By Kim McDarison

Community members who were unsuccessful during Thursday’s special meeting after waiting several hours to address members of the Whitewater Unified School District Board of Education got their chance Monday during the board’s regularly scheduled monthly meeting.

Both meetings were held in the library at the Whitewater High School.

Board of Education President Larry Kachel noted on Thursday and again Monday that special closed session meetings held by the school board typically do not allow opportunities for members of the public to speak. In Thursday’s case, he said, the special closed session meeting did not list public comments on the meeting’s agenda, and therefore, an opportunity could not be offered to members of the public.

Some 40 members of the public arrived Thursday, hoping to address the board during an open session portion of the meeting before it moved into another room to conduct its closed session.

The board held its closed session special meeting to discuss a dispute between the board, the superintendent and the board’s vice president. The three entities have each retained an attorney to guide them in discussions.

Following the board’s departure, many continued to wait for its return from closed session, which lasted more than three hours. Some 20 residents remained in the high school library when the board returned and reconvened briefly in open session. The residents were not afforded an opportunity to speak before the board adjourned its special meeting, with many expressing frustration as board members left their seats at the dais.

Kachel apologized Monday to meeting attendees who also attended Thursday’s meeting and, he said, may have misunderstood the relationship between the agenda and public comments.

An earlier story about Thursday’s special board of education meeting is here: https://whitewaterwise.com/school-board-authorizes-counsel-to-respond-and-defend-claims-made-against-district-board/ .

Monday’s public comments

With some 50 members of the public in attendance Monday, Kachel opened the floor to public comments, at which time, he said, six members of the audience had filled out forms, making their desire to speak known to the board.

While each speaker was allotted three minutes, the evening’s first speaker, Mike Maas, spoke for approximately 12 minutes, with subsequent speakers yielding their time, allowing Maas to pose several questions to the board.

Maas told board members that querying them about policies and their proper use was “not my comfort zone,” further noting that his intention was to find clarity for himself and the community.

“I don’t like being here, but after so many people reached out to me on Thursday, I felt compelled to keep talking and keep asking questions, and try to get some answers,” Maas said.

He described recent events as an “uproar in the district,” adding: “Obviously, it’s never a good look when we have multiple attorneys working against each other in consideration of our district.” 

Directing questions to Kachel, Maas said: “A couple of weeks ago you released a collaborative joint statement regarding allegations that were made against the district. In that statement, you said that you fully investigated the allegations and that you deemed no violation.”

Maas asked if the district’s attorney, Brian Waterman, also had investigated the allegations.

Kachel said he and Waterman had “fully investigated,” but he could not say anything further about the subject because the discussion had occurred in a closed session. 

“I can tell you that it was definitely reviewed in front of the board attorney,” Kachel said.

Maas next referenced a portion of the collaborative statement released by the district in which Kachel was said to agree with the district’s Superintendent Caroline Pate-Hefty that some portions of the policy that governed activities associated with contractual approval were “vague.”

The full statement from the superintendent and school board president is here: https://whitewaterwise.com/commentary-allegations-made-during-mondays-school-board-meeting-are-inaccurate-school-board-president-superintendent-say/.

He asked: “Could you tell me what policy you were referring to?”

Kachel said the policy in question was one that the board had been discussing just prior to Monday’s meeting in a meeting with the board’s Policy Review Committee, citing two policies: 221.1 and 222.1.  

Citing the board’s policy 222.1, Maas said, he believed the policy was “pretty clear.”

He continued: “It clearly states who it applies to: director of business services, buildings and grounds, technology, curriculum instruction, pupil services, principals, associate principals, athletic director.”

He said the policy states circumstances under which school board administrators enter into written contracts, establish salaries and benefits, and other conditions of employment.

Additionally, Maas said, the policy stipulated that “the board will determine administrator compensation in consultation with the superintendent and renewal and non-renewal of administrative contracts will be according to statutory provisions.”

He asked Kachel: “Could you elaborate a little bit on where you feel that’s vague?” 

Kachel responded saying: “I cannot. We’re dealing with this in closed session. We’ve had our first closed session meeting.”

Maas cited the policy as among materials of a “public nature,” adding:  “I’m not asking about the investigation. I want to know how this policy,” He asked again, what about the policy the board president thought was vague.

