Republicans on Cobb school board vote to end broadcast of public comments
Why it matters: The school board's move is the latest in a series of decisions critics say reduces transparency and limits public feedback of elected officials and the Cobb County School District.
The latest: The board's four Republicans — David Chastain, John Cristadoro, Brad Wheeler and Randy Scamihorn — voted in favor of the policy change.
Democrats Becky Sayler, Nichelle Davis and Leroy "Tre" Hutchins opposed it.
What they're saying: Superintendent Chris Ragsdale, who proposed the policy change, said during Thursday's meeting it will remove the liability of broadcasting comments that could potentially be defamatory or slanderous.
Ragsdale said the district will still have public comment opportunities for its work sessions in the afternoon and evening meetings and will continue to live-stream both sessions.
But the district won't broadcast or publish the portion of the meeting that's reserved for public comment.
Ragsdale said the district has had to edit recordings over concerns about copyright infringement and "tortious" comments.
"The risk is not necessarily attached to what is said, but the risk is attached to the fact of broadcasting what is said."
Reality check: Richard T. Griffiths, president emeritus of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, told Axios that Ragsdale's comments about copyright infringement are a "red herring."
Griffiths also said anyone who brings legal action against the school district over comments made by a member of the public would have to prove that the board and school system organized, promoted or scripted the remarks.
"What they appear to be doing is totally disrespecting and disregarding those comments and saying to the public, 'we really don't care what you say,'" Griffiths told Axios.
The other side: Several members of the public also spoke in opposition of the rule change. Democratic board members said they were concerned about the message this would send to Cobb parents, students, teachers and stakeholders.
"I think that public comment being broadcast gives a unique pressure and urgency that gets people a response that sometimes emails have proved unable to do," Sayler added.
Context: Thursday's action is the latest in a series of steps taken by the Republican-led school board to limit how the public can address them, as well as what board members can discuss.
In 2019, the GOP majority voted to scrap a portion of the meeting where they could talk freely about anything due to concerns that some of the topics were "political."
In 2021, the GOP-led board limited how many people could speak during public comment and how long they could speak for.
In 2022, the board started requiring people to sign up in person if they wanted to speak and mandated in 2023 that speakers line up outdoors — rather than inside the lobby — if they wanted to speak.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
11 minutes ago
- Fox News
Byron Donalds explains why young voters are moving towards the conservative movement
Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., joins 'The Ingraham Angle' to discuss the Democratic Party's messaging to young voters.
Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Key decisions that will shape rural health fund
States next year will begin tapping the $50 billion rural health fund in the GOP's tax and spending law, but questions have already arisen about how the funds will be allocated — and how much they will benefit rural providers. Why it matters: The fund aims at helping rural hospitals and providers adjust to sweeping changes in how Medicaid is financed, including limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments. But important details have to be fleshed out. What they're saying: Sen. Josh Hawley, who pushed for the fund, in part to get his vote for the megabill, said CMS will need to make sure the money "flows to hospitals that need it" and are not simply "going to states in general to do whatever they want with it." "So far, so good. I liked how it was written up," Hawley said. "But we'll want to monitor closely how the agency puts it into effect." Sen. Thom Tillis, who was one of the three GOP "no" votes on the reconciliation bill, told Axios that CMS needs to "make sure it's a fair formula for rural hospitals." "I think that that pot of money looks big, but it's not really when you consider some of the economic impacts, mainly from the state-directed payments," Tillis said. "We'll be interested to see how they interpret the law." How it works: The new law allocates $10 billion annually for the next five years, starting in 2026. The law says $25 billion is to be distributed equally among all states that submit a "detailed rural health transformation plan," which could include details on how they would use the funds. Between the lines: States can apply for the aid only once, by the end of this year. If they estimate wrong, or run into unforeseen problems, they don't get another shot at it. CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz must approve each state's application by Dec. 31. CMS has discretion to distribute the other $25 billion, based on factors such as how much of the state's population is rural and the number of rural health facilities. The CMS administrator can also consider other factors deemed appropriate. Friction point: Some of that flexibility raises questions about how CMS will proceed, said Zach Levinson, director of the KFF Project on Hospital Costs. "States will also have discretion on how they distribute funds among hospitals and other providers," Levinson said. "And they maybe will steer some dollars to non-rural areas, pending CMS approval." The concern is that some states could be favored over others, or that funding will not go to providers with the greatest needs. "There are risks of this becoming a slush fund if it's not carefully attended to and if it's not focused" on actual rural hospitals, said Jackson Hammond, a senior policy analyst at Paragon Health Institute. All the money has to be distributed by 2030 and spent by 2032. That also means much of the assistance will have already been spent before the provider tax and state-directed payment provisions take effect in 2028. The $50 billion sum also is about one-third of the $155 billion in estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas, per a KFF analysis.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘His income is limited': Should I pay $800 a month towards my husband's $67,000 student debt?
