The Hernando County School Board did the right thing when it decided recently to open all discussions about censoring the book Deenie.
But the board didn't take that action because a majority of its members believed in what they were doing. They did it because they were forced, and with the intent of finding a way, the next time a similar issue arises, to circumvent the state law that requires the public's business be conducted in public.
The inability - or is it merely an unwillingness? - of board members Jim Malcolm, John Druzbick and Sandra Nicholson to abandon their out-of-step beliefs that the public is better served when it is excluded from the decision-making process isn't just disappointing; it is troubling.
Last week the board grudgingly took its attorney's advice to settle a lawsuit filed by the St. Petersburg Times. The newspaper sued because superintendent Wendy Tellone wanted to block access to the deliberations of an anonymous ad hoc committee that, per board policy, was put in place to consider complaints about whether certain library books should be available to students. The complaint concerned Deenie, a 30-year-old Judy Blume novel about a young girl who suffers from scoliosis. There are two references in the book to masturbation. The parent of a fourth-grade girl is concerned that subject is inappropriate for elementary school students.
The Times maintained that the public should be allowed to observe the district-level committee's discussions about the book because its recommendation eventually could influence the board's final decision.
But, even as the board acquiesced, it instructed its staff to revise the policy so that future challenges would fail and the committee's meetings could be held in secret. To their credit, board members Gail David and Robert Wiggins defended the public's access to the meetings. Malcolm voted with Wiggins and David, but not before stating that he was doing so against his better judgment and mainly to avoid a drawn-out legal battle.
The objections by Malcolm, Druzbick and Nicholson illuminate a distressing pattern to not disclose details about the operation of the school system the taxpayers subsidize. On the same day that the board debated the settlement, for example, Druzbick lamented it was unfortunate that discussion about the proposed - and hefty - pay raises for three top administrators had to be aired in public.
Taxpayers have a need - and the right - to know how their money is being spent; that information is a tool residents use to judge their public servants' performance and hold them accountable. Attempts to thwart access to that information are counterproductive to good government and invite skepticism, often when it is not even warranted.
Hernando County residents who appreciate the gravity of some board members' misguided indifference to open government should register their disapproval now - before the policy that governs ad hoc committees such as this one is misused to block their entrance.