He invited other board members to answer his questions, saying: “because he (Kachel) said the board agrees.”

“I don’t believe I said that,” Kachel said.

Maas said he could produce the quote he was referencing. 

Said Kachel: “Ok, we’re getting way too much in detail and you’ve got, you know, 10 seconds left, but we are dealing with this in closed session.” 

Maas said the next two speakers who had signed up to comment were “his folks,” whom, he noted, were each in agreement to donate their three-minute time allotments to him.

After a brief consideration about whether that was within the scope of the rules, the board allowed Maas to continue.

Maas next directed his questions to Pate-Hefty. Citing an earlier statement reported by WhitewaterWise from the superintendent’s attorney in an email to board Vice President Maryann Zimmerman, he asked: “after your attorney said you had board approval by three members, might I ask who those three members were?” 

A story including the attorney’s statement is here: https://whitewaterwise.com/superintendent-through-a-hired-attorney-seeks-retraction-from-school-board-vice-president-i-stand-by-what-i-said-vice-president-says/. 

The superintendent responded, saying: “I don’t answer questions in public comments.”

Said Kachel: “In public comments, we’re really very limited.” He added: “we’re trying to work out clarification in closed session.” 

Maas next sought clarification about the definition of “legally in session,” asking: “what does that mean?”

Kachel asked if he was referencing an open or closed session. 

Maas said he was looking for a definition of the phrase as it applied to both.

He asked: “So right now, are we in legal session?”

Kachel said yes.

Maas continued: “When you adjourn and go home tonight, are you … out of legal session? Are you in session or no?” 

Said Kachel: “We’re not.” 

Said Maas: “Ok, so individual board members of the school board have authority to act only when the board is legally in session. So I’m wondering how Dr. Pate-Hefty got authority to make an offer. And I’m assuming the board wasn’t legally in session. Otherwise that would take four people to make a majority. See where I’m going?”

With no response provided to his question, Maas said that he was aware, as Kachel had earlier noted, that the board could not respond to his questions posed in public comments.

He said he would use the platform to “just keep talking,” saying: “I’m just wondering how we can run with authority from three people, which does not constitute a majority happening in open session, which would be public information. If you could tell me what meeting you got that authority at, I’d be happy to go back and look, because it’s gonna be recorded and I’ll just look myself.” 

Said Kachel: “I’m gonna make just one statement on it, ok? and hopefully it’ll cover a lot of you people that might be along the same lines. The allegations that you’re making …”

Said Maas: “I didn’t make any allegations.” 

Kachel continued: “Was done by a prior board.”

He said the board was working on “finding out what happened.”

Kachel added: “We (the board) decided that we need to — for the future — we need to fix this, and that’s what we’ve been working on.”

He again stated that the discussions were being held in closed session meetings and therefore he could not discuss the details of the conversations board members were having. 

Said Maas: “I can’t just cherry pick three people to ask permission and then go run with it and pretend that I have permission. Does that make sense? Can anybody give me any insight?” 

Addressing Maas, Kachel said: “Michael, I think we gotta move on. I get your point.”

He said the board would work on clarifying the matter during its closed sessions.

With another three minutes expiring, several members of the public who had signed up to speak offered to yield their time to Maas.

Maas continued: “So, going back, I know you can’t answer questions, but the question I have is when the offer was made, the offer that’s regarding these allegations, did the board determine the compensation or not? Don’t answer, I’m just asking my questions and you can clarify at a later date once you figure out the new policy and you feel comfortable (answering).

“So I wanna know: Did the board determine the compensation, like policy 222.1 states? And if not, I would say that’s a violation of school board policy. Did three board members give authority while the board was not in session? That’s not legal. I’d like that clarified. And did Dr. Pate-Hefty run with illegal authorization? I have to admit she has a PhD. I know she’s a smart woman. I can’t imagine that she’d run with illegal authorization, but every time I ask questions, all I hear is ‘I can’t comment.’ That doesn’t help clear up anything.” 

Said Kachel: “And you also understand that we’re in the middle of potentially being sued …”

Said Maas: “You made your bed; you guys lie in it, that’s not me. I’m just trying to get clarification for my town.

“The ironic thing is, I come in this building and I see the posters for ‘Our Town,’ right? The play that our kids are putting on. Well, you know what? This is our town. It is time we take it back.” 

