a philosophical chasm on the school board

There are currently two schools of thought on the board; three if you count riding the fence as a philosophy.

One school of thought would open every meeting to the public. Meetings would only be closed as necessary according to the law; and hopefully according to some higher standard than the law; which is only the lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

The other school of thought; lead by Robert "let's keep everything a secret" Lucero; would argue that unless you can prove you have a right to watch his conduct and competence as a public servant within his public service; the meeting is closed.

He brayed at some length about how, if the board actually followed the law; much less the spirit of the law; he would not be able to have casual conversations with other board members about issues before the board.

If he consults for a moment with Modral, it will be explained to him that the requirements of the OMA apply to meetings where decisions that affect the public interest are made; and not to his casual conversations with other board members.

Mary Lee Martin has wondered aloud, why all meetings are not open. Delores Griego said, open the meetings up to the public. I believe that Gordon Rowe and Marty Esquivel would vote to open meetings in the absence of a really, really good reason to close them.

Even Paula Maes opened up School Board Executive Council Meetings to the public, on the spot.

That sounds like a majority to me.

All that we are missing
is the paperwork and the signatures.