D.M. school officials met the law — but missed the point

You would think a school district readily knows its A-B-C’s.

 

Not the Des Moines Public Schools — at least not when informing the public what its 6,600 employees were paid during the academic year that ended June 30.

 

Yes, grade school teachers still call roll in alphabetical order. And next spring’s high school graduates will walk across the stage as their names are announced, starting with the A’s and moving through to the Z’s.

 

But when publishing a list of its employees last month and how much taxpayers paid each one, the Des Moines Public Schools’ alphabet started with Tiara S. Ziegler. Next was Pia Marcell Stites, and the list continued in an anything-but-organized manner.

 

Was this an attempt to hide names by randomness and make it difficult to compare salaries? Or was this the result of a brain freeze, much as when the school board hired Ian Roberts as superintendent without first doing a comprehensive background check and then fired him soon after he was arrested on federal immigration and gun charges?

 

A longstanding Iowa law requires public school districts to publish a list of their employees and wages each year. Des Moines complied with that law on July 20, taking up six full pages with an official notice in The Des Moines Register. 

 

The publication requirement is simple. Lawmakers wanted every district to inform their residents who is being paid and how much each received. This is a basic principle of accountable government. 

 

So what does it say about the Des Moines district’s commitment to transparency when it puts the names in willy-nilly order? Taxpayers paid the $5,126 cost for publication of this notice.

 

Technically, perhaps, the district can say it met the letter of the compensation-disclosure law. The information is there. The salaries are public. Mission accomplished.

 

But transparency should not be a game of technicalities.

 

Randomizing thousands of names may satisfy a narrow interpretation of disclosure. But the way Des Moines did this undermines the purpose of the requirement and invites the public to distrust the district’s commitment to transparency and accountability.

 

If citizen activists, journalists, watchdog groups and curious taxpayers must sift through a vast maze of names simply to determine how much certain employees were paid, Des Moines is guilty of placing an unnecessary obstacle between the public and the information people have a right to see and evaluate.

 

Few government expenditures are more significant — or more deserving of public attention — than the salaries employees receive. 

 

Unlike private business, government agencies do not generate their own revenue in a competitive marketplace. They collect taxes and fees under authority granted by the citizens. Citizens are the ultimate shareholders of government, and they have a right to know how their tax money is spent.

 

Des Moines’ decision to publish the employee compensation in a scattershot fashion represents a deeper problem than just poor optics. The way officials arranged the names suggests an attempt to circumvent the purpose of the requirement rather than embracing the responsibility.

 

This is not the first time the Des Moines district has acted as if its residents were an annoyance. We saw this last October, when the school board accepted the immediate resignation of Robert Lundin, the district’s chief academic officer, but decided — for reasons never explained to the public — to continue paying him his $195,600 salary through June 30 of this year.

 

There is an important distinction between making information technically available and making it meaningfully accessible.

 

A school district genuinely committed to openness should recognize there are legitimate reasons for easily allowing people to examine salaries and other financial details. They may want to better understand how their tax money is spent, compare compensation among departments, identify unusually high salaries, investigate changes in compensation over time, or simply see what their teachers and administrators are paid.

 

This is not an extravagant demand. And that is why the random ordering of Des Moines school employee wages looks so bad. I’ve asked school officials for an explanation and continue to wait for their reply.

 

When the district makes the salaries hard to use, the public rightfully asks why. One wishes school leaders better understood how fragile the bond of trust is between the district and its constituents.

 

Secrecy breeds suspicion. And obfuscation invites contempt. 

 

Being open and accountable is a mindset, and once you understand how it serves the public good, it is as easy as 1-2-3. ♦