Why wasn't O'Connor asked about info?

Since I attended last week’s FUHS board meeting, I read with interest Debbie Ramsey’s article entitled “Candidate eludes to board leak.” I found it odd that neither the superintendent nor the quoted board member mentioned what information candidate Bill O’Connor shared that would have been exclusively known by the board members from their behind-closed-door meeting. I certainly didn’t hear anything of that nature. Most of Mr. O’Connor’s talk consisted of information the board didn’t have, facts he had collected from corroborated sources that made it clear the “conflict of interest” issue is a non-issue. The matter was settled three years ago by a county board ruling.

Another speaker gave each board member a copy of the Ed code and then read it aloud. Although a different source, the Ed code verified the information Mr. O’Connor gave. The code specifically said that if a spouse works for a district, the board member can vote on issues involving the spouse, as long as the spouse is part of a larger group that also receives the benefits. The only time a board member cannot vote for issues involving a family member is if the family member is the only person getting the said benefit.

Why didn’t the superintendent and board members identify the suspect information and just ask Mr. O’Connor how he received it? Wouldn’t it have been prudent for all parties to check out the allegations before printing them? Let’s move on to issues that are important to our kids, instead of these unsubstantiated charges.

Mary Ann Craven