District resident Geoff Hale next came to the podium.

Reading from a prepared statement, he said: “It is an honor and a privilege to serve on a board. When you all sought to be elected to this board, you must have realized the potential for controversy. The actions taken by the three school board members last Thursday to walk out of the room while (district resident Henri) Kinson was speaking disgraced the position … and were an embarrassment to our community. It’s the truth I’m after, and the truth never harmed anyone.

“What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance.” He attributed the quote to Marcus Aurelius.

He called the superintendent “famous” for “quelling controversy,” by “ducking for cover when the heat’s turned up, especially if she’s the one pouring gasoline on the fire.”

He admonished the superintendent for her absence during Thursday’s meeting, asking: “Where was Caroline Pate-Hefty? The accuser never showed up for the trial.” 

Kachel interrupted Hale, saying: “Let me stop you there. There was no trial. There was a discussion.”

Hale continued: “Over 40 concerned Whitewater citizens turned out to help defend Zimmerman at this special school board meeting, only to have the school board retreat into a closed meeting for nearly four hours in hopes of reconvening to an extinguished fire. What sort of superintendent fails to show up when the temperature is rising? Seems to be a pattern of unbecoming behavior. Here, our superintendent holds a long history of prosecution and retaliation, and running for cover. With prosecution and retaliation, she wins silence.”

Hale cited past event, during which, he claimed, students organized a “protest” at the district’s central office in defense of a teacher who was terminated. 

“To dodge the heat of a demonstration, our superintendent simply closed down the administration building for the day,” he said.

Additionally, he listed several former school district employees whom he said were “intimidated” while serving in their respective roles. His list included former building principals, and Zimmerman, among others. 

Hale said that autocratic rule “degrades the morale and trust of your employees, while spiraling the organization to fail.”

He continued: “Record low morale, plus record low test scores, plus record loss of great teachers, plus record loss of good students equals failed leadership.”

Kachel told those in attendance that special closed session meetings typically do not offer opportunities for public comment.

Referencing Thursday’s meeting, he said: “Those of you that came without knowing that, I apologize, but it was not on the agenda for that. I’ve been on the board for three years and I don’t remember a closed meeting of that type where there was.”

Further, he stressed, that the closed session on Thursday was not a “trial of Maryann Zimmerman. It was a discussion. And I just want you all to also know, I’ve been hearing some rumors going around, the board does not have the ability to fire another board member.” 

“Just censure,” Zimmerman interjected. 

“Well censure, it does have that ability, but that was — we’re getting into more detail on it,” Kachel said.

District resident Nick Baldwin, arriving at the podium, said he has two children in the district and has lived in the area his whole life.

“I’ve been working at another school district for about 17 years. Here in Whitewater, we’re a community centered around our kids. Many people in this room and those watching at home received a great education in our schools. That education taught us what it was like to have good staff in our classrooms and transparency in our district office. Somewhere along the way we lost the transparency part, and have had a heck of a time keeping those good staff around. Your community wants to help you, school board,” he said, addressing the seated members. 

He continued: “There are tools in your shops right now that were donated by myself and other people in this room when the shop budgets were meager. Nowadays, the budgets are increased, and you’re getting donations from businesses week after week, and citizens that are trying to help these programs. And what happens when we speak out about what we see as a perceived fault in our district? We get stonewalled; we get a press release that claims we internally investigated — nothing to see here; pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

“That’s the best case scenario. The first time I spoke to this board, I got a free, disparaging email sent to the superintendent of my school district where I work, courtesy of this one. Imagine how it might feel to be a teacher in Whitewater school district and wanna speak up.

“Everyone here can see right through insincere promises and half truths, even right through half words. If that’s the transparency you’re going for, I think you’ve achieved it.” 

Chuck Mills, a district resident, said he was disappointed.

“We’re all disappointed and we’re multiplying. We just want to know what’s going on around here,” he said.

He said the community was “captivated” and “hooked” by the board’s recent behaviors. 

“You’re gonna have to come up with something sooner or later here. You can’t just keep stonewalling us. Number one, we’re gonna get you outta here one way or another, right? I mean it can’t stay like this. There’s avenues for doing that. I’m not particularly good at it, but I’m sure we could recall some people. We can fire a superintendent, that’s for sure. I don’t think she’s doing our system, our school system, any good. We need to start over.”