Should School Districts Be Required to Say Why Employees Are Dismissed?

The Kane County Chronicle ran an interesting story last week about how the Geneva School District reports — and sometimes doesn't report — the names of personnel who are dismissed.

The Open Meetings Act generally says that closed-session discussion is allowed — quite reasonably — for items such as personnel matters, property-purchase negotiations and the like, but when discussion is over, a vote must take place in the public forum of an open meeting.

Votes take place in open session but names or causes for dismissal aren't always given by the Geneva School Board. At any level of local government, such action can be buried in the consent agenda or monthly employment reports and still comply with the letter of the law.

Kelley Munch, communications coordinator for the School District underlined that votes are always taken in open session. An earlier version of this article incorrectly suggested that wasn't happening with the Geneva School Board.

"The Geneva School District Board of Education members are well aware that the Open Meetings Act calls for all votes to be taken in open session, and they comply with that requirement. A vote to dismiss an employee has never been taken in closed session," Munch said. "The Kane County Chronicle has called into question whether the district's practice of calling the employee 'Employee A' (or something similar) instead of using the individual's name during the dismissal vote is a violation of the Open Meetings Act."

It's understandable why School Board members might not want to name names in the case of a dismissal—one kindly reason being that they simply don't want to embarrass the employee by dragging his or her dismissal out in the open for all to see.

As a longtime editor, I tend to side heavily with the Open Meetings Act. I believe all action should be taken in open session, and the community has a right to know when a public employee is dismissed and the reasons for the dismissal. In my opinion, it's a slippery slope when the government body gets to decide what the public needs to know and what it doesn't.

Recognizing my own leanings on this issue, I was curious what the reaction would be from folks outside the Fourth Estate, so I posted a note on the Geneva Patch Facebook page asking what most readers think.

The questions was posed this way:

"Should the School District be required to name employees who are dismissed and the reasons for dismissal?"

As you might expect, opinions varied dramatically. Here's what folks had to say:

• Tony Gentile I'm a firm believer that we should not dump our problems on others. If they were dismissed for some minor problem then we shouldn't say anything but if they were fired because they committed a felony, then it should be told to everyone just like a criminals record is published.
• Suzanne Theuns If they are let go because of lack of skill, that's good enough. It should be illegal to disclose unless they commit a crime.
• Christine Lord Voreis We won't pay their salaries any more...why can't we let them maintain some level of privacy? Why are public employees held in such low regard? I'm baffled.
• Michelle Fatigato- Geen All benefits should carry accountability!! .... They r in public service, & WE pay their salaries! (via mobile)
• Erin Deinert I'm surprised their union is letting that happen.....not a good sign....
• Jo Dennis Yes. After all, the taxpayers are the bosses of all public employees. There could be some flaw in the hiring process that could be corrected.
  
  

What do you think? Let us know in the comments field.