Gary referendum critics silenced as meeting ends
Gary school officials pulled the plug on Monday’s advisory school board meeting after its members tried to voice opinions on the district’s $71.2 million operating referendum.
The meeting, streamed live on the district’s Facebook page, suddenly cut off after about 18 minutes when two members pressed Michael Tolbert, the district’s attorney, about taking a position on the referendum that’s on the Nov. 3 general election ballot.
Afterward, Gary Community School Corp. manager Paige McNulty issued a statement saying the meeting was “paused” to avoid legal liability.
“Some advisory board members made statements in violation of the Indiana Code, which prohibits the school corporation from promoting a position in the selected forum,” she said.
Board member Carlos Tolliver asked the board to amend its agenda to add the board’s position on the referendum.
Tolbert told advisory board president Robert Buggs that it’s his legal opinion they would be violating state law by making statements on the referendum during the public meeting held at the Gary
Area Career Center.
Tolbert said voicing a position for or against referendum exposed the school district and board to liability.
“I don’t think that’s the prudent move for this board and I think it would be an improper amendment because it exposes the school corporation to a violation of Indiana Code,” he said.
In his president’s report, Buggs challenged Tolbert’s conclusion. “Are you saying I can’t speak my personal position?” he said.
Under a 2017 state takeover law, the school board was relegated to an advisory board with no governmental authority. The district is run by a state-hired private company, MGT Consulting.
Tolbert said once Buggs takes a position at a public meeting, he crosses a line.
“You are chairman of the advisory board. That is an extension of the school corporation,” he said.
Tolbert became irritated with Buggs’ repeated questions saying he’s cited the code six times.
Buggs and Tolliver asked Tolbert to produce the law,
Indiana Code 20-46-1-20, he referenced.
“I just don’t walk around with the code cited in my pocket,” Tolbert said.
“I’ve told you my interpretation of the law … if you want to challenge it, you challenge it.”
Tolliver said McNulty knew the board would be talking about the referendum so Tolbert should have brought the code with him.
“It’s an attempt to stifle discussion,” Tolliver said.