The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland has taken the Somerset County Board of Education to court, accusing the small Eastern Shore district of keeping the public in the dark about some of its biggest recent decisions. In a lawsuit filed yesterday, the group asks a judge to force the release of hundreds of public records it says the board has withheld and to award attorneys' fees if it wins.
The complaint says the board has wrapped major calls in secrecy, including the departure of the superintendent, the hiring of new legal counsel, and the rejection of a new English curriculum. According to the filing, that secrecy has allegedly been used to expand the board's power and avoid accountability. The case was filed in Baltimore City Circuit Court, where the ACLU is asking a judge to order the disclosure of the records at issue.
As reported by The Baltimore Banner, the ACLU says the board denied requests for "hundreds of documents" under the Maryland Public Information Act and refused to release a separation agreement that would show how much the district paid to part ways with former Superintendent Dr. Ava Tasker-Mitchell. The outlet noted that the board fired Tasker-Mitchell one year into a four-year contract, then had to reinstate her after state education officials found the district had not followed proper procedures. The lawsuit names board chair Matthew Lankford and the Somerset County school board as defendants.
What the ACLU requested
The ACLU's formal Maryland Public Information Act request, which it attached to the lawsuit, lays out dozens of categories of records it wanted to see. The group asked for emails, agendas, and minutes related to the board's rejection of a Maryland State Department of Education-endorsed English Language Arts curriculum, as well as communications about Policy 500-19 on library materials.
The request also seeks documents tied to the firing of the district's previous law firm and the hiring of Schifanelli Law, along with both physical files and electronic communications. That includes internal emails and memoranda involving the attempted termination and separation of Superintendent Tasker-Mitchell. As outlined in the request from ACLU of Maryland, the civil liberties group is pressing for records that would show who made key decisions and why.
Decisions at issue
Court papers and local reporting trace the records fight back to a series of board moves that critics say reshaped access to classroom materials and shifted power inside the district. Among them are the board's push to review every book purchase, an effort to assert tighter control over library content, and a July vote to reject a staff-backed English Language Arts curriculum.
The Baltimore Banner reported that county commissioners later awarded the school system $1,000,000 to keep librarians employed after the board attempted layoffs. The outlet also noted that Tasker-Mitchell's contract promised a 3 percent raise each year, which would have totaled roughly $639,000 for the remaining term if she had stayed. Those episodes form the backbone of the ACLU's claim that secrecy has masked decisions that directly affect students and public dollars.
State watchdog has flagged problems
The Maryland Office of the Inspector General for Education has already taken a hard look at some of the same issues, scrutinizing the board's handling of legal contracts and procurement. The watchdog warned that certain actions could put state grant funding at risk.
According to local coverage, the inspector general concluded that the board did not follow proper procedures when it changed legal counsel and raised concerns about how the board handled open-meeting and procurement rules. WBOC detailed the inspector general's findings and the dispute that followed.
Board response and next steps
The board and its attorneys have pushed back on multiple fronts. They say they complied with document requests and reject the inspector general's legal analysis. In their view, statewide procurement rules do not apply to local school boards in the way the watchdog suggested.
Board counsel has argued that parts of the inspector general's report are legally flawed, setting up a sharp disagreement over who is reading the law correctly. WMDT reported on the board's rebuttal and the broader legal battle that is now headed from meeting rooms to a courtroom.
Legal stakes
In this new lawsuit, the ACLU is asking a judge to apply the Maryland Public Information Act's presumption in favor of disclosure, compel the board to produce the requested records, and award attorneys' fees if the court finds violations. Maryland courts and legal commentary instruct that the MPIA should be interpreted to favor public inspection of records, a standard that appears in precedent and analysis of the statute.
For readers who want to dig into how that standard has been interpreted, Justia provides background on Maryland case law. With the ACLU's filing, the long-running transparency fight in Somerset County is set to become a test of how open a small Eastern Shore school district must be when the public comes asking for answers.
