School Board Member Reprimanded for Disclosing Information Deemed Confidential

The Loudoun County School Board on Tuesday night issued a formal reprimand to a member who was found to have disclosed on social media confidential information presented by the division attorney during a closed meeting.

Following a closed session to discuss the issue, the School Board voted unanimously to affirm that the information disclosed was subject to attorney-client privilege and should remain confidential.

In a separate motion, members voted 6-2-1 to publicly reprimand Beth Barts (Leesburg) for the violation of board rules. Denise Corbo (At Large) and John Beatty (Catoctin) opposed that action.

Barts declined to participate in the closed meeting.

In a Facebook post following the vote, Barts wrote, “I accept the reprimand they issued to me while I remain committed to continuing to be transparent and open on social media when to comes to the greater good and safety of our community including all staff and students.”

She added, “Please note—A reprimand is “an official rebuke”. It has no impact on voting privileges or my standing as an elected representative. Only my constituents can remove me as a representative. Despite the fact that I feel discouraged at times due to my lack of successful advocacy, I hope you will still allow me to represent you as we get through this coming winter together. I have no doubt at the end of my journey many years from now, I will look back on this as one of my most challenging times not just as an elected official but as a community advocate, friend and neighbor.” 

10 thoughts on “School Board Member Reprimanded for Disclosing Information Deemed Confidential

  • 2020-11-18 at 1:23 pm
    Permalink

    There is an ongoing effort to have her recalled, so hopefully she’s wrong regarding her “service” will end years from now.

  • 2020-11-18 at 2:41 pm
    Permalink

    Doesn’t Barts behavior trigger her removal? The school board is hot on triggers.

    Either way, she has failed Loudoun voters.

  • 2020-11-18 at 3:17 pm
    Permalink

    Ummm, because Attorney-Client information is privileged,and just cause Ms. Bart’s violated that doesn’t mean the press should as well.

  • 2020-11-18 at 9:12 pm
    Permalink

    It gets left out because it is subject to attorney-client privilege. That’s the whole point lol.

    • 2020-11-19 at 12:45 pm
      Permalink

      Ravenclaw, newspapers don’t have to comply to attorney-client privilege. 1st Ammendment trumps attorney-client privilege.

  • 2020-11-19 at 11:11 am
    Permalink

    If she posted it, it’s in the public domain. That ship done sailed. The First Amendment covers journalist on such matters. What did she say? This isn’t hard.

  • 2020-11-19 at 6:51 pm
    Permalink

    This is apparently what happens when the entire school board leaves the chore of managing the school system under the law (state statute 22.1-79) and sets off to resolve tabloid quality issues of no educational significance. Has anyone even asked if they read and understand what the law expects of the board? Over my 8 years on the school board I had plenty of constituents tell me they didn’t completely agree with a position I took on the board but I NEVER had to be told that my actions were unrelated to educating 10’s of thousands of children from Loudoun neighborhoods. I hope parents realize this kind of off color stuff happens when the electorate does not show up to vote in a local election. A totally new board is hopefully what we see in three years as this one seems not to function very well in my opinion.
    🙂

    • 2020-11-20 at 1:16 pm
      Permalink

      People showed up to vote. They just didn’t show up to vote for you.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: