The Rapid City School District board members seem willing to be coerced into transmitting the district's message to the public, and not their own.

Earlier this week, a "procedure" was discussed which would require board members to inform superintendent Peter Wharton each time a media representative contacts them. Failure to make that contact would result in a call from board president Sheryl Kirkeby and a discussion of the violation in executive session - out of the public eye and potentially illegal under South Dakota open meetings laws.

A procedure allowing for a board member's "violations" to be discussed behind closed doors is little more than a scare tactic designed to coerce board members into checking their opinions at the door and instead parrot the company line.

That's not the model for an effective school board and it's not one Rapid City needs.

Having different opinions, different messages, is healthy for an elected body. That's how democracy works and the public deserves a rich discourse on education issues.

Rapid City school board members have a tough job. Reimbursement for their time is minimal and the headaches are common. We'd bet most of the board members serve because they harbor a passion for helping to provide excellent schools for our children - not to become pawns in the district spin.

In addition, you have to wonder: Who works for whom? The superintendent serves at the pleasure of the board, which oversees the operations of the district. Why would school board members be required to report their discussions to the superintendent? They report to the people of this community.

Board members should prevent such procedures from being enacted. They need to be the strong voice for an open and honest dialogue on all school district issues, without fear of having to defend themselves in an executive session.

The media represents the people of this community, asking questions and expecting answers on issues that an individual member of the public may not get answered.

If the message to the media is being controlled, modified and prepared by the school district, is the public next? Will you be permitted to expect an answer from your elected official, or will they have to seek the approval elsewhere before responding?

This procedure amounts to little more than a control issue and, frankly, stems from this flawed thinking: Kirkeby said board members have a right to their opinions but they should support the majority view on issues.

Really? Why is that? Board members should be permitted to have independent opinions and if they disagree with a decision by the district, they should say so - they are not required to fall in line and become rubber stamps.

If board members approve this procedure, then the guise of them being elected officials who report to the voters will be shredded.

Board members must be permitted to have opinions that are contrary to the school district, and to be allowed to express those opinions.

The voters who put them in office expect their representatives to be the checks and balances for the taxpayers.

And not a spokesperson for the school district.