THEY DENIED MY CONSTITUENTS REPRESENTION

In a 5-3 vote last Tuesday night my colleagues denied my vote in the

appointment of an Interim Director for MNPS. In a 5-3 vote they denied my
constituents their representation.
All nine of us have an equal say around the MNPS Board of Education
table but my vote was denied last Tuesday night.
Last Friday when the board chair, Sharon Gentry, called an "emergency"
meeting I immediately let her know that I would not be there as I had a
surgical procedure scheduled for Tuesday morning. My doctor's orders
precluded any driving, working, or making any legal decisions for 24 hours.
I sent her several emails requesting that she reschedule. She never
replied. I asked for a phone call. She said she would call but never did.
This "emergency" meeting was held anyway. I watched from home.
Jill Speering made the motion to delay this crucial vote until I could be
there. Amy Frogge passionately made the same request and read a
statement that I had written. There was much discussion. All fell on deaf
ears.
It is difficult for me to believe that my colleagues thought that their votes
were more important than mine. Their arrogance is astounding.
I have been ruminating over the actions of my colleagues for the days
since this total lack of consideration. I am sharing these thoughts today
after hearing from many of my constituents expressing anger and disbelief
that my colleagues arrogantly, and wrongly, believed their vote was more
important than mine.
Whether or not we agree with each other is immaterial. We all have an
equal vote around that table. To undermine someone's ability to vote,
and their actual vote, is criminal. Indeed. Their actions were criminal.
If the argument is that the outcome would not change since my vote
would merely make it 5-4, then that begs the question, was this vote
already discussed and agreed to prior to the emergency meeting? The
point is that the views of the people who elected me to represent district 4
were not allowed to be heard. Their arguments for or against
reconsideration of the previous decision were not allowed to be heard.
Who knows if those arguments may have changed the outcome of the
vote? The email and other feedback I received was not allowed to be

heard by five of my colleagues who voted to deny me the opportunity to

represent the views of my constituents.