[TN] [TN] How do I challenge a school board policy?
Local school board in Tennessee initiated a policy that I feel unreasonably restricts the public ability to speak at the meetings. It requires you to be a Hamlin County resident, provide your full address, request permission from the director of schools five days prior to the meeting specifically providing topics you wish to discuss, and a conversation with the director regarding the topics you wish to discuss in order to be put on the agenda to speak. On top of this the district does not release a very basic version of the agenda until sometime the day you must have permission and no supporting documentation is provided with the agenda to the public—you must request this information be sent to you via email.
14
4
Solved
I will try to give some thoughts...
Under Tennessee law, including the Tennessee Open Meetings Act (TOMA), codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-44-101 et seq., the public is guaranteed the right to attend and observe meetings of governing bodies, such as local school boards. However, TOMA does not explicitly mandate that public bodies allow comment or speech during these meetings unless otherwise provided by the board’s own policies. That said, when a public body does create procedures for public comment, those policies must be applied in a reasonable and non-discriminatory manner consistent with constitutional protections under the First Amendment. Courts have repeatedly held that while government bodies may impose reasonable “time, place, and manner” restrictions on speech at public meetings, such restrictions must not be so burdensome as to effectively chill or prevent meaningful participation. Requiring advance approval five days before a meeting, coupled with a mandatory conversation with the director of schools before being placed on the agenda, may be challenged as an overly restrictive barrier, particularly where the agenda is not made reasonably available before the request deadline. This effectively denies participants a fair opportunity to identify issues they may wish to address, raising due process and free speech concerns.
Additionally, under the First Amendment’s public forum doctrine, while school board meetings are typically considered limited public forums, the restrictions imposed must still be reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. Overly onerous requirements, such as the necessity to provide one's full address and personally converse with the director of schools, may exceed what is permissible under federal constitutional law, particularly where such requirements are not narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest like maintaining order or preventing disruption. Courts evaluating similar restrictions have looked to whether the policy effectively serves as a barrier to speech or functions to suppress criticism of the board or its policies. If the policy disproportionately prevents or discourages public engagement, especially when coupled with the lack of timely access to supporting documentation, there could be grounds to challenge the policy through a declaratory judgment action or civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation of constitutional rights. In Tennessee, concerned citizens may also petition the board formally to amend its policy or pursue state-level administrative remedies through the Tennessee Department of Education or through local government accountability channels.
0
Full Conversation
Local school board in Tennessee initiated a policy that I feel unreasonably restricts the public ability to speak at the meetings. It requires you to be a Hamlin County resident, provide your full address, request permission from the director of schools five days prior to the meeting specifically providing topics you wish to discuss, and a conversation with the director regarding the topics you wish to discuss in order to be put on the agenda to speak. On top of this the district does not release a very basic version of the agenda until sometime the day you must have permission and no supporting documentation is provided with the agenda to the public—you must request this information be sent to you via email.
I understand your concerns about the restrictions on public speaking at the school board meetings in Tennessee. Have you attended any of these meetings since the new policy was implemented?
Yes, many, but I have never truly desired to speak. I only requested the previous meeting after recently moving to this county and thus further investigated the denial to speak at that meeting. I think there’s only been four occasions where an individual has spoke in the last three school years. This policy has been in place at least since 2022.
How has this policy impacted your ability to effectively participate in the school board meetings and express your views?
Last month’s meeting I was denied the ability to speak because it was the day of the meeting. I was informed by the director of schools’ secretary via email after receiving the requested 160 pgs of supporting documentation for the agenda and informing her that I would need some time for review and I would email as soon as I could if I chose to speak that evening.
Is there anything else the lawyer should know before I connect you? Rest assured they’ll be able to help with your concerns about the restrictions on public speaking at the school board meetings in Tennessee.
No. I wanted to bring to the school board’s attention that one of the contracts that was being voted on, in my opinion, directly conflicted a parent right related to special education in the IEP process.
Good afternoon and welcome to AskaLawyer.
Hi.
I will try to give some thoughts...
Under Tennessee law, including the Tennessee Open Meetings Act (TOMA), codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-44-101 et seq., the public is guaranteed the right to attend and observe meetings of governing bodies, such as local school boards. However, TOMA does not explicitly mandate that public bodies allow comment or speech during these meetings unless otherwise provided by the board’s own policies. That said, when a public body does create procedures for public comment, those policies must be applied in a reasonable and non-discriminatory manner consistent with constitutional protections under the First Amendment. Courts have repeatedly held that while government bodies may impose reasonable “time, place, and manner” restrictions on speech at public meetings, such restrictions must not be so burdensome as to effectively chill or prevent meaningful participation. Requiring advance approval five days before a meeting, coupled with a mandatory conversation with the director of schools before being placed on the agenda, may be challenged as an overly restrictive barrier, particularly where the agenda is not made reasonably available before the request deadline. This effectively denies participants a fair opportunity to identify issues they may wish to address, raising due process and free speech concerns.
Additionally, under the First Amendment’s public forum doctrine, while school board meetings are typically considered limited public forums, the restrictions imposed must still be reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. Overly onerous requirements, such as the necessity to provide one's full address and personally converse with the director of schools, may exceed what is permissible under federal constitutional law, particularly where such requirements are not narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest like maintaining order or preventing disruption. Courts evaluating similar restrictions have looked to whether the policy effectively serves as a barrier to speech or functions to suppress criticism of the board or its policies. If the policy disproportionately prevents or discourages public engagement, especially when coupled with the lack of timely access to supporting documentation, there could be grounds to challenge the policy through a declaratory judgment action or civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation of constitutional rights. In Tennessee, concerned citizens may also petition the board formally to amend its policy or pursue state-level administrative remedies through the Tennessee Department of Education or through local government accountability channels.
Sorry, one last thing—I am a special education advocate that assists parents in navigating the IEP process.
I understand. So sorry you're dealing with this.
Thank you so much for your very thorough and very helpful response—becoming a member was absolutely worth it—shout out to CLR Bruce Rivers by the way for recommending askalawyer.com.
Thank you for the kind words, my friend.
Legal Eagle
128,690 satisfied customers
5 lawyers online now
13
5
Answered 1 month ago
Disclaimer
By messaging AskaLawyer.com, you agree to our Terms and have read our Privacy Policy.
The information provided on AskaLawyer.com is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information presented, we make no guarantees regarding its completeness or applicability to your specific circumstances.
Use of this website does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and AskaLawyer.com or any of its attorneys. Communications through this website, including any responses from attorneys, are not privileged or confidential. For advice tailored to your individual situation, we recommend consulting a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.
AskaLawyer.com disclaims any liability for actions taken or not taken based on the content of this site. We are not responsible for any third-party content that may be accessed through this website. Reliance on any information provided herein is solely at your own risk.
