Sweet Home School Board members chose a new board member Monday night, Sept. 8, then watched another of their members resign following a clamorous discussion of the board’s recent actions regarding alleged illegal meeting activity.
Board members interviewed four candidates to fill the position vacated after the resignation in late July by newly elected member Erin Barstad. They chose former district teacher and administrator Chris Hiaasen to fill the at large position.
After electing new officers to fill vacancies that remained from their Aug. 11 meeting, board members launched into a review of the status of complaints filed with the district regarding alleged serial meetings held by several board members in July that resulted in the scheduling, and then cancellation, of a special meeting to consider the termination of Supt. Terry Martin.
After that status discussion became rancorous, with board members launching accusations of slander and poor meeting management, they took a break and former Board Chair Floyd Neuschwander, who represented Cascadia on the board, announced that he was resigning and walked out of the board chambers.
New Board Member Elected
Board Member Amanda Carter was not present for the meeting, but Chairman Mike Adams, and directors Dale Keene, Rachel Maynard, Neuschwander Dustin Nichol, Jenna Northern and Mary Speck participated in the choice by voting in two rounds of written secret ballots that resulted in Hiaasen’s finishing with the most votes.
The other candidates for the open seat were Matthew Bechtel, Mindy Cummings and Jason Redick. The board spent 30 minutes hearing from them before voting to fill the empty seat.
Bechtel said he moved to Sweet Home in January of 2021, when he “hit the ground running,” quickly joining the city Park and Tree Committee and the city Budget Committee, as well as serving as an officer at the Elks Lodge, director of the food pantry at Hope Church, board member for the Mrs. Claus Workshop, and volunteering with the Beautification Committee. He said he plans to join the Rotary Club as well in the near future.
“I love Sweet Home so much and I’m committed to the future of it,” he said. “I want to do my part to help bring up our next generation.”
Cummings said she has lived in Sweet Home about 19 years and has raised her children here, including one still in high school. She has been a swimming official and served as president of her HOA – “everybody’s favorite,” she added, drawing chuckles from the packed chambers. She has worked at the Linn County Assessor’s Office for 17 years, adding “again, that makes me very popular with people.”
She said that with one student left at home, she has more time on her hands and is looking for ways to serve in the community.
Hiaasen noted that she was born and raised in Sweet Home and graduated from Sweet Home High School, and returned after 30 years away to teach and then serve as an administrator at her alma mater. After four years of retirement, she said, she’s “looking for more ways to get involved, outside of traveling.” She said she drives for Meals on Wheels and volunteers at her church.
“I thought this would be a good way to get back into the education field in a different way than I have,” she said.
Redick said he has lived in Sweet Home for about 36 years, is a graduate of Sweet Home High School and is married into a family in which multiple generations are products of Sweet Home schools.
“My roots run pretty deep,” he said, adding that he has spent the last 20 years on the board, including extensive periods as chair and vice chair.
“I was looking to move on to something else, but with everything that’s been going on, I’m just here to offer my service, whatever I can do to help out.”
They were all asked the same four questions:
After the four introduced themselves, Speck noted that Bechtel, Cummings and Hiaasen had sat in with board members on a three-hour training session from the Oregon School Boards Association on board governance and ethics, covering Oregon public meetings laws and the proper process for dealing with complaints.
Board members asked the applicants four questions: the primary role of a school board member; how the district should balance student achievement, fiscal responsibility and community expectations in making decisions; how well they would work with other board members, district leadership and community members who don’t agree; and what experience and perspectives they would bring to the position that represents the entire community’s interests?
In general, all the applicants either said directly or indirectly that student achievement and wellbeing were the highest priority amid possible conflicting tensions, although it would be necessary to have input from staff and the community before making big decisions.
(To see specific responses to the questions on the district’s video recording of the meeting, visit www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIX_w6Ewa0c and begin at 19:15.)
Redick noted that board members don’t always have the capacity to gather information on their own, so they have to be reliant on staff for information and advice.
Hiaasen said that student achievement, fiscal responsibility and community expectations “actually all work together” and that staff and administrators who can “bring all that together and let Kevin (Strong, the district’s business manager) know where they feel the money needs to be used … you’re going to have a very difficult time, because what might be what might be good for your child might not be the best thing for your child and might not be the best thing for your child,” she said, pointing around the room.
“And so, it’s a huge balancing act of trying to positively impact as many students as you can in the best way that you can, instead of just targeting one group.”
