Regarding the article "Barrett criticizes process for statement," I have no comment on the underlying issues of the vote of no confidence or plan for hybrid learning. However, I would like to address the misconception that public statements issued by board leadership are "presumed to be on behalf of all seven board members." That is not true.
Public statements are issued by the board's leadership on behalf of the entity, not the individuals. A majority vote becomes the board's official position.
Ms. Barrett presumably exercised her right to voice her opposition during the discussion and vote. She apparently failed to convince a majority of her colleagues that her position should be adopted. I note that she had no complaint that the content of the statement was incorrect.
How can there be a "lack of transparency" when the leadership is simply communicating board action taken at a public meeting? That should never require approval of individual board members. Asking for comments is a courtesy that has no impact on transparency.
The process wasn't rogue, but Ms. Barrett's response was.