When the Butler School Board considered a request by Jim Keffalas, a district resident, for additional information related to votes by the board, the district sought the advice of a lawyer for the Pennsylvania School Boards Association. Michael Levin, association general counsel, told the board in a letter read at Monday’s meeting that it had no legal obligation to provide the additional documents or public comment periods before votes that Keffalas has requested.

Fine. Butler’s board is complying with the law.

But why not go further than the law requires? Why not err on the side of openness and transparency?

Providing citizens with some additional material beyond a basic agenda for the meetings would be helpful and not impose a burden on the board or administration. The material could be made available before the meeting and also could be posted on the district’s website.

Keffalas, who is running for a seat on the board, had also asked that the board provide public comment time before each vote is taken. While that would be welcome in an ideal world where public input is paramount, it might pose practical problems when it comes to running board meetings efficiently.

It would be nice if citizens could offer their thoughts on each and every issue before the board votes. It would also be nice if the public was privy to the full board, or committee, discussions on every issue. But that level of involvement is simply not practical. Board members are elected as representatives of the public, so, in theory, the public is involved in the decision-making process.

Still, the Butler board could opt to go further than the law requires. Why not? There should be nothing to hide.

It might be possible to provide the public with a brief summary, before each meeting, of the issues that are scheduled for a vote. The current agenda provided to the public is quite minimal, amounting to a simple outline. For most issues, additional background material could be provided.

The practicalities of running a meeting would not permit public comments before each vote. But when a particularly controversial issue is being voted on, the board could make an exception and provide for additional public comment time.

And on the topic of controversial issues, the board should resist the urge to slide those issues through quickly in hopes of minimizing public involvement. Whether it is a major curriculum change, the possible imposition of student activity fees or consideration of a lease of school property for natural gas exploration, the public should be heard. The board will decide what it thinks is best, but the public should be kept well informed of the pros and cons of the issue — and should be allowed to voice its concerns.

While at times it might be inconvenient or create some extra work, the Butler School Board should opt for more transparency, exceeding the legal minimum whenever practical. All public agencies, whether school boards, borough councils, township supervisors, county boards of commissioners, the state Legislature or Congress, should all resist the temptation of secrecy.

Keeping the public informed when dealing with public dollars and public policy is essential, even if it’s not always convenient. The board should make some efforts to move in the direction of more transparency and more information-sharing.