Direct democracy is an ideal that many of us support and wish for. Layers of representation, from elected officials to the Electoral College, have a certain degree of efficiency, but also result in a loss of meaning, intent and power for the individual. Local politics offer somewhat of an antidote to this. We can show up at citywide meetings, organize others to be there with us, make our voices heard and sometimes sway opinions. In this way, assuming for the moment that we have been able to blow past the social and political barriers that still exclude so many, we can be part of the process of local governing, whether or not we are elected to office.
Perhaps this is why public meetings of local government bodies are the way they are. Often long, sometimes loud, occasionally ludicrous, but always significant. This is a case in which the process–how citizens and residents can voice their concerns in public venues–is just as important as the end results we are trying to achieve. The decisions we get to as a polity are shaped by how we get there, by who can speak, by who will listen, and by who can act.
Our public education system, at least at the district level, is no exception to this. The significance of process in school policy-making is even more crucial, because the people for whom these decisions are being made-school children–have little formal voice in the process.
School board meetings (both full and committee) are at the heart of this process. This is the body that creates policies, monitors their implementation, and then acts on the results of that monitoring. This is where parents, teachers and community members can come to speak out and speak up.
But speaking out and up is challenging. Many things prevent us from showing up at a meeting and voicing concerns. Some of them are social and political–the ownership of public power and public space that unintentionally or intentionally excludes certain communities from fully participating in public debate. Others, though related, are more logistical in nature. These are the rules of the game, which are easy enough to learn.
The school board operates independently from the City, and its rules for public comment at meetings are different. The long and short of it is, for the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) you need to prepare ahead of time in order to make a comment at a school board meeting.
Individuals, or those representing a school or community group, must either telephone the Office of the Board of Education (241-6427) by 4:30pm the Monday or Tuesday of the school board meeting, or verbally tell the Board Assistant before 7:00pm the day of the meeting. You must indicate what you wish to comment on and that item does not have to be on the agenda.
At the meeting, each public speaker has up to two minutes. A total of 30 minutes is allotted for public comment, although this can (and often does) get extended. Hence the infamous late nights, despite the official stopping time of 11pm. A different (and sometimes better) alternative is to attend a committee meeting, where more detailed discussions take place.
Because the California Education Code is vague on how to structure public commentary, there is great variety in the way this is implemented (see Section 35145.5). The Berkeley School District offers an interesting contrast to San Francisco. According to the rules for their public meetings, individuals need only fill out a speaker’s card, and then wait to be called on by the chair. Three minutes per topic are allotted to an individual speaker, and there are suggestions for strategies for the chair in the cases of large numbers of individuals wishing to speak (taking a poll of those present). Additionally, the chair can determine that an issue brought up by a member of the public should be moved to another meeting.
Swinging back the other way is the Los Angeles Unified School District, which requires speakers to summarize the nature of their comments, and limits the number of speakers on agenda and non-agenda items, though these limits can be breached by consent of the board.
It is not clear whether any of these rules substantially help or hinder the public’s ability to shape the actual decision-making process. Rules regarding speaking times and numbers of speakers allow more individuals to comment, but may afford each speaker less of ability to make his or her point, or even engage in dialogue with the school board in a public venue. Perhaps we need to rethink the entire model and instead of structuring in the means of public comment, structure in the means of public deliberation. Perhaps in addition to allowing for public comments, we need frequent, regular, moderated discussions on a smaller set of topics, or issue driven forums that are designed to facilitate an interchange of questions and ideas among the public and school board members. This is, after all, what we’re trying to achieve–a place where we are governing with each other, not simply over each other.
(Get the latest information about the school board elections. Check out http://www.schoolboardmatters.org for details about the candidates and come to a candidate forum http://www.ppssf.org .)
Lisa Schiff is the parent of two children who attend McKinley Elementary School in the San Francisco Unified School District and a board member of Parents for Public Schools of San Francisco (PPS-SF).
