The WCUUSD board owes its voters the meeting they petitioned for

On June 17, the Washington Central Unified Union School District board declined to schedule a special meeting its own attorney had just advised it was legally required to call. Board member Chris McVeigh, who voted to block the petition, has since written that his vote was "based on conscience and equity." But conscience and equity are arguments to put before the voters — not grounds to deny them the vote. If the petition would upset the balance the Articles strike between towns, the place to make that case is the special meeting the law requires, where the electorate decides. There is nothing conscientious about denying your neighbors that vote and calling it equity.

The facts are in the board's own unapproved minutes. More than 500 legal voters — well above the 5 percent threshold — petitioned the district under 16 V.S.A. § 722 and Article 14 of its Articles of Agreement, asking the board to warn a special meeting so voters could decide whether to amend Article 4, which governs the closure of school buildings. The petition reached the municipal clerk on June 15, starting a 60-day clock.

The board's counsel, attorney Bernie Lambek, said the petition was valid and that "it is appropriate and lawful for the voters to decide on this issue so a special meeting is warranted," within 60 days. The chair stated that the board's role was "to review the petition and to call a special meeting." Another member acknowledged that "state statute directs us as a board to call this meeting."

The board then voted down the only motion to schedule it — a vote on August 11, the last date inside the window — by 6 to 5. No meeting was set. Members who had just been told of their obligation debated whether to meet it; as one put it, they argued over "whether to carry out our role as a board," while another asked whether "defying statute" would build or erode the public's trust.

I found this troubling, and acted. I have filed a complaint with the Vermont Attorney General's office asking it to examine the board's failure to comply with the petition statute, and I encourage any resident who shares the concern to do the same, through the office's contact form at ago.vermont.gov/contact-form.

A school board will make decisions we dislike; that is the nature of elected office. What it may not do is refuse to follow a law as basic as calling a meeting its own voters have lawfully petitioned for — after being told, on the record, by its own lawyer that the law requires it. The remedy for an unpopular policy is a vote of the people. Denying residents that vote — the very thing the petition asked for — sets a precedent no town should accept.

See more: the Times-Argus's reporting on the meeting, "Split decision deepens divisions in Washington Central."