School Board member Dee Perry asked a federal court to invalidate a School Board resolution authorizing her exclusion from Board proceedings at the discretion the other Board members. The resolution did not apply to alleged misconduct of other members, only Perry, so other members could do the same things Perry did and not be excluded from meetings.
The resolution to exclude Perry at the whim of the Board converted policy differences into legal confrontation. Yet, when Perry sought court protection from legal punishment imposed without any defined criteria or due process, Board member Jan Vickers misled the public that Perry had instigated legal confrontation.
That mind-bending self-contradiction aside, once the Board lawyered up Perry’s offer to mediate, arbitrate and settle were rejected. The Board unleashed a big law firm to run up legal bills and make Perry look bad politically. That’s too bad because Perry would never have gone to court if the Board had settled the dispute by rescinding the discriminatory resolution applicable only to her. Or, at least made it applicable to all members equally and defined the grounds for exclusion.
Courts typically are reluctant to decide legal cases complicated by political questions. Perry knew her case, which she self-financed, was a steep hill to climb because the School Board has a history of using unlimited public funds to bury anyone seeking judicial protection from Board abuses of power. The Board has spent millions in recent years on law firms consistently losing cases long forgotten by the public.
State public records disclosures show the Board adopted the resolution to exclude Perry as part of a campaign of intimidation to “change her behavior.” Yet, Perry did not change her behavior, and mounted a court case credible enough the Board abandoned the resolution to exclude her.
Specifically, Perry refused to surrender to what she regarded as unlawful abuse of secrecy powers. Still, risk the court might not dismiss the case forced the Board to let the resolution to exclude Perry expire without renewing it.
Since termination of the resolution was all Perry really wanted, the litigation forced the Board to give Perry what she was asking from the court. Her lawsuit defended the right of voters who are her constituents to be represented on the Board. Too bad the Board spent an estimated $100,000 before giving Perry what she was asking from the court.
Howard Hills, Laguna Beach
