Two months ago the Cobb grand jury came down hard on the county school board for severely limiting "open and public debate of school policy decisions prior to vote and implementation."

Now the grand jury has hammered the school board in another presentment, finding "serious issues/bad management practices" and "an environment of intimidation and 'virtual fear'" of job losses by employees in the district's transportation department.

Two blistering grand jury presentments in two months - what a record for a school board to set.

After the first rapping by the grand jury, school board chairwoman Lynnda Crowder-Eagle thanked the jury.

Then district legal counsel Glenn Brock spoke dismissively of the matter as "not sworn testimony" but rather "more conversation." To cap off his legal advice - which costs the taxpayers $2 million a year - he read "sporadically" from grand jury recommendations ranging from tax assessor to probate court and the medical examiner's office.

The board majority's refusal to listen - to parents, teachers, bus drivers, citizens - and its failure to deal with substantive issues have brought about this sad state of affairs.

The upshot is that some board members are spending more time in the courtroom than in the boardroom, not to mention the classroom.

It took a lawsuit by citizens to force the board to obey the law after member John Crooks put the controversial cell tower at Eastvalley Elementary on the agenda without advance notice as required by state law. As a result, Crooks is now fighting a recall effort.

Then there's the lawsuit against the district's plan to use SPLOST money to install artificial turf at all Cobb high school athletic fields.

The board is spending tax money right and left to defend itself against litigation, most of which could have been avoided by the board simply following the law.

Case in point: The Open Meetings Act requires agenda items to be posted "as far in advance of the meeting as reasonably possible" and "at a minimum, at some time during the two-week period immediately prior to the meeting."

A high school dropout can understand that.

And where has district legal counsel Brock been during the legal missteps? Unfortunately, it seems his principal duty at meetings is as timekeeper to make certain that citizens don't exceed their allotted few minutes during the public comment period.

There are substantial legal issues in play. The board needs solid legal counsel and guidance - which should have prevented the advance-notice violation at the least.

On the question of the artificial turf, the board needs to pin Brock down: What are the chances of winning this case? A solid answer based on the law and case law would give the board the guidance it needs.

Meanwhile, these school board members have tons of major issues on their plate - budget cuts, student achievement, transportation problems - but they are bogged down in court when they should be working on these problems.

dmckee9613@aol.com