In this clip, BOE Member Gale Bradford claims that she was “on the other side” of the OPRA Custodian issue (there does not appear to be any public record of statements from her confirming this).

She then claims that she received “new information” that was not available to her as a member of the public that caused her to change her mind. This “new information” that only BOE Members appear to have, compelled her to add a THIRD position to the business office to help with OPRA Requests despite the overwhelming evidence refuting Dr. Varley’s claim that the District was inundated.

So it’s great that Dr. Varley and the Business office answered Ms. Bradford’s questions, but why can’t the public hear this new version of why the Business Administrator needs a third Assistant?

Why won’t the Administration or Ms. Bradford provide this information to the parents who asked her?

The thinking and explanation behind this vote does very little to increase confidence that Ms. Bradford is going to be any different than the majority.

Related Articles:

EMAIL TO THE BOE ON THE PROPOSED OPRA CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS POSITION

POLICY 8310: CONCERNS ON TOP LEVEL DECISION MAKING, USE OF DISTRICT DOLLARS AND LEGAL ADVICE CONTINUE TO MOUNT

PEELING THE SPIN: A CONDENSED LOOK AT OPRA REQUESTS

TOM FOREGGER SAVES THE DAY AGAIN

01/19/2023 BOE MEETING- WHAT PARENTS SHOULD BE AWARE OF GOING IN TO THIS MEETING

OPMA & OPRA: WE SHOULD FEARLESSLY DEMAND TRANSPARENCY

THE DISTRICT PUBLISHES OPRA REQUESTS ON WEBSITE

OPRA, ATTORNEYS AND AWARDS CEREMONIES

OPRA: The Final Line of Defense

John Migueis