News

The 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the policies of a Texas school district that effectively prevented a disgruntled former employee from criticizing a current  school employee during the open session of a board meeting.  In so doing, the court  addresses issues that frequently arise at heated board meetings. 

            Liberty ISD fired Julie Fairchild from her position as a teacher’s aide in May, 2005, for “creating a classroom environment not conducive to learning.”  Fairchild filed a grievance over her termination, claiming that it was wrongly motivated. Fairchild claimed she was fired for blowing the whistle on alleged illegal and inappropriate actions of Barrier Lanier, the teacher she worked with.

            The matter came before the school board on August 16, 2005 in two ways.  Fairchild wanted to speak to the board during the “public comment” section of the meeting, but she was also going to present her Level III grievance over her termination.  As part of her grievance, she was asking the board to fire Lanier, the teacher. 

            During the public comment section of the agenda, Fairchild presented a petition from parents in the community asking the board to promise that no school employee would be fired for speaking up on behalf of an endangered child.  Fairchild was allowed to present this petition, and to speak about it, but was instructed not to complain about or criticize any school employees by name.  Apparently, she followed those rules. The board listened, but took no action.   

            Fairchild wanted her Level III grievance heard by the board in open session, but the board refused to do so. Noting that the grievance sought adverse action against Lanier, the board held the meeting in closed session because Lanier had not requested an open meeting.  After hearing the matter, the board denied the grievance, thus refusing to fire Lanier or reinstate Fairchild. 

            The case went to the 5^th Circuit as a challenge to the constitutionality of the board’s policies and actions along with accusations of a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act.  The court found no violations and completely exonerated the school district and the officials who were sued personally. 

            This case is important because Liberty ISD handled this situation exactly as most schools in Texas would.  The policies under attack (BED Local and DGBA Local) are common Local policies promulgated by TASB.The court found that the practice of funneling complaints through administrative channels, rather than hearing them in public, served a legitimate purpose and did not unduly infringe on free speech.

            Here are some Key Quotes from the court’s decision pertaining to the “public comment” section of a board meeting:

At the comment session, the Board is to alert a speaker to an administrative proceeding at which the speaker may be heard and seek a remedy or the Board may put that topic on future agendas. It follows that quarrels between employees and rehearsals of disputes moving through the administrative process have no place in the comment session and are not here reflective of viewpoint preference. 

The Board has a legitimate interest, if not a state-law duty, to protect student and teacher privacy and to avoid naming or shaming as potential frustration of its conduct of business.

In short, the Board’s agenda does not allow at this time and place charges against its teachers.  Rather, it reroutes them for further treatment.   

            This is a very good common sense decision for school administrators and trustees.  However, like most court cases, it is important to remember the factual background. This was a teacher aide vs. teacher dispute in which the aide sought to get the teacher fired.  The court was sympathetic to the board’s desire to hear this personnel matter privately.  The same might not be true if a citizen wanted to criticize a high ranking school official, such as the superintendent.  Public comment cannot be restricted to non-critical observations. But this case tells us that direct personal attacks which seek to impose penalties on named school employees can be funneled into other channels.

            The case is Fairchild v. Liberty ISD, decided by the 5^th Circuit on February 22, 2010.  It will be fully reported in the April issue of the Texas School Administrators’ Legal Digest.