This terrible! NO zoom bombings have happened at school board meetings, yet they rush to stop public comment! Please let the Board hear of your opposition!

There's an easy technical fix - just delay zoom comments (a "tape delay") by 2 or 3 seconds before letting them through, with a person to monitor the undelayed comments on headphones. If a comment is a zoom bomb, the monitor can just kill the comment before it is heard by anyone else.

This is happening all over the Bay Area and in fact the nation so we might learn from what others are doing.

If nothing else, the city clerk who deals with the public commenters should immediately cut off comments from those only giving their first name initial or other vague identifiers.

If the board sticks to PAUSD related topics and doesn't wade into international politics, then maybe "Zoomers" will stay on topic. The delay idea sounds like something worth trying, but I suppose "agility and innovation" have to take a back seat to expediency in this case. It is too bad that well intentioned stakeholders have to pay the price, but such is the state of affairs these days.

[Portion removed.]

Let people comment through the chat. Their questions can still be answered and their comments recorded.
Racist, anti sematic, and rude comments should not be tolerated

Enable comments via chat please, it is very simple and manageable - don't shut people out because they can't make it to the meeting in person.

PAUSD just looking for another way to stifle community input/discussion. Wouldn't be surprised if they try to eliminate Zoom participation entirely. Then they can shorten, again, the amount of time for speakers to talk.

Your ideas make more sense when you're just talking into the echo chamber.

The moderated chat idea seems solid. As teachers we did it all the time during the pandemic. It actually allows those too shy to speak a way to voice their opinions. It is not easy to manage or validate a flood of comments, but at least nonsense and hateful comments can be ignored.

I hope, as Morgan states, that this is not a ploy by the Board to silence even more voices.

PAUSD is being proactive, and considering nipping it in the bud before hateful rhetoric comes their way.

Zoom bombings have been a problem since the pandemic, when Zoom usage strongly increased. People are more aware recently because of media coverage.

@Jennifer
Nipping in the bud is great, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, not so much. PAUSD already has a transparency problem, so moderation should be the first thing tried.

@Modoman

Transparency is not a priority. Controlling the narrative is the order of the day and Mr. Austin's actions and words on behalf of the board have made that patently clear.

His contract was renewed and thus there is no reason in his mind, or in the minds of most board members to be authentically transparent. If they say they are transparent, then they are transparent.

I don't see the board pursuing a moderated ZOOM approach because they don't need to, nor do they need to explain why they don't need to. Cutting off ZOOM is the path of least resistance. It is also expedient given the platform ZOOM provides to extremists of all stripes. The leadership style exhibited by Mr. Austin and the Board precludes the "moderated access" solution.

PAUSD board leadership does not want community input.It’s ironic that DiBrienza weighed in via zoom, but does not want to extend that courtesy to the people who elected her and to whom she is supposed to represent.

In addition to the public, this board is actively trying to silence the one board member who received the most votes in the last election. They only care about ramming their own agenda through.

This is a worrying development. Although there was much angst expressed by the Board during this meeting about being champions for democracy and so on, on the same morning the Board Policy Review Committee was reviewing this little gem:

“Communicate directly with the Superintendent as appropriate whenever a staff member, parent or community member raises a question or concern -that implicates student well being or other issues related to district business that, in the board member’s best judgement, are best addressed by the Superintendent or designee - and direct people to communicate to the appropriate person closest to the situation”

There is no recording of the meeting where this revision of Board policy was discussed on Monday. This directive is supposed to influence Trustee behavior. Given the vague and overly broad wording of this proposal, anything and everything you say to any Board member is to be reported immediately to the Superintendent. Any sensitive matter, any opinion, any criticism you might have is clearly within the purview of this policy.

How can these Trustees talk about equitable participation over Zoom, while on the same day, speaking about this policy which will have a massive chilling effect on citizen participation?

Is this even legal?

Who wrote or proposed this strange policy?

