Board debates new censure bylaw and governance standards; trustees seek legal clarifications
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Trustees discussed a proposed censure bylaw drawn from CSBA templates that would codify procedures for investigating alleged misconduct by board members. Several trustees urged caution, asked for clearer safeguards and requested legal review before a second reading.
Trustees spent substantial time on a first reading of a proposed board bylaw that would formalize a censure process for board members, drawing on California School Boards Association templates and recent recommendations from the state fiscal oversight agency.
Trustee Tamayo emphasized safeguards in the draft, noting that "censure shall not be based solely on difference of opinion, lawful dissent or minority votes, or protected speech," language included in the proposal to prevent misuse against ordinary disagreements.
Other trustees raised concerns about who would evaluate allegations, how evidence would be gathered, and whether the process could be weaponized. Trustees asked staff to consult the district attorney and return with clarifying language about investigatory steps, thresholds of evidence, and whether the board could authorize payment of legal counsel for a member under certain circumstances.
Legal counsel and the superintendent explained the attorney typically represents the board as a body, not individual trustees, and that requests for reimbursement of private legal costs would need board approval and legal vetting to avoid gifting public funds. The board treated the item as a first reading and directed staff to draft revisions and bring the item back for a second reading after additional legal review.