Addressing “concerns” or “specific concerns”?

At the Sauk Prairie School Board meeting on April 26, Board President Richard Judge did speak to masks, mandates, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s striking down of the state mandates, during “board comments.”  His remarks lasted ten minutes. Perhaps the biggest takeaway was when he said: “But nothing that we’ve been able to do has made everyone happy at all times. But what we have had is a lot of success.” Judge opened his remarks by speaking briefly about the civility that has so far been present at board meetings, and the need for such going forward--as well as the rarity of that in other school districts.  “[We need to look] at our success stories. We’ve had kids on premise since summer school. It’s not an easy thing to do.” “Folks adapted and it wasn’t always easy or pleasant.” Michelle Ziegler, one of the parents from last week’s article on the school mask policy who spoke during public comment, felt Judge did not directly address her fellow parents’ concerns, however. She said, “At the end of Board Comments, Richard Judge mentioned the Supreme Court decision related to the statewide mask mandate. He did not address me or any speakers during Public Comments. And he did not address my specific concerns about a process in revising the policy.” Judge was looking directly at the audience--which includes those making public comment--when he spoke. The issue seems to be over what Zielger means by “address[ing] those parents who spoke at the meeting about the mask policy, and potential a review. In the Wisconsin Open Meetings Compliance guide, put out by the Attorney General’s Office, it states about public comment: “During such a period, [of public comment] the [board] may receive information from the public and may discuss any matter raised by the public.” The guide continues: “If a member of the public raises a subject that does not appear on the meeting notice, however, it is advisable to limit the discussion of that subject and to defer any extensive deliberation to a later meeting for which more specific notice can be given. In addition, the body may not take formal action on a subject raised in the public comment period, unless that subject is also identified in the meeting notice.” The issue of the mask mandate was not on the agenda.   The Star News would like to thank Mary Frey for providing video of Judge’s comments.