State Board of Education Vice Chairman Bob Schaffer, R-Fort Collins, is not giving up his fight to see the board vote on whether to continue defending a lawsuit brought by a coalition of concerned taxpayers.
Schaffer (L) and SucklaFTS Staff Photo
At both a Wednesday working session and a Thursday board meeting, Schaffer made a second and third plea to his fellow board members, asking that they add an agenda item that would allow for a vote on the matter. Additions to the agenda require either approval from the chair or unanimous support from the board. Schaffer, unfortunately, had neither. Only Republican Peggy Littleton, R-Colorado Springs, came forward to support Schaffer's motion. Littleton used the opportunity to publicly state that she does not support defending the lawsuit.
As Face The State previously reported, this was not Schaffer’s first attempt to secure a public vote that would specifically ask board members whether they support the Colorado Department of Education's continued defense of a lawsuit over a controversial tax increase backed by Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat. In addition, Schaffer recently sent a letter to Chairwoman Pamela Jo Suckla, R-Slickrock, requesting the board vote on whether the department should “defend the lawsuit or [agree with] the claims against the state.” Suckla shot down Schaffer’s request, saying that debating the merits of the case is "not the board’s job."
Tensions between board members were clear when members opposed to Schaffer's motion said it was because they worried a vote would jeopardize the case, and their legal counsel had advised the board not allow for any public discussion. Suckla said she "blames herself" for the behavior of some of her board members regarding their respect of attorney client privilege and handling of the media - a jab to those on the board who favor openness and transparency, unlike Suckla who refused the opportunity to comment on a $3.8 billion tax increase.
Regardless of Suckla's own personal views, what does the board - and the voters who elect its members - lose from seeing a public vote? For those on the board supporting Ritter's massive tax increase, they've got a lot to lose. Perhaps even their own re-election.
