Fremont County school districts commit transparency transgressions
RIVERTON — Last week, several members of the Riverton School Board sounded off about education bills at the Capitol. Longtime board member Carl Manning described the bills as an “attack” on public education, asking of legislators: “don’t destroy us.”
But behind the scenes, members of the Riverton School Board violated a key tenant of the state’s transparency laws: They decided to oppose the legislation by taking a private email vote.
At its Tuesday meeting three days later, the board placed the matter on its consent agenda to “ratify” the email vote during a public meeting.
But according to the Wyoming Supreme Court, it may not be enough to right the wrong.
What happened
On Wednesday, January 22, Superintendent Jodi Ibach in an email gave board members advice about how to testify in opposition or support of legislation, advising that board members may speak or write as individuals not representing the full board — or a board member may speak on behalf of the full board if the board votes to do so.
“To do this, we would need to complete a board poll including the bill, if the testimony is for or against, and who will be the spokesperson,” she wrote. “We would then follow up with an action item at our next board meeting.”
That Saturday, Ibach emailed the board noting that HB 100, which would loosen the requirements for Wyoming teachers to a simple background check and 18th birthday, was expected to be discussed during a hearing that Monday.
She asked that board members respond via email on whether they wanted to direct board member Lori Morrow to write a letter in opposition.
Board members indicated their support in emails, and Morrow drafted and emailed the letter in two batches to House Education Committee members and Fremont County legislators – one at 4:44 p.m. on Monday, the other at 5:10 p.m.
The following day, during the board’s public meeting, several board members hashed out HB 100 and other bills early in the meeting. Then, during its consent agenda – when the board typically votes through a host of measures without discussion – it approved a measure to “ratify” its email vote.
In an interview last week, Ibach explained how the email vote came to be.
“Given the short timeframe and the need to gather input over the weekend, conducting an email poll was the most efficient way to determine the board’s position,” she said, adding that the vote came “at the direction of the board to determine its collective stance.”
What the law says
Like any set of laws, Wyoming’s transparency statutes can become cumbersome at times, but the two main sets of laws can be whittled down to this: Government bodies must vote only at public meetings, and the government must provide government data on request.
When elected officials are faced with a time crunch, Wyoming law has a solution: hold a special meeting.
Special meetings include relaxed public notice requirements, allowing elected officials to be nimble in making timely decisions.
When asked whether district leaders considered calling for such a special meeting to vote on its position on HB 100, Ibach said they did not, adding that the issue wasn’t an “emergency.”
Will a vote to ‘ratify’ remedy the violation?
The decision was made, the letter delivered, and then the board took the required public vote on the matter as part of its consent agenda that Tuesday. But was it enough?
In the Supreme Court case Gronberg v. Teton County Housing Authority, the housing authority attempted to cure a similar violation after it illegally cast a vote in executive session, then tried to fix it by voting again during a public portion of a meeting.
In that case, the Supreme Court outlined how such a violation may be remedied.
A governing body must conduct “a new and substantial reconsideration of the action in a manner which complies with the act,” and the reconsideration must afford the public “ample opportunity to know the facts and to be heard with reference to the matter at issue.”
More violations
The Lander School Board took similar email action in violation of the state’s public meetings laws when it discussed whether to formally support or oppose a handful of education bills.
The matter was discussed via individual email exchanges with the chair in an apparent attempt to avoid a discussion of a quorum of board members. The members apparently couldn’t reach consensus, and instead agreed via email to draft a generic letter in support of the district’s educators in light of the “current political environment [in which teachers can feel] attacked, devalued, and under-appreciated.”
News Letter Journal Publisher Bob Bonnar helped craft some of the state’s transparency laws, and also served a dozen years on the Weston County School District #1 School Board.
He said both the Lander and Riverton school boards are obviously aware of the law, and the Lander board’s attempt to evade the requirements by avoiding a quorum made that violation of the law appear intentional.
“That is evidenced by the online contortions they’ve engaged in to try to get around the law in order,” he said. “It clearly deprives the public of their right to know what their government is doing.”
Bonnar said that transparency laws are in place to ensure that elected officials voice their opinions and reach consensus on issues in public, and before their constituents.
In particular, he took issue with Lander’s attempt to avoid open disagreement.
“It is the worst kind of institutional cowardice, and voters should be asking their elected representatives why they aren’t willing to express themselves in a public meeting instead of letting the debate on these important issues be driven by keyboard warriors on social media,” he said. “That doesn’t sound like leadership to me.”
Lifting the curtain
WyoToday Media submitted a data request to view the Riverton School Board’s email poll and conversation surrounding the legislation.
Ibach provided the emails at no cost in less than 24 hours.
This news organization also made a similar request on February 3 for the Lander School Board’s emails. As of February 11, that request has yet to be filled.
This story was published on February 12, 2025.