CORPUS CHRISTI, Tx — Neighbors have voiced frustrations on social media following the removal of a speaker during the latest CCISD Board meeting.
Michael Miller, a principal with Teal Construction, was escorted from Monday’s regular board meeting while speaking on a bid awarded by the board for the purchase of printer paper. Miller had signed up to discuss the agenda item but also raised concerns about the district’s general practices in awarding and approving contracts.
While Miller briefly addressed the printer paper bid, he shifted focus to a recently awarded contract to JR Ramon for the demolition of the old Carroll High School property.
“It’s both transparency with the community, but it starts at a board level, and I don’t think that staff is being 100% transparent with their board,” Miller said. He pointed out that the board was provided limited information about why four vendors were selected from a list of 13 proposals for the paper purchase.
When Miller began discussing the Carroll High School demolition contract, CCISD Trustee Eric Villarreal informed him he could only speak on purchasing policies related to the agenda item. Miller continued, stating, "There’s no pricing involved in the information that’s delivered to you guys.”
Miller also touched on the potential cost differences for the demolition contract. “I would want as a school board member to make a good decision for something that could be as much as $530,000 extra being spent,” Miller said. Following this remark, Villarreal directed CCISD officers to remove Miller from the meeting.
In December, CCISD awarded the demolition contract to San Antonio-based JR Ramon for $2,282,000. A competing bid from Coastal Bend Demolition was proposed at $1,752,500.
According to documents obtained by KRIS 6, JR Ramon scored higher for having “five or more” similar projects and a project foreman with relevant experience. Both companies scored identically in other evaluation categories.
After the meeting, Miller posted a video of the incident on Facebook, which garnered significant attention from the community. Villarreal responded in the comments, defending the decision to remove Miller.
I have absolutely no issue with you speaking your mind at our meetings. That’s your right. Our rules, as other boards, councils, and commissions have, are specific on what you can speak on during the meeting. Had you spoken in general public comment instead of on the specific agenda item for the procurement of copy paper, you could have spoken all you wanted about the Carroll demolition. Again, you chose to speak on the wrong agenda item.
With Miller's removal, questions have been raised regarding potential violations of the Open Meetings Act.
6 Investigates sought the opinion of Bill Aleshire, an attorney who specializes in issues related to the Open Meetings Act.
Aleshire is one of several attorneys statewide who volunteers with the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, which answers questions about the Open Meetings and Public Information Acts.
He also served as the Travis County Judge from 1987 to 1998.
Aleshire said Miller was using an analogy to highlight potential issues in the awarding of a current contract, and given the items were related he did not believe the resident to be off-topic.
"The thing that struck me is the extreme reaction and having him dismissed and removed from the room," he said. "I just think that was an overreaction by the board president to do that."
"We have to remember these board members don't own that government, that the voters do." Aleshire added. "And if you have the right attitude about being an elected official you show more patience with the people who do own the government when they come down and try to express what they would like to see happen or not happen."
Aleshire said the circumstances of whether Miller's rights were violated are not clear-cut, but the incident is concerning.
I think the board president showed a lack of patience, a lack of respect for democracy, and was on the edge of whether or not he was violating that gentleman's rights under the Open Meetings Act that gives the public a right to speak.
6 Investigates requested an interview with CCISD regarding this incident. Once again,CCISD "respectfully" declined that request for an interview and instead provided a statement.
CCISD welcomes public comment during meetings to help inform decisions and stay informed regarding matters members of the public wish to bring to our attention. To that end, public school districts adopt policies and establish protocols to encourage input while maintaining a safe, respectful and productive environment.
As there was a request for removal from speaking, CCISD appreciates the resident voluntarily ending his comment and voluntarily leaving the Board Room. We are reviewing procedures with leaders who may be in a position to make decisions at the dais, including limiting board meeting removal requests to speakers making personal attack against individuals, or using defamatory language or gestures. Audience members causing disruptions are also subject to removal.
Interview request respectfully declined. Thank you.
In the statement provided by CCISD, the district states that the resident voluntarily left the Board Room. However, it should be noted Villarreal directed law enforcement to remove him. Miller said he was escorted from the building by the district's chief of police.
Q&A with Bill Aleshire:
6 Investigates reviewed CCISD's public participation guidelines following the incident with Miller and had questions regarding three guidelines. KRIS 6 asked Aleshire for his expert opinion regarding these rules.
Question: CCISD public participation guideline number two states: "Questions and comments must be addressed to the Board, not to individual persons." Is this a valid rule?
Answer: "If a member of the board has voted a particular way and citizens have a point of view that they want to express about that, they're allowed to do it.
Under section 551.007 of the Open Meetings Act, it says a governmental body may not prohibit public criticism of the governmental body, including criticism of any act omission, policy, procedure, program or service. The subsection does not apply to public criticism that is otherwise prohibited by law.
Sometimes if you have some members of the board that vote one way and the other, you can't criticize the board, you've got to criticize those that voted a particular way that the citizen didn't like.
That's just common sense. So once again, what constitutes criticism of the body as opposed to individuals?
You can point out specifically board member so and so, I really didn't like what you did about such and such. And they also have a constitutional right of remonstrance, as it's called, the right to complain. And that goes beyond (the Open Meetings Act). That's a constitutional right in the Texas Constitution. And that goes beyond the Open Meeting Act statute."
Question: CCISD public participation guideline number eight states: "Speakers or others who make personal attacks against individuals or use abusive or defamatory language or gestures shall be ruled out of order and may be escorted from the Board room by security staff." Is this a valid rule?
Answer: "Again, abusive is a vague term. And the rules and regulations that are vague are really not enforceable and they run the danger of being inconsistent in the enforcement of such.
And what constitutes a personal attack? If you name a person and say in your official capacity you did so and so, and I don't like is that a personal attack? So what is personal in terms of that language?
If the rules are so vague, they end up enforcing them one way when they don't mind so much, versus another, now they've engaged in violation of free speech based on the content of the speech.
Again, this kind of heavy-handed control of what the public is entitled to say is borderline illegal conduct, but it also betrays a lack of fundamental acceptance and understanding that yes, they need to conduct a reasonable meeting and it needs to be conducted efficiently, but they have an ultimate responsibility to pay attention to what voters have to say."
Question: CCISD public participation number nine states: "Expressions of hostility, including handheld placards and behaviors such as booing, clapping, or cheering, shall be prohibited before the Board." Is this a valid rule?
Answer: "Once again, they run the danger of having someone come and testify and say, 'Mr. Board President, you're the best public official I've ever seen in my life,' and people clap and you don't throw that person out of the meeting or discipline that person for saying it. But then somebody comes up and says, 'Mr. Board President, you're the worst public official I've ever seen in my life,' and people clap and they punish that speaker. They are flat dab in the middle because of their vague and unreasonable rules of violating free speech rights under the US Constitution and the Texas Free Speech provision.
Based on the content discriminating against the position that people take and how they allow them to speak or don't allow them to speak or try to punish them or to chill their speech with rules like that in advance.
The problem with those kinds of rules is they show a bad attitude on the part of the public official about their responsibility to the public."
Learn more:
What: KRIS 6 News, in partnership with the Corpus Christi Caller-Times and Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, will host two Open Meetings Act and Public Information Act workshops in February.
When/Where: February 3 from 5 to 6:30 pm, Nueces County Commissioners Courtroom, 3rd floor of the Nueces County Courthouse, 901 Leopard Street.
February 6 from 9 to 10 am, Robstown City Council Chambers, 101 E Main Ave.
For the latest local news updates, click here, or download the KRIS 6 News App.