My husband is 40 and I am 44. When we got married a year ago, I was aware that he had about $67,000 in student-loan debt as well as credit-card debt from living paycheck-to-paycheck. He never consolidated his student loans and they all have varying interest rates between 5% to 8%. I did not have him consolidate the loans as there were potential benefits under the Biden administration for him not doing so. In the meantime, I was able to get him to change his spending habits and pay off all his credit cards by helping him understand the principles behind how interest and payments work. He also has his own business, which has a small financial footprint supported by his income. As for myself, my income allowed me to purchase a house in 2020 with a 2.6% interest rate. I am able to pay all the bills to support us both and then some. Wall Street braces for deluge of Treasury bills, a crucial test of market demand Why Tesla analysts are mostly upbeat about earnings, but investors aren't happy 'If I was writing the checks at Coke, I wouldn't write the check for this,' one expert says about cane-sugar Coke Related: The 5 huge changes coming for student-loan borrowers and colleges under GOP megabill I have stopped short of paying for his business, his car payment and health insurance. Yes, there are a few incidentals he also helps support for our family, such as food, but his income is limited due to his new business and part-time work. I would like to grow my retirement and emergency funds some more, but I am very aware of my husband's student-loan debt, which he is not paying down in a timely manner. I graduated with about $57,000 worth of student loans in the early 2000s. A modest lifestyle on an income that rarely topped $15 per hour and low rent helped me pay off my own student-loan debt in 10 years. I have been working for the same company for over 15 years and I have built a career path that has led me to making almost six figures annually. I have an estimated retirement income of about $6,500 per month. I believe I can contribute about $800 per month to paying off my husband's student-loan debt. From what I understand, I am not legally responsible for his student debt, which was all taken out by him before we were married. We also keep our bank accounts separate so that if something should happen where the government lands on student loans, my income is in no way touched and all the normal bills could be paid like normal. Am I better off paying toward my husband's student-loan payments, or should I take this monthly amount and invest it elsewhere? Thank you for your kind attention. Student Loans Are Killing Us All Don't miss: 'Why am I so afraid to retire?' I'm 60 and lost $1.2 million in a divorce. Can I rebuild my life? I have a funny feeling you're going to do what you're going to do. But since you asked… You married this man, who may be a wonderful guy, and appear to be paying the lion's share of the bills. You are now considering crossing that imaginary line and helping him pay off other extraneous expenses, and are now giving serious consideration to paying off his student debt. Paying your husband's bills won't teach him to make smarter financial decisions in the future, nor will it help you in your own retirement goals. The fact that he would actually accept $800 a month from you to pay off his student debt also gives me pause. It tells me: He ain't gonna change his financial habits. You are not responsible for these loans, as I'm sure you are aware, given that they were taken out before your marriage. So I wonder why you have the 'disease to please' or, in this context, the 'fret about his debt,' and see it as much your obligation to pay off as his. Why do you see his debts as your duty to pay? You don't have to pay his bills. You don't have to make up the shortfall because his business is not performing. You don't have to take money from your own retirement fund in order to pay off his student loan because he didn't do what you did —live far below your means and work a $15-an-hour job. You didn't clear your own loan so you would have the time/money to clear his debts. If you paid off this loan solo — let's say your husband became overwhelmed with other expenses, which would not be so farfetched given his current and previous financial situation — it would take you more than 10 years and end up costing you nearly $100,000, including roughly $33,000 in interest. If you and he paid $800 each, it would take half that time (five years) and cost just over $76,000, including $9,000 interest. Related: My husband and I are 40. I have $200,000 in student debt, while he has $600,000 in retirement savings. Are we in trouble? It's important to see what you are giving up by paying your husband's debts: Let's say you invested $800 a month in the S&P 500 SPX for 10 years and 4 months — the same amount of time it would take you to pay off his student loan alone. At an average annual return of 7%, compounded monthly, you would end up with $138,000 for your retirement and/or emergency fund by the time you're 54. Nice work, if you can get it. If you do the math, it makes more sense for you to invest that $800 and tell your husband that he should put together a plan to pay his student loan just like you did. If you don't pay his student loans, it doesn't mean that you don't love him. It doesn't make you a bad person or an uncaring or unsympathetic partner. It does make you somebody who values their own financial independence and intends to lead by example. Let me share a story with you that I have not thought about in many years. When I was a kid, I had a paper route. It was, you might say, my first job in journalism. I finished school early on a Wednesday afternoon and I delivered newspapers for exactly one penny per paper. It sounds like I grew up in Dickensian times, but it was Ireland before the economic boom. It was my first taste of earning my own money and it felt bloody great. One week, I finished my paper route shortly after lunch and my friend who lived on my street neglected to do his route until late in the day, so I suggested helping him. It never occurred to me to ask for money and, if he did offer, I refused. Either way, I arrived home empty handed feeling pretty good about my good deed. My mother went through me for a short cut. She told me I should not have done half of his route in addition to my own. That's a roundabout way of saying: Allow your husband to deliver his own newspapers. Related: My daughter has $500K in med-school expenses. Can my wife and I afford to pay it off? My daughter has $500K in med-school expenses. Can my wife and I afford to pay it off? Can my husband contest his late brother's $600K will? He experienced oxygen deprivation due to COPD before he died. I have early Alzheimer's and my husband has stage 4 kidney disease. We just inherited $50K. How can this help us? . 'I'm already up $45,000 in about an hour' — Reddit traders boast about wins as meme-stock mania returns Dow cuts dividend in half in reaction to 'lower-for-longer' earnings The S&P 500 just did something it's only done four times in 50 years. Here's what happened next. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
