'Job Of School Board Members Joke Of Community'

In April of 1968, the Ann Arbor Board of Education paid about $4,000 for the "Indiana Report," a study by a professional consultant team from Indiana University which suggested ways of making the school board a "more efficiënt" and "more effective" body. Roughly 80 per cent of the report's mendations have been implemented, and both School Supt. W. Scott Westerman Jr. and School Board President Harold J. Lockett say they are "generally pleased" with the implementation. But a recommendation which the authors stressed was important to better Communications between the school board and the public and to improve the school board's image has been ingly ignored. This was a recommendation to shorten the meetings and make them more relevant. "There is considerable evidence that a significant element of the Ann Arbor citizenry has lost confidence in the Board of Education," thej report stated. A main reason for this, according to the report, is that "the public will tend to make a udgment about the board because of the way it utüizes its time m board meetings. Inordinate attention to considenng minutiae, discussing procedural details, seeking public vísibüity ad embracing administrative prerogatives contribute to the detenoration of public confidence " U VUg the past severaI months, Board of ISducation meetings havevPrH 'more than On Oc?Pel nÍght' 1Uding exec"tive sessions. Sov r fVn meetmg lasted untiI midnight; on ah l Ú 1 on 19 tü 1:30 á m thli thfsfetmeetings had begun at 5:30 p.m.j !■■■■■!"" "Carlv Plitire working "davs " That situation is not new, however. James A. Crippen, a local attorney and former Ann Arbor school board member who made a reputation several years ago by leaving board meetings at 11 p.m. each week, whether the session was over or not, bluntly gave his views on the long meetings: "We have made the job of school board members the 'joke' of the community. Who in their right mirid wants to sit from 7:30 p.m. to midnight every Wednesday night and listen to his colleagues debate whether we should have pink or green tile in the new junior-high bathrooms or whether the new math should begin in the fifth grade or the sixth . . ." Crippen said he always left the meetings at 11 p.m. "as a silent protest of my irritation over sitting through long debates in areas of administration where, in my opinión, the board had no business in the first place," and because "after 3'2 hours of sitting I had usually exhausted any contribution I might have had." Do the present members of the Ann Arbor school board feel the meetings are too long? Do they feel the long meetings are detrimental? Do they have any solutions for change? Eight of the nine board members agreed the weekly Wednesday meetings are too long. The exception was Trustee Joseph T. A. Lee, who said the question of length "cannot be answered categorically." Lee said there is "no known yardstick , for measuring proper length of board meetings." The other eight trustees suggested a variety of reasons as to why the meetings last so long: the trustees talk too much and too long; too much of the business discussed is "irrelevant;" strict parliamentary procedure is not enforced; too much attention is paid to administrative detail. Nearly all the board members agreed that the length of the meetings is usually directly related to the length of trustees' speeches. "Late hour meet-; ings are usually the result of long-winded board: members and a long agenda," Trustee Ted Heusel Ideclared. The board members "have a tendency to be loquacious in their remarks about certain issues, perhaps their favorite issues," Board President; Lockett said. , ■. AU board members also agreed that trustees often use the weekly meetings as a forum to espouse their own personal views. The trustees were heavüy crïticized for doing this in the Indiana Report: "In board meetings, it appears that each member feels that he must somehow enhance his own image, even if the total effect of this process is to delay adjournment until late in the evening." On the same subject the report was critical of the "general atmosphere" of the board meetings: "The entire setting might be compared to a public forum from which a restricted number of individuals espouse their convictions of the moment." Heusel talked about the personal forum issue when he said a seat on the Board of Education is "not a social position. There is no remuneration, and it is not a stepping stone to further one's political career. This may seem hard to believe when oné heárs long dissertations involving personal philoj sophy." Trustee Richard M. Wood agreeü "tneres nq question about it" that the meetings are used as personal forums by some trustees. He said he is continually "amazed" at the tactic, since the school board is supposed to be non-partisan. "But it does occur," he added. Trustee Paul H. Johnson agreed with the rest oij his colleagues that many board members do use; the meetings to espouse their causes. But unlikej most other trustees, he defended these actions: "The trustees should be politically oriented individ-! uals who are sensitive to their constituents' desires.j As such, it is their prerogative and responsibility; to project these sensitivities. That's what they're elected for." Lee agreed that "what might at times: seem personal views may be necessary explanations to support positions on various issues." Do the long meetings decrease audience participation and the number of prospective board candidates? Opinions were divided on these questions, but the majority of trustees feit the length of the meetings had little effect on these two groups. Fatigue was mentioned by many trustees as a problem during the long meetings. "The working person who is up at 6 a.m. finds his interest span wavering when the clock nears 11 o'clock that evening," Heusel remarked. Paul Johnson feels that fatigue has influenced many decisions, particularly those made at the endj of a seven or eight hour meeting. He feels the school board responses last month to some of the "21 demands" of Huron High black students were "open to question," for example, especially the responses' hammered out near the 1 a'm. adioiirnmpnt timp. ■ ..■■MiaB __________ Several trustees, including Trustee Henry Joh I son and Heusel, feit that the meetings were lengt) ] because of too many items on the weekly agendij I And several trustees, notably Wood and Cecil Warner, feel the board is being asked to act on tl many items that are administrative in characte such as approving building rental rates, mirr changes in school hours at King School, and alteitions in secretarial job description - some redt items approved by the board. "We should cut our functions down to pe required issues . . . ," Wood told The News, 'hd handle social issues only after being briefe'in detail by the administration." Supt. Westerman, however, said he beljves the board, "for the most part," is being asid to act only on policy matters, not administitive ones. Westerman also said he hopes meetingscan become shorter so that decisions are made ?hen "minds are clear." He promised to do whiver he can administra tively to help "control" meiings lengths. A number of suggestions were put fom by current trustees and former Trustee Cripijn to help shorten the sessions, though Henry Jcnson warned that shorter meetings might not be ppsible because of the increased human and socialproblems facing the Ann Arbor board today. The suggestions: - Six trustees - Wood, Warner, Lee Paul Johnson, Heusel and Henry Johnson - sa) they would favor some sort of time limit on ebate. Trustee Ronald C. Bishop specifically said h would not favor "arbitrary" time limits, however -Reduce the number of items to be d cussed and acted on per meeting. - Allow discussion only after a motion items that need a vote. -The trustees should discipline themives to talk less and keep to the point. (The Indianj Report said during one meeting in 1968, "slightlybver 25 per cent of the comments made by individu! members were in the 'unrelated comments' cgory," meaning they were not related to the issp being discussed.) "The real solution," according to tesident Lockett, "lies with each board member. Eah member should be more disciplined in his remirks and should try to avoid expressing his philoáphy on every issue." -Be more strict in the application a parliamentary procedure. -Allow the administration more latitud in running the school system (though this idea was opposed by Paul Johnson,) According to Crippjn, "The job of the Board of Education is not to rih every aspect of school life but rather to hire toe best trained v?eople and then let them run the system, subject only to guidelines and policy decisions dictated by community needs . . . In my judgnent we have always had the best administration! and have hamstrung them with our refusal to surrender the reins." .„J