Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board rejects request to review three staff personnel files after privacy and precedent concerns
Summary
A trustee’s motion to have trustees review three personnel files sparked a lengthy debate about precedent, confidentiality and 'fishing expedition' concerns; trustees voted down the motion on a roll call and the board clarified that any personnel review must respect privacy and HR procedures.
Trustees debated a motion requesting that the administration provide trustees access to review the personnel files of three staff members "whose identity is known by the board." The motion prompted an extended discussion about the appropriateness of allowing trustee review without a specific, articulated reason.
Several trustees said reviewing files without a narrowly defined purpose could set a problematic precedent and enable ill-defined searches of personnel records. One trustee referenced prior advice from legal counsel at MASB cautioning against approving individual trustees’ requests to review personnel files without stated justification. Supporters of the motion said they sought to put rumors to rest and follow up on specific complaints and that some files warranted due diligence.
Board members clarified the mechanics if the motion passed: trustees would review records in HR offices with an HR professional present and have 30 days to complete the review. After debate the board took a roll-call vote that resulted in the motion being defeated on the floor. Trustees said that personnel questions should be handled carefully and that any board-directed review should be tied to a documented cause or follow standard HR/legal process.
The discussion occurred in open session; the board did not authorize the requested access.
