Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Public Forum Trial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Superintendent: judge ruled meetings are a limited public forum; trial over policy enforcement set next week
Summary
Superintendent Hiltz told the District 49 Board the judge denied summary judgment in Schmidt & Coles v. District 49 and characterized board meetings as a limited public forum; the trial will consider whether the district's rules are reasonable and were applied consistently.
Superintendent Hiltz informed the El Paso County Colorado School District 49 Board of Education on July 10 that a judge denied summary judgment in the case Schmidt and Coles v. District 49 and described the board's meetings as a "limited public forum." The denial means a jury will decide whether District 49's rules for public comment were reasonable and whether they were applied consistently.
"The judge observed that school board meetings ... are properly classified as a limited public forum, which means that you may make reasonable restrictions on time, manner, and place of expression," Superintendent Hiltz told the board. He said the upcoming trial will focus first on whether the district's standard is reasonable and then on whether it was applied consistently.
Hiltz described the policy at issue as objective and workable — for example, prohibiting signs with written messaging — and said the district's enforcement decisions were made under a clear protocol. He warned that the trial will include significant witness testimony and likely take multiple days; while the superintendent is at trial he will be largely offline and unreachable.
Board members discussed the case briefly during board updates. Director Schmidt said she had hoped to keep the litigation out of public debate and expressed disappointment that the superintendent had publicly characterized aspects of the trial; other directors noted the legal characterization will affect how the board writes and enforces meeting rules.
The superintendent framed the district's position as defending a policy that draws clear, objective lines about permissible expression and time limits, and he recommended the board rely on that standard when setting meeting procedures.
No trial date beyond "next week" was given at the meeting. The board directed administration to continue coordinating with legal counsel and acknowledged the superintendent's reduced availability while in trial.
