The Jefferson City Public Schools Board of Education's Policy Review Committee faces a communications dilemma largely condensed in these questions: Does greater openness invite chaos? Does continued control imply detachment and aloofness?
Communications are critical. Members of the Jefferson City School Board and district patrons all are aware that facilities expansion is necessary. But for the district to win voter approval of a bond issue or levy increase, a rift between some disgruntled patrons and district officials must be healed.
Board President John Ruth, who assumed the leadership role in April, has taken action. He has charged the Policy Review Committee - which includes him, veteran board member Doug Whitehead and new board member Pam Murray - with reviewing nearly 300 pages of proposed policy changes.
Among them is a policy some patrons have challenged. During open forums at board meetings, the existing policy limits patron comments to agenda items.
Whitehead and Murray voice differing viewpoints.
Whitehead argues proper channels and a hierarchy within the district are designed to hear and respond to patron concerns. He said the process is not intended to stifle complaints and he fears an unrestricted forum could devolve into airing unsubstantiated and personal allegations.
"It does not bode well in today's age of social media and twisting information to allow people to air dirty laundry without us being prepared," Whitehead said.
Murray contends patrons want to be and have a right to be heard by their elected board members. "I think, especially at the local level," she said, "there really needs to be an opportunity for the public to participate."
We understand the reasoning behind both views.
But we believe the board can, and should, satisfy patrons by listening to what they have to say - on any subject.
If a patron complaint or concern is best handled at the class or building level, the board can direct it to the appropriate venue.
But when patrons are permitted to address the board directly, they know they have been heard at the highest level. When denied, they may become more persistent and contentious.
The existing policy may be designed to steer concerns through proper channels, but even the appearance of repressing or redirecting dissent is problematic for a district that must cultivate confidence and credibility.