By Crystal Hayduk
At the Aug. 8 meeting of the Chelsea School District Board of Education, the possibility of the November election resulting in a majority of the seven board members having family ties to district employees was mentioned.
In an effort to investigate Conflict of Interest laws and statutes, this article summarizes those findings.
The laws are described in chronological order of their passage.
The Revised School Code, Act 451 of 1976 is an Act that provides the public school system; consolidates laws related to education; provides regulation for schools, employees, and funding; and prescribes powers and duties of boards and officials.
Section 380.11a (5) says “A general powers school district is a body corporate and shall be governed by a school board. An act of a school board is not valid unless approved, at a meeting of the school board, by a majority vote of the members lawfully serving on the board.” This section indicates that a majority of the total number of board members is required to approve an act (not merely a majority of board members present at a particular meeting). A later section of Act 451 further clarifies issues of conflict of interest. (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-act-451-of-1976.pdf)
The State School Aid Act of 1979, Act 94 of 1979 serves to control the financial support of public education. Section 388.1769b, titled “Contract in which board member has conflict of interest; abstention from voting,” became effective October 1, 1996. It states “A board member of a district, intermediate district, public school academy, or public school academy corporation shall abstain from voting on any contract in which the board member has a conflict of interest.” (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-act-94-of-1979.pdf)
According to the Jan. 22, 2013 edition of “MASB Headlines,” Governor Rick Snyder signed Senate Bill 1051, which had been sponsored by Republican Senator Joe Hune, of the 22nd Senate District. This became the law now known as Public Act 606. (http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277-57577-292473–,00.html)
PA 606 was added to the School Code as Section 380.1203, titled “Conflict of Interest.” It explains what happens when board members with a conflict of interest cannot vote, but the remaining board members who are eligible to vote are fewer than a majority of the total number of board members. Of note are paragraphs one, five, and seven.
380.1203. “(1) A member of the board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a public school academy who believes or has reason to believe that he or she has a conflict of interest with regard to a contract or other financial transaction that requires the approval of the board or board of directors shall abstain from voting on the contract or other financial transaction and shall disclose the specific conflict of interest. A member of the board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a public school academy is presumed to have a conflict of interest if the member or his or her family member has a financial interest, or a competing financial interest, in the contract or other financial transaction or is an employee of the school district, intermediate school district, or public school academy.
“(5) If a majority of the members of the board of a school district or intermediate school district or of the board of directors of a public school academy are required to abstain from voting on a contract or other financial transaction due to the operation of this section, then, notwithstanding any other provision of law or any bylaw, for the purposes of that contract or other financial transaction, the members who are not required to abstain constitute a quorum of the board or board of directors and a majority of those members eligible to vote is required for approval of the question.
“(7) As used in this section, ‘family member’ means a person’s spouse or spouse’s sibling or child; a person’s sibling or sibling’s spouse or child; a person’s child or child’s spouse; or a person’s parent or parent’s spouse, and includes these relationships as created by adoption or marriage.” (http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-380-1203)
Chelsea School District Bylaws and Policies includes Section 0144.3 on Conflict of Interest that is in line with the state law. Additionally, the district’s policy requires that the member with a conflict of interest not only refrain from voting, but also withdraw from participation of the discussion about the subject.
The policy states, “When a member of the Board determines that the possibility of a personal interest conflict exists, s/he should, prior to the matter being considered, disclose his/her interest (such disclosure shall become a matter of record in the minutes of the Board), and thereafter shall abstain from participation in both the discussion of the matter and the vote thereon.” (http://www.neola.com/chelsea-mi/)
Prohibiting participation in the discussion when a conflict of interest exists is accepted as permissible. Attorney Charyn Hain of Varnum Law, who represents the Chelsea School District, said, “We don’t want to improperly exclude people, but we are required to comply with conflict of interest statutes and act consistently in regards to constitutional rights.”
Superintendent Julie Helber said that it’s better for the district to be proactive and think ahead, knowing the number of current board members and candidates for the November election who have family members who work for the district. “We need to be aware and start the process of researching how to conduct business,” she said.
Current board members or candidates who have family relationships among district employees include (in alphabetical order) Laura Bush, Susie Catherman, Anne Mann, Greg Rhodes, and Kristin van Reesema.
The next School Board Candidate Forum will take place on Oct. 27 in the Washington Street Education Center Board Room, 500 Washington Street, at 7 p.m.
Thank You for this very important information.
In Susie Catherman’s campaign literature she says that her husband , Rick, is the Band Director at Chelsea High School. She neglects to mention that he is the President of the Teacher’s Union. I don’t believe that most of the voters in our school district know this.
Thank you for sharing this information so that voters can make an informed decision! Section 5 clearly shows that our school board members will still hold the deciding vote even if a majority have to abstain from a vote:
“(5) If a majority of the members of the board of a school district or intermediate school district or of the board of directors of a public school academy are required to abstain from voting on a contract or other financial transaction due to the operation of this section, then, notwithstanding any other provision of law or any bylaw, for the purposes of that contract or other financial transaction, the members who are not required to abstain constitute a quorum of the board or board of directors and a majority of those members eligible to vote is required for approval of the question.”
Keep in mind that this will happen once in the Spring of 2018 when the teacher contract is up for renewal, then will not happen again for, ideally, another 3 years, during which there will be an additional opportunity for turnover on the board.
Our school board decisions will NOT default to the WISD board! Voters need to know that and should vote for the candidates they feel will best serve our students.
However, board members with conflicts cannot even be included in the discussions. This could include any subject that is part of the contract including clubs, activities fine art productions and sports. By the way, when is the last time there was a three year contract. In most cases school districts only sign one year contracts because of financial insecurity at the state level. The real question is: should the CEA president have his wife on the Board of Education? Conflict of interest – seems to be the case.