Following last month’s controversy surrounding the censorship of the Burlington High School student newspaper, the city’s school board is forming a committee to create a student media policy that complies with Vermont law.
The school board voted almost unanimously Tuesday night to establish a committee charged with recommending within 60 days a written policy consistent with the states’ New Voices law, which protects the rights of student journalists.
Student journalists at the BHS Register broke the news September 10 that the Vermont Agency of Education had brought licensing charges against Mario Macias, the school’s guidance director. Principal Noel Green then told newspaper advisor Beth Fialko-Casey to have the student editors who wrote the story — — Julia Shannon-Grillo, Halle Newman, Nataleigh Noble and Jenna Peterson — remove it from the newspaper’s website.
While Green later allowed the students to re-publish the story after the news was reported by other outlets, he informed student editors that he would be requiring them to submit stories for approval 48 hours before publication. First amendment advocates and supporters of the students argued that both the initial demand for the story to be taken down and the 48-hour review policy violated the New Voices law.
The new committee will include Green; Fialko-Casey; Traci Griffith, a journalism professor at St. Michael’s College; Mike Donoghue, the executive director of the Vermont Press Association; Jeff Wick, a school board commissioner; and the BHS Register editors.
Only one school board commissioner, Liz Curry, voted against forming the committee, arguing that policies are already in place for instances when the district is not in compliance with the law. Under the current framework, the superintendent is required to report to the school board when the district is not in legal compliance, Curry said.
“I did not see that process followed, and that would be a reason for the board to engage the superintendent in that conversation,” she said. “I have my own theories about why it wasn’t followed, in terms of new staff, new school year and a lot going on, confidentiality rules, confusion and other possible reasons.”
The New Voices legislation was signed by Gov. Phil Scott in May 2017. It restricts prior restraint of student-run publications and protects student journalists and their advisers from being disciplined for publishing sensitive stories.
The South Burlington School District is also forming student media policy, which its school board could officially approve at its Oct. 17 meeting. In its current form, the policy puts student editors in charge of the content in the student-run media outlets and only allows school administrators to restrict content that is not protected by the New Voices law, such as stories that are libelous, obscene, threatening, bullying, violate state or federal law, or “creates the imminent danger of materially or substantially disrupting the ability of the school to perform its educational mission.”
Donoghue said that VPA and the New England First Amendment Coalition, which he is vice president of, wanted to see Burlington enact a policy similar to the one under discussion in South Burlington, which does not give school administrators more power to restrict content than is allowed under the law.
“That is what the New England First Amendment Coalition and the Vermont Press Association would like to see in this proposal, that it ensures the first amendment for the students, which clearly got abridged at BHS, and that the advisers are protected against any form of retaliation, suspension, discipline,” he said.
At least 15 Burlington residents — mostly parents — reached out to members of the Burlington school board to express concerns about how Green and Superintendent Yaw Obeng handled the Macias situation and resulting censorship, according to email communications obtained by VTDigger in a public records request.
Many said they felt that the school leadership was prioritizing Macias’ needs over the needs of students. Some said the saga had made them question Obeng’s ability to lead the district.
Obeng initially stood by Macias before suspending him days later. In an email to one parent before Macias was suspended, Green defended Obeng’s decision.
“With the amount of people that have condemned Mr. Macias, I have had an equal amount of people who have stepped forward in his behalf,” he wrote.
Green added that he was privy to additional information that was shaping his actions that he couldn’t share because it was personnel matter.
“The one thing that has not been alleged, is that Mr. Macias has failed students in regard to supporting them as the[y] matriculate through high school,” he wrote. Green said he was also worried placing Macias on leave would not allow the counselor due process.
The district initially defended Green’s decision to order the article removed, releasing a statement the day censorship questions were raised which argued principals “have the responsibility to manage the climate of the school and have the authority to regulate manners which they deem to be affecting that climate.”
Some school board members have since expressed concern that the handling of Macias and concurrent censorship drama could affect voters’ confidence in supporting the $70 million high school renovation bond on the ballot in November.
As the Macias situation played out, school commissioner Monika Ivancic emailed fellow board members saying “it definitely doesn’t look good to the community to censor BHS Register article postings.”
“And although it is a separate issue, this will only hurt the prospect of passing a construction bond,” she wrote.
The bond requires a simple majority of “Yes” votes to pass. The renovation includes an addition to the school’s main building, the demolition of at least two other buildings and a fix to maintenance issues that have gone unaddressed for years. It will also address accessibility and safety concerns.
Clare Wool, the school board chair, said after a press conference at the high school last week that she shared some of the anxiety over how the Macias matter could affect some voters.
“But I am hopeful that the emphasis and the long-awaited years of support has come for the school, that that will not discourage or put a cloud over this positive support city-wide,” she said.
Obeng said after that press conference that voters should consider the renovation project on its merits.
Emails between school board members also reveal that Wool acted quickly to address questions about the legality of Green’s decision to reinstate the prior review policy, and that she initiated the decision to revoke that policy.
After articles questioning the legality of the prior-review policy were published on the evening of Sept 14, Wool emailed Obeng at 7:14 a.m. on Sept. 15, a Saturday morning. Wool sent Obeng a statement with Obeng’s name attached revoking the policy and stating the school board would be forming a committee to draft a new policy that she asked him to release to the media.
“It is my hope you understand a corrective and professional response is required immediately,” Wool emailed Obeng after he responded that the district would work on it.
Soon after sending that email, Wool sent a VTDigger article on the policy to the school board with the subject line “Please read-Current BSD response in violation of law.”
Obeng and Wool released a joint statement later that day revoking the policy.
