The Olympia School District Board of Directors took its summer retreat on the road, and the meeting may have included violations of Washington’s Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA).
The all-day event took place on Saturday, Aug. 10, at the North Mason School District Administrative Building Boardroom in Belfair.
Board Vice President Scott Clifthorne (District 5) led the meeting. All five board members, Executive Director of Secondary Education James Whitehead, two representatives of the organization OSD for All, and a JOLT reporter were present. Three of the new student representatives for the 2024-25 school year came to the meeting partway through it (with the fourth joining later via Zoom). Board President Hilary Seidel announced that Superintendent Patrick Murphy was excused from the meeting due to a family obligation.
The NMSD Administrative Building is 44 miles and an hour’s drive up Mason County’s winding roads away from the Olympia School District Administrative Building. When asked following the retreat why the event took place in NMSD, Board President Hilary Seidel (District 4) told The JOLT the following:
“Okay, so the board has a practice of trying to meet in different spaces. For our retreat, not in our boardroom. And for this retreat, we felt that, given the big reflections that we were doing on what our system was going to look like, it would benefit us to be in a district that looked really different from ours, and that it would force us to sort of think outside the box. And certainly, as you’ve looked around, you can see that North Mason is a really, really different type of school district. It’s organized in a different way because of its geographic location and the way that services collaborate. And so we felt it would be beneficial.”
“And we do also, technically, we notice the conference, where we all gather for several days as a public meeting, and that’s never anywhere close to the school district. So, it’s not necessarily outside of our practice not to meet in district. And we do not have a practice of Zooming or recording our retreats. We never have so, but there will be meeting minutes that will be posted within board docs, so thank you.”
Seidel recommended that The JOLT contact Clifthorne about why the meeting took place in NMSD since he planned the meeting and selected the site. “You might want to ask Scott as well, because he’s actually the person who plans the retreat, but that, that was what he shared with me when he let me know that he wanted to have it out of district.” The JOLT reached out to Clifthorne with this question.
Some aspects of the meeting may have violated the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). These include keeping parts of the conversation away from the public and failing to post meeting agendas as specified by OPMA.
The NMSD Boardroom is a large room. Rather than sitting at the board desks at the front of the room and facing the public, the directors sat around a large rectangle of tables, with some members’ backs to the public and others on the opposite side of the room.
None of the board members used microphones throughout the meeting, and at times it was difficult to hear them.
During some meeting activities, the board members moved to the far end of the room, away from the public. Some were out of sight, and some could not be heard. At other times, loud music played from a speaker that Clifthorne placed near the public seating area.
The public was required to sit in an alcove at the far corner of the room away from the board. When one person moved to a seat along the far wall to see and hear what was going on, Director Jess Tourtellote-Palumbo (District 2) complained that she felt threatened. Director Darcy Huffman (District 3) demanded that the woman move out of “our space” and back to the designated corner for the public.
Holding conversations privately and speaking sotto voce out of the public’s hearing appears to violate the OPMA’s requirement that meetings be public. Huffman stated that it was “our building time,” but there is no provision in the legal requirements for a public meeting for board members to move out of the public’s hearing range and exclude them from listening to the proceedings, other than for executive session.
According to the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington (MRSC) website, local government bodies must provide notice and agendas of their meetings. For special meetings, defined as “anything other than a regular meeting,” the OPMA explanation states as follows. “Notice must be prominently displayed 24 hours in advance at the main entrance of the agency’s principal location and the meeting site if the meeting isn’t held at the agency’s principal location.”
The agenda was posted on the district’s website but not posted outside the main entrance to the NMSD building; only the handwritten sign pictured appeared there. It stated, “This is the OSD Board Retreat. The doors are locked, but the public is welcome to attend and observe. Text 360-XXX-XXXX to be let in.”
At one point, Director Maria Flores (District 1) mentioned that a member of the press was present at the meeting. Clifthorne later stated that it is “hard being vulnerable in front of a member of the press. Quite frankly, he should have identified himself as a member of the press earlier.”
Yet Clifthorne had told the public at the beginning of the day that “there’s not a method for you to participate,” and that they were limited to observing only. He had also told the public that they were not permitted to talk amongst themselves in the boardroom during the meeting and needed to have conversations outside the room.
Clifthorne did not specify when or how he expected the member of the press to identify himself, given the rules he had established.
This story will continue tomorrow.
9 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Claire
So much for transparency. They know better, hence the back--tracking. Typical left-wing liberal actions and the democratic process be damned.
Monday, August 12 Report this
fyancey
Inexcusable behavior by the board both in selecting a site where the only differences they could observe would be in the parking lot and meeting room contrary to to reasons given for choosing the district site. And then to isolate the public and verbally mute some conversations just invites criticism and cries of covering up issues. Their actions are a travesty of the concept of a public body..one can only wonder what they were thinking about how their actions would play out. Not well, especially given the district’s financial challenges.
Monday, August 12 Report this
MaKane
After all the controversy coming from OSD thi isn't helping the public trust
Monday, August 12 Report this
OldKid
A retreat is one event; a meeting is another, and open to the public. I'm confused why the Board called this a retreat, treated the public as though they were trespassing on a retreat, yet performed the business of the School Board.
Not sure "left-wing liberal actions" qualify for every infraction. Maybe leave political leanings out of this.
Definitely, some serious explaining is due.
Tuesday, August 13 Report this
Larry Dzieza
Wait, “not pictured: student rep Sovana Roberts, attending via Zoom” means that they could have and should have made the zoom available to the public.
Deliberate decision to avoid transparency and accountability.
Tuesday, August 13 Report this
JHermes
Want a retreat? Or want to observe how things are done in another district? Awesome. Just don't double-dip and call it a board meeting.
Tuesday, August 13 Report this
OlyBlues
One would think after all the controversies at OSD year after year, things would eventually be getting better and common sense would rise to the top in some fashion. Cleary that is not the case. The OSD School Board must immediately take training on the Open Meetings Act. They must all start to realize that they are actually public servants and have a legal responsibility for transparency and compliance with the law. I hope the JOLT will file a violation report with the state and have an investigation launched. If the Board is this cavalier with witnesses present, one can only imagine the other ways they are violating the Open Meetings Act when no one is around. Where is OSD legal counsel in all this? This secretive behavior is a total disgrace to the district.
Tuesday, August 13 Report this
JulesJames
The superintendent didn't attend? The person with the most accurate knowledge regarding every possible question the school board could be discussing has a "family obligation." The Board is meeting in the North Mason School District to learn about the district is malarkey -- unless North Mason County SD folk also retreated. And what does OSD learn from a district with one-quarter the enrollment? Not a good start to the school year.
Wednesday, August 14 Report this
Theolympians
This school board is a load of bologna. A couple of years ago a group of concerned parents raised a red flag reference the district and board. The board made it political and turned it nasty. People blindly followed the board and now here we are. I’d love to laugh, but it’s the kids getting hurt so it’s not so funny. For the school district:as 16 year Oly residents we sold our home and moved out of state after attending board meetings and seeing what a mess you had made. You literally drove us away. You can claim whatever reason you want for declining enrollment, but we know the truth.
Wednesday, August 14 Report this