All we get is 'educated' guess?

We’ll never know specifically why Whitefish Superintendent of Schools Kate Orozco felt compelled to recommend that popular Principal Dave Carlson be dismissed from his job.

But after an unprecedented outpouring of support for Carlson from the Whitefish High School student body, parents and the community earlier this week, we know their message was heard and thoughtfully considered.

Orozco reversed her recommendation and the Whitefish School Board voted to keep Carlson.

So what’s the take-home lesson here?

Certainly it’s a good example for our students about how effective their collective voice can be. If the outcome had been different and the board had followed through with the recommendation to oust Carlson, the students would have been deeply disappointed, but still would have known the satisfaction of taking a stand for what they believed in.

Personnel matters are messy no matter where they occur. The fact is that school boards and any number of government entities and, of course, private companies are not legally bound to release any information about why they choose not to renew an employment contract. Laws requiring confidentiality are meant to protect the privacy and to a lesser degree the reputation of the person involved.

In this case the lack of transparency about what Carlson allegedly had done wrong is ironic given the $14 million bond issue that was recently approved to build a new high school in Whitefish. That entire campaign to convince voters of the need was based on transparency, and Carlson went the distance to make sure the public understood both the deficiencies of the school building and the funding scenario that would pay for upgrades.

Citizens need transparency in their local government. If it takes changing laws to allow some measure of explanation about why someone is being removed, then so be it.

From what we’ve seen, Carlson is doing a good job for the school district. If he isn’t, then the public has a right to know why. But if he is, then he never should have been threatened with losing his job in the first place.

But with a lack of transparency, only a handful of people really have any idea what just happened.

Indeed, the speculation about what Carlson did or didn’t do to provoke the top administrator into wanting him gone continues to churn through the rumor mill. Perhaps it was a power struggle between Carlson and the teachers. Perhaps he and Orozco don’t see eye to eye. We just don’t know, and probably never will.

The decision to keep Carlson and give him tenure may be a victory for the students, but it’s likely an uncomfortable conclusion for both the administrators and the staff. It leaves a cloud over the heads of everyone — Carlson, Orozco and the school board. And it leaves the public with no way to judge whether Orozco’s initial recommendation was justified or not. More transparency is clearly needed.