Open meetings and open records are the very heart of a democratic society; they are the cornerstones upon which an informed electorate is based.
Without the ability to attend meetings or look at the records of our public bodies, We The People have no way to really know what our elected (or appointed) representatives are doing with our taxpayer dollars.
Over the course of the past several months I have written a number of stories about what I perceive to be abuses of the Open Meetings and Open Records acts by the Cordell Public Schools Board of Education. Last week I published a story detailing District Attorney Angela Marsee’s response to a complaint I filed with her office requesting an investigative audit - a request she denied, inappropriately, in my opinion.
Most of this situation stems from a verdict in Washita County District Court, a verdict in which a jury awarded the sum of $31,700, plus legal fees, to Nurnberg Roofing LLC for work performed on the Cordell High School gymnasium roof. Four years ago the Board of Education and superintendent Brad Overton decided not to pay Nurnberg for the work they did on the roof. A lawsuit ensued, and four years and at least $40,000 later, the jury ruled in Nurnberg’s favor.
I believe the taxpayers of the Cordell School District have the right to know on what the school district spent that $40,000. To that end, I requested copies of the attorneys’ invoices. In response I received pages with headers, dollar amounts, and big black boxes covering the descriptions of the services performed.
Overton claimed the descriptions were protected under the umbrella of attorney-client privilege, and Marsee agreed.
But here’s the problem: Overton is not the attorneys’ client, nor is the school board. You are. I am. We are.
Oklahoma law only allows for privileged communication between a public body and its attorney for pending litigation where a judge has ruled that disclosure could adversely impact the litigation. As the litigation is over, and the school board lost, it is impossible to claim disclosure would be detrimental - and it certainly hasn’t been presented to a judge for such a determination.
But roughly $40,000 has been paid to attorneys in a failed attempt to not pay a $31,700 bill.
That $40,000 isn’t Brad Overton’s money. It isn’t Ronnie McKee’s, or David Thain’s, or Mike Reimer’s, or Dale Selman’s, or Nocona Cooks. It’s not the schools’ money, or even the county’s money. It’s your money and you have the right to know how it was spent.
I don’t know if that money was wasted on frivolous legal expenditures because the school has withheld, inappropriately in my opinion, that information.
During the course of this months-long saga about records and meetings I’ve received mixed responses. Some have encouraged me to continue pursuing the matter, others have accused me of blowing things out of proportion.
Personally, I don’t think matters of public meetings and records can be blown out of proportion. The laws exist to make sure the voters have the opportunity to monitor the actions of their elected employees. You read that correctly, elected employees. They work for the people, not the other way around.
People may not go to any or all of the meetings, they may not often request to view the records of those meetings or the actions taken by those boards - but their right to do so must always be protected and defended.
The Cordell Beacon is committed to providing its readers with relevant information, and we will continue to fight for acccess to meetings and records and to provide that information to you, our readers.