Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forest Hills board approves settlement in free-speech suit, revises public-comment rules
Summary
The Forest Hills Local Board of Education unanimously approved a settlement of a lawsuit over a removed public commenter and adopted revisions to its public participation policy P0169.1 that clarify removal standards and require board training; attorney-fee payment was part of the agreement (amount not specified).
The Forest Hills Local Board of Education voted unanimously to approve a settlement in a lawsuit stemming from the removal of a speaker at a prior meeting and to adopt revisions to policy P0169.1 governing public participation.
Board members said the settlement package includes payment of attorney's fees, scheduled training for the board on open meetings/public-records and public-comment procedures, and targeted language changes to the district's public-participation rules designed to reduce ambiguity about when a speaker may be removed. The board president summarized the case history and the proposed terms and said lawyers advised that pursuing the case further would likely be costlier and risk an adverse judgment. The settlement amount and attorney-fee figure were not read into the record and are therefore not specified in this report.
Under the amended policy the prior phrase allowing a presiding officer to remove a speaker for failing to observe "reasonable decorum" was revised to give clearer grounds for removal, including when a speaker "disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting." Other edits allow the board itself to change or suspend rules rather than vesting sole discretion in the meeting chair. Board members said the adjustments aim to reduce subjectivity and ensure viewpoint-neutral application of rules.
During the discussion board members noted the matter had been inherited from the prior board and that the training component was something they had already planned to pursue earlier in the year. One board member summarized the rationale for settling as avoiding greater expense and uncertainty through continued litigation.
The board then voted to approve the settlement and separately voted to amend policy P0169.1; both motions passed unanimously with all five members present voting yes. The board said it did not intend to take other action on the matter that evening and moved into an executive session focused on superintendent search interviews.
What happens next: the board will schedule the training required under the agreement and implement the revised public-comment policy as part of routine board governance. The settlement paperwork and any required filings to dismiss the lawsuit are expected to be completed per the agreement but the specific payment amount and other financial terms were not disclosed at the meeting.
