Board debates committee structure and public-comment rules; considers one-comment-period model
Summary
Trustees discussed whether to keep committee structure or move to a committee-of-the-whole model and considered changing public-comment rules to a single comment period and clearer expectations for responses and visual access to meeting materials.
Trustees discussed governance changes after a recent governance workshop, including whether to replace standing committees with a committee-of-the-whole format and how to structure public comment at meetings.
Board leadership reviewed pros and cons of committee-of-the-whole: proponents said it can improve equal access to information and reduce the need for separate committee reports; opponents said larger meetings could be longer and less efficient and could disadvantage detailed, small-group review. The board's superintendent and several trustees said they preferred keeping smaller committees while improving information flow and committee notes.
On public comment, trustees discussed moving from two separate public-comment periods (agenda items only, and open comment) to a single public-comment section. Speakers recommended clearer, published procedures for response timing and follow-up, better advance posting of meeting materials and improved visual access for the public. Trustees suggested options including better committee note distribution, recorded committee discussions for later review and testing tools for transcript capture to make committee deliberations available to board members and the public.
No governance policy changes were adopted at the meeting. Trustees asked staff to draft potential procedural changes and options for improving committee transparency and public-comment responses for consideration after the June budget work and at the start of the new fiscal year.
