Wait for the Legislature to fix the school board stipend law before taking any action, OSBA began telling school boards Thursday.
The Oregon Government Ethics Commission issued an opinion Wednesday that voting on a stipend creates a conflict of interest. The commission proposed some workarounds, but OSBA leadership said they appear unworkable.
“We don’t see these suggested solutions as practicable,” OSBA Executive Director Jim Green said. “Instead, we will be working on a legislative solution in the short 2024 session. In the meantime, we are strongly urging that school boards hold off on considering the stipend issue.”
The law, allowing school board members to receive a stipend up to $500 a month, went into effect July 18. Some school boards have already taken votes either accepting a stipend or saying no to it.
Commission Executive Director Ronald Bersin said boards that voted against taking a stipend are fine but boards that approved a stipend would need to revote using one of the commission’s suggested approaches.
OSBA Policy Services Director Spencer Lewis said boards should consider seeking counsel from OSBA or an attorney on next steps.
The commission said voting on the stipends creates an “actual” conflict of interest.
Oregon statute distinguishes between “actual” conflicts of interest and “potential” conflicts. Public officials cannot discuss in meetings or vote on “actual” conflicts of interest that would definitely convey or deny a monetary benefit to them, their relatives or their businesses. “Potential” conflicts of interest could convey or deny a benefit, but it’s not certain. Public officials can partake in those discussions and votes after declaring their conflict.
Other than changing the law, the commission’s opinion offered three ways around the state statute. Lewis said each of the commission’s proposals presents problems.
School boards could declare a “potential” conflict and then vote on giving the next elected board members a stipend. But that means either only half the board would get stipends after the next election 2025, or stipends would have to wait until 2027.
School boards could hold separate votes on each individual member’s stipend, with that person abstaining because of an “actual” conflict. But that raises the possibility of some board members receiving a stipend and some not.
The commission also proposed deciding the stipend by a voter-approved resolution. Lewis said school boards don’t really have mechanisms designed for getting resolutions on ballots and that could potentially cost the district.
Lewis could see other ways a school board could still be considered in violation of conflict of interest rules even while following the commission proposals.
The commission opinion also suggested waiting for a legislative fix.
Bersin said the Legislature could simply exempt school board stipends from the conflict of interest statute. He said he has no problem with school boards’ receiving stipends, but the commission can’t ignore statutes unless another law tells them to.
Rep. Ben Bowman, a former Tigard-Tualatin School Board member who championed the original bill, said he would work with OSBA to figure out the best next steps.
The Corvallis School Board is among the districts that had already started discussing a stipend. Board member Sami Al-Abdrabbuh said he appreciates the commission’s work but he is disappointed in the opinion.
Al-Abdrabbuh, the OSBA Board president-elect, said any approach that limits school board discussion goes against goals of school board transparency.
The commission’s proposals also ignore the need to support some school board members sooner rather than later, he said.
“The law had really the sentiment of an emergency effect because board members are dropping off,” Al-Abdrabbuh said.
– Jake Arnold, OSBA
[email protected]
