Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings And Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent raises transparency concerns as board accepts court's dismissal of his case
Summary
William King Moss criticized late posting of agenda documents and how a dismissal was described on the agenda; the board voted to accept the court's dismissal of his claim during the June 12 meeting.
William King Moss, a Brentwood parent, community member and former district teacher, used his public comment time on June 12 to press the Board of Education on transparency: he asked why meeting documents were not posted 24 hours in advance, whether executive session votes were included in minutes, and why his litigation was described on the agenda in a way he called "misleading to the public."
Moss told the board that he had received agenda materials late and asked, "Why did I have to threaten legal action to get that to happen?" He also questioned whether the minutes the board planned to approve memorialized executive session votes and whether absences from past meetings were recorded and excused.
During the meeting a board representative acknowledged receiving the packet on June 11 and indicated the district intends to post materials earlier going forward; the district also said minutes being approved that night would be posted online in the near future.
On the same agenda the board considered a resolution summarizing a court decision in a case brought by Moss. The resolution recited that "William King Moss the third brought an action in New York State District Court for the Eastern District Of New York ... in which he alleged the district and other defendants engaged in racial discrimination against him," and that the court "ordered that mister Moss's claims be dismissed." The board voted to "accept the court's determination to dismiss mister Moss's claim." The motion was made by Hassan Ahmed, seconded by Brandon Garcia, and carried with the board recording "Aye" votes and one absence noted.
Moss told the board he found the agenda language misleading because it did not specify whether a dismissal was with or without prejudice and because it described a ongoing matter in a way he said could mislead the public. The board did not amend the resolution on the floor; it approved the item as presented. The board also reiterated it intends to post agenda materials earlier and to make minutes available online.
No additional formal actions were taken in open session in response to Moss's public comments; the board treated the concerns as public comment and proceeded with scheduled agenda votes.
