ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, January 16, 1996 TAG: 9601160026
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
COLUMN: Reporter's Notebook
SOURCE: BRIAN KELLEY
I had the opportunity to cover the Montgomery County School Board twice in the past two weeks, which was interesting because it marked the debut of the four new elected members from Blacksburg, Christiansburg and Prices Fork.
It also gave me a chance to see a stark contrast in style between the School Board and the Board of Supervisors on one of my personal pet peeves - unnecessary executive, or closed-door, sessions.
You don't need to be Bob Woodward to know that Montgomery County is obsessed with secrecy and closed-door sessions. The hours literally roll by as the Board of Supervisors discusses important issues out of the public eye. These sessions are in compliance with the letter of the state's Freedom of Information Act, if not its spirit.
Last year, readers might recall, The Roanoke Times studied the use of executive sessions by local governments in the New River and Roanoke valleys and found that the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors was in a class all its own. The board held 105 executive sessions in 1994, second-highest of the 16 local governments we examined. Only tiny Rocky Mount in Franklin County had more. (Things seemed to improve in 1995, though we haven't yet counted the record.)
When it comes to buying land for a school or hiring or firing an employee, executive sessions are understandable. You don't want to jack up the price of a piece of land you're trying to acquire, or unnecessarily embarrass an employee in public.
But when it comes to which elected official will lead the board, one has to wonder, why the secrecy?
Last week, the supervisors spent 10 minutes behind closed doors before emerging to elect Henry Jablonski as chairman and Ira Long as vice chairman for this year. The board justified its action by citing a section of the Freedom of Information Act that allows for closed doors on personnel matters, specifically "Discussion [related to] ... assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining or resignation of specific public officers ... "
By letter of the law the board might be in its rights. By spirit is another matter.
The public vote following the session to elect the chairman was unanimous. The actual decision, well, we can only speculate.
Supervisor Joe Gorman had said earlier he was interested in the job. Gorman, a Democrat, seemed to have it in the bag, what with his party holding a 4-3 majority following the election of Mary Biggs in November.
But in most local governments, personalities matter just as much as or more than political parties. And on the Montgomery supervisors, it is no secret that Gorman and Long have locked horns in the past and likely will continue to do so in the future. The clashes have prompted public outbursts between the two Democrats, such as a fist slammed on a table two years ago and harsh words and personal attacks at a November Public Service Authority meeting.
For those reasons, the smart money going into the meeting last week was that Gorman's chances of winning Long's support as chairman were as likely as Virginia Tech President Paul Torgersen suddenly declaring himself a closet Wahoo.
But if that debate actually took place, we're none the wiser.
So compare and contrast that state of affairs with the Jan. 4 Montgomery County School Board meeting. Where the supervisors went and hid to choose their leader, the School Board did it all out in the open as the first order of business.
Members nominated incumbent Roy Vickers and challenger Annette Perkins. Vickers, chairman since December 1992, gave a short speech about his accomplishments and his goals for the coming year. Perkins did the same.
Then the School Board voted - in public - 5 to 4 for Perkins. The former high-school teacher won with the support of three of the new elected members and an appointee who joined the board in July. It took all of 10 minutes.
As with the Board of Supervisors decision, there was an unstated subtext to the School Board vote, in this case the long-simmering dissatisfaction of some School Board members with the leadership styles of School Superintendent Herman Bartlett and Vickers.
But if those issues weren't openly discussed, at least the School Board came to a real vote in public.
LENGTH: Medium: 79 linesby CNB