Deb Ryan does not belong in elective office, at any level.
The vice chairwoman of the Pelham School Board does not believe in free speech. She does not believe in open government. And she has a demonstrably twisted concept of ethics.
Ryan, arguing last week that the board should present a unified front on proposals that go to the public for a vote, asked the board's lawyer, Dean Eggert, what could be done to punish members who violate a board policy that prohibits members from attacking positions endorsed by a majority.
This is breathtaking, and reflects on all the board members. They have no business creating a policy that seeks to muzzle those in the minority in the first place.
Ryan was upset with member Linda Mahoney, who was in the minority in voting against a new high school plan that was on the Town Meeting ballot, and who spoke against it publicly. The vote narrowly rejected the high school.
Eggert properly told her that free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment protect dissent. But he lost his way when he added, "The First Amendment will always trump ethics."
What? The ethical problem is with Ryan and the policy. What is ethical about trying to quash constitutional rights?
If Ryan had a credible sense of ethics, she would resign from the board.
But she wasn't done. She also wanted to know if the board could debate issues "off camera," again so those who watch the meetings on local television wouldn't hear any view dissenting from the majority before a vote on an issue.
For a board member to suggest such a thing, and have to be reminded once again that the law requires the meetings of public boards to be held, with limited exceptions, in public, is appalling.
Ryan's attitude reflects an all-too-common view in local politics: If you can't win an argument on its merits, silence the opposition.
The essence of democracy is debate. Yes, it can be messy. But the alternative is dictatorship. If Ryan can't accept, endorse and uphold democracy, she should get off the board.
