The Auburn school board is embarking on a very dangerous and foolhardy track as it tries to update its ethics rules that may eventually make it easier to remove members of its own nine-member board. The reason why they have gotten to this point may be understandable; but what they are seeking to do violates the very basic principles of a representative democracy.

Clearly one of the issues leading up to this point of reviewing and amending the 2002 ethics rules is that while the district may want to speak with one voice, that hasn't been the case and, unless they go to a complete autonomous dictatorship, it won't. A government board with leaks or dissenters wanting to go to a reporter to make their case is as natural as day following night. While the board may spin that it will not prevent someone talking to the press, the press may have to be omniscient, to know where there is dissent, if a member is barred from going to the press.

It is doubtful that anyone who has ever been in the majority of a governing board has not, at one point or another, wished that a fellow board member who dissents repeatedly couldn't just be removed. It happens in city councils, state Legislatures, town and village board and, yes, even school boards. There is a natural tendency for majorities, which work well together, to want to squash minority viewpoints and limit the dissemination of opposing ideas.

It doesn't help that the person who is the chief opponent, and probable target, of these changes, is board member Joseph Leogrande, a grandstander who has a propensity to irritate. While it should not be shocking that he decided to read his dissent, distributed to the media the day before, to the board, his failure to advance his arguments within the processes of the board shows why he may be such a pariah within it.

Yet, whether you like him or not, our representative democracy has always made room for dissent. And while the majority may not like the idea of having members of the board disagree, after a vote, get used to it. Every single governing board has that problem.

If a member of the board does do something atrociously improper, the court of public opinion usually gets them to vacate their seat. If not, voters have a chance at the next election. It should not be the role of fellow board members, who may have their own reasons for wanting dissenters out of the way, to have that power. Even the Constitution, with its flaws, creates a system that is cumbersome when removing members of Congress or the president - no board of education should have an easier time.

Cosentino is a former mayor of Auburn and can be contacted at cozguytho@aol.com