NORWICH – The Norwich City School Board engaged in a heated debate last night over a seemingly innocuous topic. For more than 30 minutes, members of the board of education argued over going paperless, a process that was first offered up as a cost savings measure back in December.
The discussion began when board member Priscilla Johnson insisted she continue to receive a hard copy of each meeting’s agenda and board packet.
“I do not have access to the computer during the day,” Johnson told fellow board members. She prefers to take print copies with her while she works rather than sit in front of the computer at night to review the material provided in advance of each meeting, she explained, adding that she did not want to incur the cost of printing the documents herself.
“I’d prefer not to have to print it off on my own material at home. I’d like the district to provide it to me,” Johnson said.
Based on a timeline laid out by the district’s Technology Director Peter Somach at the board’s Feb. 3 meeting, last night should have been the first paperless board meeting. But because of a scheduling change, it was instead a full board test of the new system which Somach estimated would save the district a minimum of $4,200 a year between printing expenses, staff time and postage.
Johnson took aim at both Somach and the superintendent’s secretary for failing to make training her on the new paperless sytem a priority after she missed the scheduled board training session because of a conflict. It took three weeks, she said, to coordinate a time for her make-up session.
Johnson found support in her request from board members Sally Chirlin and Tim Brown.
“I would think it’s a reasonable request if an individual board member wants a hard copy, so let’s accommodate her,” board member Sally Chirlin said.
Chirlin made a motion to grant “Priscilla’s rather simple and reasonable request,” which was seconded by Brown.
“I still think we should accommodate her need,” the board vice-president said, agreeing that Johnson should not have to assume the expense of printing the board packet.
Other members of the board were less willing to give in to Johnson’s demands.
“The whole idea was that we’d all be doing it,” said Kathy Coates.
Perry Owen, who originally proposed the idea on Dec. 2, explained that going paperless was not just a way to save money. “Going paperless is ‘green,’ and that’s a contribution to society as a whole,” he reported, offering several suggestions to Johnson on how he was working with the change.
“I’m all for sticking with it and going paperless,” Owen said.
Board member Joe Stagliano expressed disgust at how much time had been wasted discussing the issue, which was not on the meeting’s agenda.
“I thought we agreed,” Stagliano said. “I’m all for going green and setting a good example for the kids.”
Despite the opposition, Johnson held her ground. “Paper is a renewable resource,” she stated, adding that she “would have reconsidered being a school board member” if she had known going paperless was a requirement.
“I can’t help feeling there are certain people that are unwilling to meet my needs,” Johnson said.
When moved to a vote, the motion failed with three members voting in favor (Brown, Chirlin and Johnson) and the remaining four against. This prompted Johnson to request the district provide her with paper and an ink cartridge for her to use at home, which was denied by Board President Bob Patterson.
A compromise was reached when Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan suggested she come to the district office to print out the packet.