Three members of the Denver School Board were caught in what clearly seems like a violation of the state’s open meetings law, and not a one of them has had the decency to publicly apologize or explain what they’re up to.
Board members Arturo Jimenez, Jeannie Kaplan and Andrea Merida met with a public interest legal group to discuss a DPS administration plan to turn around troubled northeast Denver schools.
Why? Are they going to sue their own school district?
This bloc of board members has made no secret of their displeasure with the DPS administration and its plans to improve the district’s low-performing schools.
An alleged lack of transparency on the part of DPS is a constant complaint from this trio. Yet they have the audacity to meet secretly in what seems a clear violation of state law and discuss a schools turnaround plan with the Colorado Lawyers Committee, a nonprofit organization.
Apparently, only some of the discussion of the turnaround plans ought to be conducted in public.
Oh, the hypocrisy.
Jimenez, Kaplan and Merida have long opposed DPS reforms. Earlier this year, they favored a moratorium on the creation of charter schools in the district and halting the opening of any new school. They voted against a turnaround plan for schools in northwest Denver, which, incidentally, has turned out to be quite popular with students and parents.
And at a public meeting last month, Merida complained the plan to improve schools in the Montbello area did not adequately involve the teachers union. However, teachers were included on the planning committee, and meetings have been open to the public for months.
The smear campaign against the plan has been shameful.
The full school board is set to vote on a motion later this month to publicly censure Jimenez, Kaplan and Merida for their actions in meeting secretly with the legal group on Nov. 1.
We hope it passes. Unfortunately, the law doesn’t include any penalties, and a public censure is about the most severe punishment that can be levied.
To be clear, we’re not saying the trio shouldn’t have met with the group. It’s just that the meeting should have been advertised and the doors open to the public.
Merida, quoted in a Post story published Thursday, employed all sorts of rhetorical gymnastics to make the case she didn’t know she was violating the law. She was on speaker phone. She didn’t know that proper public notice hadn’t been given.
The dissenting board members could bring some valuable questions and thought to the debate at some point, but no one will listen to them if they lose all credibility in the process.
The bottom line is that a thoughtful, solid plan to turn around some very low-performing schools in northeast Denver is being undermined to the detriment of students who desperately need better schools. Where is the outrage about that?
