Vollmer may overreach, but so does the sanction

Stories raising issues about when it may be appropriate for public officials to engage in the public process outside their core duties — and when that may seem disruptive, political, intimidating or uncomfortable — broke almost simultaneously in Portland and McMinnville earlier this week.

In Portland, the coverage was triggered by uniformed, on-duty police officers showing up for town halls hosted by councilors assuming, in The Oregonian’s assessment, “emerging roles as critics of the Police Bureau.”

The visits led Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney to ask that henceforth, officers be asked to check in first with the host councilor, and Chief Bob Day assented.

In McMinnville, the impetus was school board veteran Larry Vollmer’s penchant for dropping in on classes and programs on a regular basis to get a first-hand look — a hallmark of his 19 years of board service and noted selling point in a 2022 re-election campaign netting him a new four-year term.

Recent fallout from unannounced visits at Wascher Elementary led Superintendent Debbie Brockett to formally advise him, “From now on, you are not permitted to visit any school in the district unless you receive an invitation directly from the principal.”

In Portland, officer engagement in community forums and events has been strongly encouraged under the city’s community policing program, the goal being to build bridges, break down barriers, dispel stereotypes and foster good will.

The question is, did an unusually large showing of uniformed officers at forums hosted by critics cross the line? Did it have a chilling rather than warming effect, undercutting the core intent in order to deliver a political message?

In McMinnville, board member engagement in school forums and events has been strongly encouraged as well, for like reasons. In fact, members have long been rotating assignments to local schools, gradually exposing them to all the district’s schools over time.

However, Vollmer has, from the outset of his service, paid more visits to more schools than fellow members. And he has always seen fit to expand his visits beyond his rotating complement of assigned schools.

In her Feb. 24 directive, belatedly brought to light by rumbling in the ranks that reached the ears of a reporter, Brockett cited past issues at Buel Elementary as a supporting factor.

The plain fact is, it can be both intimidating and disrupting to the presenter when an authority figure shows up unannounced at his or her carefully choreographed presentation. That’s true even if such figure arrives unarmed, in plain clothes, unaccompanied by backup.

It can also give the presenter pause about trying to fend off the unwanted visit at the time or sending a formal complaint winging up the ranks afterward. The unequal power dynamic can serve to unfairly tip the scale.

For those reasons, we think Pirtle-Guiney acted prudently in her request for advance notice for future police visits in Portland, as did Day in granting it. We are less taken with Brockett’s directive to a long-serving, highly dedicated board member that he obtain invitation “directly from the principal” for any future school visits.

The Portland duo applied a change in approach to an entire class of public officials and employers on an across-the-board basis, providing equal justice for all. Brockett applied a severely restrictive sanction on a single board member, leaving the rules as relaxed as ever for the rest.

We also question Brockett’s authority over elected board members who collectively serve as her boss. Members of our editorial board have each spent decades in the news business without hearing of a superintendent claiming such authority.

It seems to us this matter could have been settled quietly and privately behind the scenes on a voluntary consent basis, or, barring that, by board adoption by majority vote of new rules applying equally to all.

Perhaps the thought was that the Vollmer directive would never come to public light, but in our experience, that rarely proves the case. Once at least two people know something, the old saying goes, it’s no longer a secret. And when it comes to public policy, transparency should remain the immutable rule anyway.