Formal Complaint to the Board from Parents, September 2025 & Board Response
Description of Complaint:
At the September 8th school board meeting, it came to our attention that the BEA had requested an agenda item for the 9/8 meeting to discuss teachers’ concerns about recent reassignments and negative interactions with the administration, and that the Board Chard had denied their request for the agenda item. The were told to use the public comment period instead if they had input to share. The agenda on 9/8 then included close to an hour of presentations by the administration, where multiple times the Superintendent and Principals acknowledged the need for improved communication and collaboration with teachers. The meeting then went to public comment where members of the BEA had a total of six minutes to speak. They used that time to point out they hypocrisy that had just occurred in the meeting, and they described the poor communication they had received from the Board Chair. They also requested an open public work session with the Board to discuss these issues within the next two weeks.
Multiple parents have had a similar experience with the Board Chair (formerly AJ Kimball, now Angela Cardas): our requests for agenda items to discuss concerns about the Superintendent’s leadership have been denied, and at times the Board has failed to respond to our emails altogether or the response has been very delayed or vague. It is unacceptable, unprofessional and unethical for the board to deny legitimate requests for this important dialogue to occur at public board meetings and to stonewall teachers and constituents.
The problem is heightened by the fact that the current Board Chair is a close friend of the Superintendent, a conflict of interest that could interfere with the Chair’s ability to be an objective overseer of the Superintendent. This conflict of interest erodes trust. The Board Chair’s obstruction of genuine dialogue between teachers, the public and the administration undermines the district’s claims that they are committed to improved communication and collaboration.
All of this is having a negative impact on teacher morale, district culture, and the educational experience of our children.
Who Should You Talk To, Evidence to Consider:
We recommend you talk to the impacted parties named in this complaint: teachers, parents, and School Board constituents who were present at the September 8th meeting.
We request the following solution:
1. The Board must approve the public work session that the BEA requested during their public comment at the September 8th board meeting on the exact terms they specified (the meeting must be open to the public, as required by public meeting law, and occur within two weeks of the request, by September 22nd).
2. Board members Angela Cardas and Briana Hutchens must recuse themselves from any deliberations or votes pertaining to the superintendent due to the conflict of interest posed by their close friendship with Ms. Schmerer.
3. We request the board adopt a policy regarding email response time to the public. The numerous instances in which the Board Chair has taken an exceedingly long time to reply (over a week or more, and in some cases never), is disrespectful of constituents and a neglect of the basic duties of the Board Chair.
Board Response October 15, 2025:
Below is the board response to the complaint you filed on September 22, 2025. Please forward to the co-complainants.
Executive session 10/13/25
Complaint meeting conducted by Martha Lane
Complainants - Amber Berg, Zoe Dasurra, Ann Kellogg, Anna Cruz, Heather Kellogg, Nia Sopiwnik Stewart, Cory Stewart, Jessica Markham-Brink, Lauren Blichfeldt
Complaint: Board Chair denied a request for an agenda item. Request for open public work session also denied.
Response: With pending complaints, grievances and potential litigation, it was advised by the OSBA attorney that we do not have a session in which the board would be responding to allegations in a live, public manner. The request for an agenda item was responded to with a suggestion of an intermediary step of a meeting with up to three members of the board, the superintendent, and the BEA, which was denied.
Complaint:
Delays of response to emails: The specific delay of one week was within days of the transfer of board chair to Ms. Cardas and a new email system put into place as a response to email usage. It also coincided with days out of office for the advising attorney.
Resolution: Ms. Cardas has now put into place auto responses for out of office times, and the school board email is now the exclusive email for all board business, so that emails are not lost within personal and business correspondence. Ms Cardas states that she has reviewed all emails written to her directly, and at this time the only emails not responded to are to anonymous senders. There is no requirement for email response.
Complaint: "close friendship" between board members and the Superintendent.
Response: Conflict of interest has not been proven. Specifically a conflict of interest is defined by the OSBA as "financial, personal or family gain or prestige" - none of these are the case. Board members Angela Cardas and Briana Hutchens affirm that their reviews of Ms. Schmerer are more critical as a result of their friendship, as demonstrated in their reviews at the most recent evaluation.
Resolution: The complainants are encouraged to meet with the superintendent and up to three board members to address any further concerns.