Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy 1420 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Missoula trustees debate agenda-setting policy; motion to table fails, review added to regular meeting
Summary
Trustees at a special Missoula County Public Schools meeting debated proposed changes to policy 1420 (agenda setting). A motion to table the discussion tied and failed; the board voted to add a review of suggested redline changes to the next regular meeting for fuller consideration.
Trustees met in a special session to discuss proposed changes to board policy 1420 governing how items are placed on the Missoula County Public Schools board agenda. Chair Tracy Long said the topic had been requested for special consideration and placed on the agenda after executive-committee discussions.
Trustee Anne Wake moved to remove the item from tonight’s special meeting, saying the suggested changes had not been distributed and expressing concern that subgroup discussions outside the full board could risk open-meeting violations. “We jeopardize our standing as a district, as well as open us up to lawsuits that could be avoided regarding our open meeting guidelines,” Wake said, urging that the matter be taken up at a regular board meeting under the personnel-negotiations and policy-revision items.
Other trustees defended the purpose of the special meeting. Trustee Keegan Davy said the intent was clarification of the agenda-setting process rather than revisiting past actions: “The discussion is designed to clearly identify where agenda-setting authority resides,” he said, outlining a need for a predictable pathway for trustees to request items.
District counsel advised the board that the district’s policy aligns with a standard MTSBA template used by many Montana districts and summarized how other districts balance chair/superintendent authority and board-member requests.
Trustee Wood moved to table the policy discussion; the motion was debated and put to a vote. The board’s hand-count resulted in a 5–5 tie, and the motion therefore failed. Counsel also noted that the redline (the proposed redlined version of the policy) had not been distributed to trustees, which limited any immediate action to adopt policy changes that night.
Instead, Trustee Davy successfully moved to place a review of the suggested changes for policy 1420 on the agenda for the next regular meeting so trustees can consider a distributed redline and supporting materials and return with a more fully informed discussion. The board will again consider the matter when the redline and supporting documentation are available.
The board’s discussion repeatedly emphasized two themes: protecting open-meeting compliance and producing a transparent, predictable process for trustees to request agenda items. No final policy change was adopted at the special meeting.
