The superintendent of the Pleasant Valley School District, James Konrad, has proposed basically cutting in half the time residents have to address the board of education at its monthly meetings, and the suggestion hasn’t gone down well among some board members and the public.

The board is likely to vote on this proposal when it next meets on Thursday, and I am recommending that the idea is rejected and that the current policy remain in place.

Konrad floated the streamlined comment policy at the last board meeting in July, and it was met with mostly negative reaction. Rightfully so. When efforts are made to reduce public input, it should be a matter of concern.

Let’s understand: It’s not as if Konrad is suggesting muzzling the public, although some might argue that it boils down to a form of muzzling. As policies to allow public comment at board meetings go, Pleasant Valley’s are among the most generous I have encountered in my many years of covering and observing board of education meetings in our area.

Residents are given one hour at the beginning of the meeting to discuss agenda items only and one hour at the end of the meeting to comment on non-agenda items. Each person has a three-minute time limit. If they have not finished their comments, and after everyone else who wants to comment has been heard, the person is allowed to continue their comments.

Konrad’s proposal would cut the public comment time to 30 minutes - both before and after the agenda items are considered. It retains the three-minute time limit but would now restrict a person to keep comments to one topic, and if they run out of their time allotment, they would not be able to return to the podium even if the time given to public comment is not all used up.

On the face of it, Konrad’s recommendations are praiseworthy to try to streamline meetings that sometimes can be ungodly long. He pointed out with additions to the monthly meetings, such as commendations and other features which showcase the good work being done in the district, meetings can get to be unwieldy. He also is concerned that the current system of public comment is sometimes dominated by a few residents who could be charitably characterized as “gadflies” - people who annoy others by persistent criticism.

Admittedly, school officials must walk a narrow line when it comes to advocating for a well-run public meeting, yet, at the same time, allowing the public which pays the bills to have its say.

When a generous policy is in place, as it is now in the Brodheadsville-based district, there are going to be some downsides, especially when the aforementioned gadflies want to chime in about multiple subjects and dominate the discussion. As I have said so often: This is a price paid - and, in my view, a small one - for fostering open communication and transparency.

From a school director’s standpoint, in considering whether to seek the thankless unpaid position, the person is often one who wants to give back to his or her community, not understanding that there are going to be critics who don’t care that they are volunteering their time and expertise. These board members weren’t expecting harsh finger-pointing, sometimes totally unwarranted, but it goes with the territory.

One of the practical problems with Konrad’s proposal is that when you take away portions of a policy already in effect that gives the public a platform, residents don’t like it and are inclined to think that something fishy is behind the move.

Konrad stressed that if the new policy takes effect, he is still willing to meet with residents in his office and is accessible by phone and email to discuss any issue or topic.

As admirable as this might be, nothing is a substitute for allowing someone to present issues and topics in an open forum such as a school board, borough council or township supervisor meeting.

The challenge for officials is to balance the factors involved in allowing public comment by creating a policy that encourages engagement while ensuring effective governance. Konrad maintains that this is what he is trying to do with his recommendation, but the perception is that, if adopted, the proposed policy change would take away something the public has and wants.

By BRUCE FRASSINELLI|tneditor@tnonline.com

The foregoing opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or Times News LLC.