A lawsuit that sought to remove the new Hartselle superintendent was thrown out by a Morgan County judge who said fears about the superintendent’s future actions were speculative and that there was no evidence the school board violated the Open Meetings Act.

Brian Clayton, 52, was selected as superintendent among six finalists by a split Hartselle Board of Education on Nov. 15, was hired by the board at a Dec. 13 meeting and took office Jan. 4.

Bruce Wilhite, the father of two Hartselle students, filed a lawsuit Dec. 9 seeking to invalidate the board’s selection of Clayton on the grounds that the school board violated the Open Meetings Act.

Morgan County Circuit Judge Stephen Brown held a trial Jan. 3 and on Friday night ruled against Wilhite and in favor of the school board. Brown’s order concluded no evidence was presented that the board violated the Open Meetings Act; that even if such evidence had been introduced, Wilhite filed his complaint too late to invalidate a board action; and that Wilhite had not demonstrated the sort of injury that entitled him to an injunction.

On Monday afternoon, Brown denied a request by the plaintiff to amend the order.

In a written statement forwarded by the school board’s lawyer Monday, board President Dr. James Joy said Clayton “is immensely qualified and actively engaged in providing continued great leadership for our school system. The board is actively involved in and looks forward to working with him to maintain and improve upon the exceptional educational opportunities available in Hartselle City Schools.”

Both at the trial and in a post-trial brief filed Friday, Wilhite’s lawyer indicated a primary reason Wilhite and other parents objected to Clayton was that as principal of James Clemens High School he had enforced a Madison City Schools COVID mask mandate that lasted longer than the one imposed at Hartselle City Schools.

In an online petition he posted, Wilhite said the board should have questioned Clayton about his views on mask mandates, his stance on in-person learning versus remote instruction, and “the role and inclusion of ideological curricula in our school system.”

At trial, Wilhite testified that the COVID masking policy at James Clemens High was “not representative of my values or my community’s values.”

In a brief filed Friday, lawyers for the school board objected to the suggestion that Clayton, as a principal, had a role in formulating mask mandates.

“Attributing masking policies of a school system to a single building-level administrator misunderstands a fundamental premise: school boards — not a singular administrator — hold and exercise the power to create and adopt system-wide policies,” they wrote.

The judge ruled that concerns about possible future actions by the new superintendent are not grounds for an injunction invalidating his hiring.

“The plaintiff indicated this injury may never occur if the superintendent turns out to be great,” Brown wrote. “In other words, the actions of the school board have no impact on the plaintiff, and the actions of the superintendent only have a possible impact on the plaintiff at a future date unknown to any party of the case.”

Brown also rejected Wilhite’s argument that the school board had interfered with his parental rights by hiring Clayton, noting that “plaintiff has full legal and physical custody of his children.”

One of Wilhite’s primary arguments was that board members conducted illegal “serial meetings” in selecting Clayton. According to testimony at trial, Joy spoke individually with at least three of the other four board members during the weekend before the Nov. 15 board meeting when Clayton was selected. Wilhite argued that these discussions should have been held in a properly noticed public meeting. The formal vote on Nov. 15, Wilhite asserted, merely finalized the serial meetings that took place in the days before.

The Alabama Open Meetings Act forbids serial meetings, which it defines as a series of meetings, each involving fewer than a quorum of members but collectively including at least a quorum, where the members “deliberate specific matters that, at the time of the exchange, the participating members expect to come before the … full governmental body at a later date.”

The judge’s order did not directly address the issue of serial meetings, but did note that Daxton Maze, the only board member to appear at the trial, “testified that no candidate was eliminated from consideration during these discussions.”

Under state law, violation of the Open Meetings Act is only grounds for invalidation of a board action if a lawsuit is filed within 21 days of public notice of that action. Brown ruled that Wilhite’s lawsuit was filed 23 days after the public received notice of the board’s Nov. 15 vote selecting Clayton.

The judge also rejected Wilhite’s argument that he had effectively been precluded from addressing the board in opposition to Clayton’s hiring. Wilhite said board policy required members of the public to register their intention to speak at a board meeting at least five days in advance, and the agenda indicating the board’s plan to approve a superintendent candidate was posted on Nov. 15, the day of the board meeting.

The court ruled that the public has a right to observe board meetings, but no absolute right to speak at them.

Moreover, he ruled that Wilhite was not prohibited from addressing the board at the Nov. 15 meeting, which he did not attend, because school board policy permits the public to speak at board meetings without the five-day advance notice if the topic they wish to discuss is on the agenda.

“No issues remain pending,” Brown said in his order. “This is the final order in this case.”

Clayton did not return a call seeking comment Monday. Clayton was hired to replace Dee Dee Jones, whose retirement as superintendent was effective Sept. 1.

— [email protected] or 256-340-2435. Twitter @DD_Fleischauer.

___

(c)2023 The Decatur Daily (Decatur, Ala.)

Visit The Decatur Daily (Decatur, Ala.) at www.decaturdaily.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.