Is it wise for Trustees to chill participation of stakeholders in this way? Aren’t they further deepening their own disconnection from the operations of this institution? Doesn’t this open additional legal risk? Whistle blowers are an important safety valve.

Here’s the link to the agenda:
Web Link

Anyone can claim to be a “champion of democracy”. North Korea is known as the “Democratic People’s Republic”. It is a very fluid term. As I stated before, Mr. Austin and the Board spend a lot of time and energy attempting to control the narrative.

There was a time prior to this current Board and Mr. Austin when several board members, not just one or two, would visit campuses regularly to seek input and feedback from teachers and staff. They were approachable, had children in the district schools, and gave stakeholders due respect. More like representatives than rulers if you will. The Board cared deeply about what happened on the ground. They did their own research above and beyond glossy reports from site principals, or self-serving newsletters and websites emanating from 25 Churchill. If you attended the Board meetings you felt like a member of a community, not an adversary or a nuisance. Sure, there were folks that were thorns in the side, but for the most part the Board and Superintendent handled vocal critics with grace and respect.

Mr. Austin and the Board that hired him brought a new philosophy. Maybe they feel it to be democratic, but it is not the democracy taught in the classrooms they oversee, nor is it the democracy that many are accustomed to. As a great political philosopher once asked: Is it better to be feared or to be loved? His answer was it is best to be both, but if one must choose between the two, chose fear.

Discount all the propaganda and grandstanding. Look at attitudes and actions. I think it is clear which way this current “leadership team” leans and there is no real impetus for them to change, at least in their minds.

Cutting off “zoom bombers” shuts off every voice too. Let peace, free speech and democracy prevail. There will always be a dissenting rude, line cutter. We are stronger than hate! Show it! Please allow a public forum to be . After all Zoom was the good when absolutely necessary for some kind of normal for our children distanced learned. Let us speak. Be doomed those Zoom bombers. Like they have any pier over truth?!! Don’t let them win while silencing the rest of the whole of us.

This is all about controlling the narrative. This board is not focused on PAUSD students as a whole or on teachers. They are wildly unpopular if you look at results of the last election. These policies are intended to silence critics including and especially the newest board member who won by a large margin. [Portion removed.]

While I understand the board's concerns, this was a disappointing move.

There is no way to know that these offensive zoom bombers would attend school board meetings. Yes, they've gone to city council meetings -- but this doesn't mean that they will care to go to school board meetings. Notable, Palo Alto City Council and Menlo Park City Council, where this zoom bombing has actually happened, continue to allow zoom comments.

Cutting out zoom comments has a serious silencing effect on participation, *especially* for a school board where commenters, generally speaking, have children or are students themselves, and might not be able to leave their houses in the evening.

Kudos to the *one* school board member who had the courage to vote against this.

And, thanks to the chilling effect of these weird board policies they’re considering, I can’t state my views about any of this to any Board member because I am most certainly subject to the negative consequences of my opinion being reported directly to the superintendent. The Board is deliberately choosing the positive spin vortex of 25 Churchill. As a taxpayer, I’m not comfortable with willful blindness as a risk management strategy. We can do better. We will all end up paying the price in legal settlements.

Caution to any teacher or staff member who expresses concerns to a board member about questionable policies or maltreatment. Mr. Austin is not a neutral arbiter and putting him in that position would make a flawed system even worse.

When it comes to Uniform Complaint Procedures, 25 Churchill regulates itself, thus misbehaviors on the part of administrators are often pigeonholed. Essentially there is no advocate for staff at 25 Churchill with any real leverage. For the most part the unions are anemic in this realm too.

I have seen complaints regarding administrative malfeasance turned around with the complainant the one subsequently rebuked. The effect is demoralizing and the message clear: Don’t bother making a complaint, because it will go nowhere.

A single board member dissenting against the possibility of Mr. Austin being the gatekeeper is disheartening, but kudos to them for attempting to shield stakeholders who should be free to voice concerns to a neutral party. Preferably a neutral party with some teeth.