She added that when people have conflicting opinions about how money should be spent, “they’re not wrong, but they’re not all right either. That is the most difficult part about balancing.”
In response to the question about working through disagreements, Redick said he was amazed by “how much conflict at the board level filters down into the schools, to kids.
“A board that fights with itself, that doesn’t get along, that doesn’t agree with things, will eventually filter down into the classroom and affect the kids and their parents.”
He noted that board policy requires that once a decision has been made, board members are required to support that decision, even if they disagree with it.
Hiassen said she has always “prided myself on being able to work with anyone, whether we agree or not.
“I think I’m very good at looking at the big picture and saying, ‘This is what the board has decided to do, this is what the community wants us to do, this is what the principals have asked us to consider.’ I think I am very good at looking at all sides of whatever issue that we’re looking at.”
After the interviews, Adams said board members would write their choices on pieces of paper, which would be tallied. After the first round, Redick and Hiassen were tied with the most votes, which eliminated Cummins and Bechtel. Hiassen received the majority of the votes on the second ballot, Adams reported.
After Hiassen was sworn in board members then elected Keene to fill the vice chair position that was vacated when a majority elected Adams in their Aug. 11 meeting to replace then-Chair Floyd Neuschwander.
Board members also elected Jenna Northern to serve as board secretary, replacing Mary Speck, who was also voted out of that position in the Aug. 11 meeting.
The votes for both positions were 6-2, with Speck and Neuschwander dissenting.
Controversy
In response to a request from Keene for an update on the status of the alleged ethics violations that had been filed with the district, Adams reported that the five people who had filed grievances with the School Board had received email responses on Aug. 15, which were also sent to the Oregon Government Ethics Committee as required by state law.
Adams said he received a call from the OGEC executive director and an investigator on Aug. 18 who informed him that “all five documents were being treated as public meetings violations, not public ethics violations.”
Adams said that timeline requirements for submitting documents had been met and that OGEC had informed him that “they weren’t going to do anything further unless the people who filed the grievances contacted them to state that they were not happy with the district’s response and requested them to investigate it.”
He added that OGEC told him that that could occur any time in the next four years.
Adams told the board that a complaint filed with the district “is kind of what gets you through the door.”
He said that on Aug. 26 he received another complaint alleging “bias and conflict of interest” but said that no board members were named. He said he told that person that OGEC investigates those types of complaints, not the school district.
He said that the complaints and the district’s response are public record.
Maynard asked if she could make a statement, then asserted that she “did not participate in a serial meeting, had no hidden agenda, and I am solely here to better our district – there is always room for improvement.”
She said there were “intimidation tactics” in the Aug. 11 meeting that were “effective.”
That launched a vigorous 40-minute conversation that at times became rancorous as some board members criticized the proceedings in the Aug. 11 meeting, eventually leading to members interrupting each other, accusations of slander, and disputes about the events of Aug. 11 and prior.
Nichol said the district should conduct an investigation to clear the matter, but Adams responded that it would be costly.
Neuschwander and Speck both complained that they were unfairly removed from their positions and Speck protested that although she was named in one of the grievances, she did not participate in a serial meeting.
She said that “if the result (of an investigation) shows we are innocent, we should be reinstated.”
“The motions that were made that evening were based on false information and resulted in the removal of two members,” she said. “Had you known the truth, I wouldn’t have lost my position, Floyd wouldn’t have lost his position and Rachel wouldn’t have had her name slandered.”
Neuschwander complained that he was removed when “I didn’t even know what was happening” and said he deserved an apology.
Responding to the complaints about slander and misinformation, Martin interjected: “I also want my name removed from the 30 news stations that said ‘The board was attempting to oust Supt. Terry Martin.’
“You want an apology? Let’s go all the way back to that. The school district doesn’t have the money to pay attorneys to do that.”
He said that an investigation could be conducted by someone who is respected from the community or from another school district.
After some more accusations about who contacted the news media, board members agreed to take a break.
At that point, Neuschwander stood up and said, “I don’t need this s–t. I submit my resignation, and walked out.
Board members voted to accept his resignation at the end of the meeting, and agreed that they needed “closure.”
“We need to agree to disagree,” Nichol said. “Otherwise, this is ridiculous.”
Northern said she was concerned about spending money on attorneys that should be going to meet students’ needs in the classroom.
“I don’t want to argue and we’re doing the same thing over and over again. That money that taxpayers paid needs to benefit the classrooms and those teachers and everything around it.”