councils. I wouldn't oppose to a friendly sub or amendment that, that did that with city councils and county councils. But I was asked to address this for school boards, and if it's successful, then maybe we can spread it to county councils and city councils in the future.

Fillmore? Yeah, Mr. President, the, the sponsor actually addresses, my main concern is that by passing this bill, we are not just passing this for school boards. It will certainly extend and be therefore cities and counties and mosquito abatement, districts and cemetery districts, and essentially every other public body, probably, with the exception, the exception of the legislature, or at least the exception of the legislature during the legislative session. That said, that's what we would be doing here. And it might take us a couple of years to, you know, to, to walk that entire length of track. But, um, because that is what I think we're voting on, I think this bill is so narrowly drafted, is to exempt all of those people from opining on it. And before we do that, I would want the opportunity to hear from the cities, the counties, the special districts on what this would mean for them. I'm not opposed to the idea of doing this, but it's been 24 hours for quite a while. I don't think there's a large public clamor that that is insufficient, although I do understand why the sponsor would be, uh, you know, very responsive to a constituent who brought a specific concern. But, uh, I think before we take the step, we need to have a chance for all of these agencies that are ultimately going to be impacted to reach out to us about it. And we ought to hold a hearing on that bill. Uh, and not just this one.

I, I think that senator, good Senator raises a point. And I, I would just say if, if we can, if we can do non-competes by one profession at a time, I think we can do, um, you know, notices, uh, by, by by one, um, by, by one agency at a time for school boards. So, uh, that's my summation.

I would move that Senate bill to, uh, 69, be read for a third time. Thank

Senator Fillmore, Thank you Mr. President. I regularly vote against all of those, uh, non-compete bills. Also, no.

Um, as we discussed yesterday, this would, uh, merely require school boards to publish their agendas, uh, 48 hours in advance of the meetings. Uh, with that I'll yield to any questions. Discussion to the bill. Seeing none. Back to you. Senator Weiler.

Thank you. I'd move that Senate Bill 2 69 pass.

Thank you. I'm not sure if Senator Fillmore was up to speak in favor of this bill, but, um, I, uh, I appreciate the body that, uh, I, I didn't do a call to the Senate, um, on this morning 'cause I had just done it for the bill before and, uh, that was a mistake. It, it actually passed 13 to 10, but we had six off the floor. So I'm gonna try this one more time. I do wanna add, I've gotten some more context. Um, so I think Senator Fillmore raised a good point. You know, why are we doing this just for school boards? And while that's a good point, I just want the body to know, I think it was two or maybe three years ago, we passed a bill that said if an item was on the agenda, we, we had to allow, uh, the, the, the, uh, the c had to allow public comment. And when we, we actually took that to a conference committee and we decided that that would only apply to school boards. So there is a precedent for trying things out with school boards first. And I think this would, whether it's a good precedent or bad precedent, it's a precedent. I think this would fall in there. The, the, the idea here is that, um, parents would have more notification, uh, 48 hours and it was 72 hours in committee. And I, I listened to some concerns and we reduced it to 48, which I consider a compromise. Um, but I, I do think that, um, as I understand it, most of the school board members are gonna get an email packet with their information more than 24 hours, uh, before a board, uh, meeting so that they can prepare. And I think it's fair to give parents a little bit more time so that they can get a babysitter, arrange their schedules or whatever if they wanna come and, and speak to the board about an issue that's on the agenda. So with that Mr. President, I don't wanna make the same mistake again. So I would like to, to do a call of the Senate and I don't care if, uh, leadership appears virtually.

I guess I should have allowed for debate first, but, Uh, that's true.

Um, so with that, I'll go ahead and move this. Okay. I'll lift the

I'll move that Senate Bill 2 69. Uh, be read for a third time and pass.

Uh, Mr. President, I had a chance to speak with the, uh, you know, the good Senator Vickers constituent who came to ask me about this bill. And I said, why didn't you just listen to the bait? She said, I did. You didn't say anything. So just to be clear, I think we're setting up a principle here. It may in fact be good policy, it may be the right policy, but by establishing this precedent here, there's no way we'll be able to ever vote no on a bill to do this for any other government agency. And again, that might be the right policy, but we are setting this standard without ever having had those government agencies a chance to opine. Maybe 48 hours is the right policy. Maybe there are good reasons why it's 24. Maybe by engaging all the stakeholders, we could come up with something that they all support like a 48 hours with an exception in case something needs to get added later. Um, I just want to make sure that when we are up here doing this, that we're giving the people that this affects a chance to do it. And the reason that the league and the special districts and other government agencies haven't been up here to opine on this and didn't show up to committee to opine on it, is because the bill doesn't affect them, uh, yet. Um, so that's why I'll be a no, uh, 'cause I, I just think we ought to, uh, when we set this standard, we ought to hear from everybody that it will affect