Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Legal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board counsel says board cannot remove elected member; public commenter demands removal and cites legal grounds
Summary
Board attorney (Mister Keith) told the board it had no statutory authority to remove a duly elected member and explained legal thresholds for personnel terminations; a public commenter, Britney Sherman, later urged immediate removal of a board member and referenced alleged violations and legal grounds.
DeSoto County School Board meeting, Oct. 16 — In a lengthy legal update, the board's attorney clarified the legal limits on board authority to remove elected members and on personnel actions. Later in the meeting a public commenter urged immediate removal of a board member and cited alleged legal grounds.
Board attorney Mister Keith told the board he had received numerous emails and said he was responding publicly to two recurring questions. On the first he said, "this board has no statutory or legal authority whatsoever to remove a duly elected board member." He added that the superintendent likewise does not have authority to remove a board member because the superintendent reports to the board. On personnel matters, Keith said every licensed contractual employee has a contract that gives "federal and state due process rights," and that his role is to advise the superintendent when legal thresholds for personnel action have been met.
During public comment Britney Sherman, who introduced herself as a licensed military social worker with a specialization in child trauma, urged the board to remove a board member and said the member's conduct constituted "a breach of this mandate" and "an act of institutional betrayal." Sherman said there were legal grounds for immediate removal based on documented violations and demanded that action.
Earlier in the meeting a board member asked for a motion to consider entering executive session to discuss a residency matter (the residency of 'Hills'); the chair requested a motion but the record does not show the executive session vote outcome in the transcript provided.
Why it matters: The attorney's legal clarification delineates the limits of board authority and underscores due-process requirements for personnel actions; public allegations and a request to consider a closed session on residency were raised publicly and remain matters for further procedures or investigation.
