Canceled Meeting to Discuss Teacher Contracts Becomes Issue at School Board Meeting

Just because a special meeting slated to discuss new teacher contracts with the unions last week, doesn't mean the topic was totally off the table at the Port Washington-Saukville School Board's regular meeting on Monday.

While the issue did not appear on the agenda, two Port Washington residents, Kurt Stammer and Peter Murray, showed up to the meeting to share their concerns about the cancellation.

Stammer said he felt the decision to cancel the meeting was made rather "abruptly," and he is worried about the board's decision-making process.

"I think this is a topic that’s at the forefront and the front of everybody’s mind at this time — and there’s a lot of confusion," he said. "There’s a lot of people, as taxpayers, that are concerned about the direction of the board. As I understand it, (being on the board is) a job, it's an elected position and you represent the people of the community as tax payers.

"You are the sounding board between the union and the teachers, and I understand that you have to have a strong working relationship, but I think at this point there’s a time when you have to realize the fiscal responsibilities that go along with it," he added.

School Board President Patty Ruth had cited the abundance of confusion that still existed surrounding the state's budget repair bill as the reason for canceling the March 28 meeting.

Gov. Scott Walker's bill, among other things, eliminates most collective bargaining rights for many public employees. The Republicans removed the fiscal items and passed the bill, which was then signed by the governor.

Lawsuits are pending accusing the lawmakers of violating the open records law because they did not offer the needed 48 hours notice before passing the bill.

The law can't go into effect until it is published and the most recent dispute lies over what exactly constitutes publication. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau posted the law on its website on March 25, and the Walker administration said that action constitutes "publication" of the law.

However, Secretary of State Doug La Follette, a Democrat, says the bill has not taken effect because it has not been published by his office in the official state newspaper.

The confusion over when this law will take effect is something both the board and the public need clarity on before moving forward, Murray said.

"My request is ... that there’s an open forum and the opportunity for citizen input before any decisions are made once the legal implications are made clearer to all of us as to what’s ahead," he said.

Whichever way the law goes, Ruth said the School Board's main focus still remains its students.

"The board's primary purpose and role is to serve the students, and that's our focus," she said. "We are truly a student-centered board, and that is what will guide us in our decision making process — and we will do it in a fiscally responsible way."

Ruth made a point to reassure the residents that the board is doing its best to represent its community and follow the law.

"We’ll make sure that the legal implications are clear to us before we move forward," Ruth said, "and then there will always be an opportunity for public comment before we take action."

The School Board went into closed session after the Tuesday's meeting to further discuss the matter.