Lee Newcom is the Recorder of Deeds for McLean County, an elected office. In that position you would think he would know how to read.

Mr. Newcom is also a conservative activist and contributor for our good friends the Illinois Review. That might explain his partisan behavior and slight “slip-up” in skipping over a section of law that he even copied and pasted for everyone else to read in full.

In a post ostensibly lamenting the suggested Oath of Office for local school board members, Mr. Newcom begins:

Most people don’t realize that the Illinois Education Association spends a good deal of resources “educating and training” school board members that they are to be passive and not resist the efforts of teachers and adminstrators. School board members are not to think independently or think about the taxpayers or parents, but to rubber stamp as they are instructed to. This is called being “constructive.”

Actually, nothing in his post proves his claims since his post is really about the state statute covering the aforementioned Oath of Office for newly elected (or re-elected) school board members … but don’t let that stop him from doing a little hating on public schools.

He then introduced the jist of his post:

Consequently, the following is incredibly funny as it is so rediculous [sic], but sad in that it is true. It is the new oath that state law prescribes for new school board members. Sadly, this bit of idiocy was passed unanimously in both houses last year. Find it in 105 ILCS 5/10-16.5 (it’s the ‘I further swear…’ part that is rediculous [sic]):

The bit of ridiculous “idiocy” in question? Here is it is (Mr. Newcom kindly pastes the entire statute for all to read. I’ll paste only the portions relevant to Mr. Newcom’s complaint):

(105 ILCS 5/10‑16.5) Oath of office. Each school board member, before taking his or her seat on the board, shall take an oath of office in substantially the following form:

I, (name of member or successful candidate), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of member of the Board of Education (or Board of School Directors, as the case may be) of (name of school district), in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and the laws of the State of Illinois, to the best of my ability.

I further swear (or affirm) that:

I shall respect taxpayer interests by serving as a faithful protector of the school district’s assets;

I shall encourage and respect the free expression of opinion by my fellow board members and others who seek a hearing before the board, while respecting the privacy of students and employees;

I shall recognize that a board member has no legal authority as an individual and that decisions can be made only by a majority vote at a public board meeting; and

I shall abide by majority decisions of the board, while retaining the right to seek changes in such decisions through ethical and constructive channels.

(Source: P.A. 94‑881, eff. 6‑20‑06.)

What’s so bad about swearing to faithfully discharge the duties of the position, following both our state and Federal Constitutions, respecting the taxpayer interests by protecting the district’s assets, etc.? Mr. Newcom explains:

Notice that we are not to protect the taxpayers, but the school district. And you know, this will really cause those nasty public officials who ran on platforms of not respecting privacy, or majority votes, or free speech, or even wanting to not be constructive or ethical, to stop in thier [sic] tracks!

Mr. Newcom apparently forgets that the school district is made up of the taxpayers which means the district’s assets are the taxpayers’ assets. Maybe he needs to see it put a different way: respect the taxpayers by protecting their assets. It’s the same thing he as Recorder of Deeds promised to do for the taxpayers of McLean County.

Moreover, this state statute merely “suggests” that this be the Oath taken by school board members. Any given school board is free to use a different Oath so instead of complaining to the World Wide Web about the text passed by Springfield maybe he ought to go to his next school board meeting and complain to the people who can change it, his local school board. (Or, maybe Mr. Newcom really only wanted to whine about public schools as so many of his fellow partisan conservatives seem to enjoy doing.)

As for “those nasty public officials” … it’s up to the voters to decide whether or not to accept their behavior. If it is unacceptable to them (no matter what it is) any eligible citizen may run for office in opposition and any eligible citizen may vote to oust the “nasty public officials” in favor of someone whom they hope will be either less nasty or, hope of all hopes, decent (as most elected officials across the state are — you only hear about the “nasties” in the news). That’s why we live in a democracy.