One of our local
Board of Education (BOE) members – who embroiled herself last week in the hotly
contested and, ultimately reversed, firing of our school district’s superintendent
– is seemingly in need of a civics lesson.
Let’s begin
with the fancy footwork that started the whole hullabaloo. Five members of the
BOE voted to enforce the Unilateral Termination clause of the superintendent’s
contract. The clause itself, also known as a Termination for Convenience
clause, allows for the termination of a contract without reason, even if the
contractor is performing his or her duties splendidly. There is no need for a
causal infraction, default, or violation to justify the termination. The
employer, in this case the majority of the BOE, needed only to vote in favor of
termination. In that sense, the “Gang of Five” likely held to the letter of the
law, making moot the argument over whether they had the right to fire the
superintendent.
Just because
you have the right to do something, however, does not mean it is the right
thing to do. For example, I am fully within my rights to work in my yard
without wearing a shirt. I choose not to because it might be an affront to my
neighbors and emotionally scar their young children.
In this case,
business leaders, teachers, parents and local elected officials admired and
applauded the superintendent for the changes he was attempting to make. He was
more visible than any superintendent preceding him and was working within the
community to develop educational partnerships and bolster teacher morale. It
seems to me when you have a leader whose only apparent popularity issue is with
the bloated middle management between him and his line-level employees, it might
be an indication he’s doing something right.
I do not know
the reason why the Gang of Five wanted to get rid of the superintendent, and I
don’t care, either. I’m also not particularly sold on the idea of a recall
election. I have to put more thought to that one. Laura Lang, the lone holdout on
the BOE who voted to fire the superintendent has been, for now, rendered
harmless in her minority standing. A coup to oust her from the board might make
her a sympathetic figure. Allowing her to limp ineffectually along to her regularly
scheduled re-election could prove the wiser tactic.
That Laura Lang believes her actions justified, I do not doubt.
It might even be that she truly believes what she did was in the best interests
of Moore County students. Only she can know for certain. In the aftermath of the resignation of the other four BOE members and the rehiring of the superintendent, Ms. Lang made only one comment that struck me as requiring a response:
“Cruel and
absolutely harsh things that have been said about all of us has just been so
unlike the citizens of Moore County. It’s shameful.”
I’m sure some
people went too far when calling or emailing the BOE members to vent their
outrage. Anyone guilty of a criminal act should be held accountable for their
words and actions.
Many people,
however, merely suggested the five BOE members might have colluded to oust the
superintendent in order to free the position for a political ally. Others might
have used such words as misguided, arrogant, rude, disconnected, and stubborn
when talking about Ms. Lang specifically. I might even have suggested the
possibility the Gang of Five was helping to foster a bullying, abusive work
environment for our teachers. But, none of that is cruel or harsh. In her
attempt to portray herself and her fellow BOE members as victims, she is labeling
the entirety of the uprising against her shameful and, therefore, attempting to
negate our right to vocally and vehemently condemn her actions. Not only do we
have the right to stand up for what we believe, we have an obligation to do it.
For the most part, the commentary and conjecture has been timid in comparison to
the kinds of tactics available to our forefathers.
It was only
a generation or two ago that hanging someone in effigy was acceptable in the
United States. Instead of posting our comments on Facebook or filing calmly
into a crowded high school auditorium, we might have formed an angry mob to parade
around the school with a flaming representation of you dangling from a long
stick, all the while chanting wildly inappropriate lynching songs. If we tried
that these days, we’d be charged with attempted arson, reckless endangerment,
communicating threats, and possession of a weapon with intent to do harm before
we lit the first match.
And how
about our Founding Fathers? If you think people have been uncivil this past
week, consider Thomas Jefferson and John Adams when they set the stage for
character assassination during the Presidential election of 1800. Jefferson’s
campaign labeled Adams a war-mongering, tyrannical hypocrite. Adams’ campaign
labeled Jefferson an atheistic, cowardly weakling. Adam’s people said Jefferson
was the son of a Native American squaw mother and a multi-racial father.
Jefferson’s people called Adams a hermaphrodite. A hermaphrodite! I’d much
rather be called arrogant or misguided than a hermaphrodite.
The schools
of Moore County have flirted with greatness over the years, often falling short
for one reason or another (can you say inadequate local tax funding? Under-funded capital
projects? Inconsistent policies and programs? Poor community relations? Putting
sports before academics? Bueller?). This time around the thing standing in the
way was our own elected leaders.
Take heart,
Ms. Lang. You aren’t the first public official to be vilified, and you won’t be
the last. If you truly believe you’ve done the right thing, rather than hiding
behind words such as “if you knew what I knew” when people condemn your
decisions, grow a thicker skin and borrow from that master of public insults,
Benjamin Franklin: “Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain… and most
fools do.”
Just bear in
mind that statement might also apply to you.
