Letter to the Board from Zoë Bradbury DeSurra, Parent
July 7, 2025
Dear Members of the Bandon School Board,
My name is Zoë Bradbury DeSurra and I’m writing to you with concern about current tensions within the Bandon School District between teachers and the district administration. I would like to request that this letter is forwarded to all members of the entire School Board.
I live in Langlois and have two daughters in the district: Uma, who is entering 5th grade, and Cleo, who is entering 9th grade. Both girls have gone to school in Bandon since Kindergarten and first grade, respectively, in part because my husband’s workplace is in Bandon, but primarily because we have appreciated the wonderful, supportive environment that the school district has provided our kids for the past eight years. Both of my kids have thrived in the Bandon schools; Cleo has maintained a 4.0 GPA through all four years of middle school, is a member of the jazz band, and has been a dedicated Cross Country and Track & Field athlete. Uma has excelled through Oceancrest and has also found a passion for running with the Boys and Girls Club Track program. As the owner of Valley Flora Farm, I’ve worked with the school district for the past fifteen years offering free Farm to School fieldtrips (we’ve hosted hundreds of students from every grade for spring and fall tours), and we provide discounted and donated produce to the cafeteria to support the school meals program. I have been nothing but grateful to have such a stellar public school to send our kids to – a special thing in a small, rural community – and have enjoyed contributing healthy, fresh produce and farm to school outreach to further enrich students’ experience at BSD.
I share this context with you for two reasons: 1) to assure you that I have been nothing but a cheerleader of Bandon schools to date, and 2) to acknowledge the fact that my daughters are at Bandon by way of an inter-district transfer and I am genuinely concerned that the input I am about to share with you may put them at risk for retaliation by the Superintendent, who could seek to deny their transfer for the upcoming school year.
I am being forthright about this because it summarizes the destructive climate that has come to pervade the school district in the past six months: one that is dominated by mistrust and fear of retaliation among teachers, staff, parents and students. This is the topic that I want to speak to today, despite great hesitation that it could turn my own kids into targets.
Let me back up six months and explain how I have come to this point of reaching out to the entire board.
In February of 2025 I began to hear about the teacher contract negotiations, and specifically that there was mounting tension between teachers and the district. I attended one of the meetings in April, had a few conversations with teachers, and spoke with some parents about the situation. I was sympathetic to the teachers when I learned that they are among the lowest paid on the entire Southcoast, despite the fact that Bandon has the highest cost of living. I was also concerned about reports that interactions with the Superintendent had been hostile - and even, as one teacher described it, “bizarre” - from the start of contract negotiations. The negotiation meeting I attended in person fit that description. But I also recognized that I was ignorant of the fiscal reality that BSD is facing given current federal cuts to public education. This prompted me to begin asking questions about our school budget.
Meanwhile, my daughter Cleo, was taking advanced math at the high school when her teacher, Mr. Kruse, left abruptly at the semester change. Mr. Kruse had been hastily hired just a few days before the school year started in a scramble to fill the hole left by Ms. Buckley, who left the district unexpectedly due to tensions with administration. Mr. Kruse was not certified or qualified to teach high school math, but he rose to the occasion and Cleo appreciated him as a teacher. When he left amidst allegations of personal misconduct, Principal Sam Dockery replaced him with a long-term sub, Mrs. Frakes. Unfortunately, Mrs. Frakes struggled to teach the 9th grade algebra material and Cleo came home every day frustrated and confused about her math units, sharing stories about how students were having to correct Mrs. Frakes in class as she mis-taught the material. I then began to hear from other parents whose kids were also suffering the consequences of Mrs. Frakes’ ineptitude: tests were graded incorrectly; assignments that had been turned in by students were then lost by the teacher; grades were slipping measurably; a deficit of material was being covered (instead of moving through six or seven units during the semester, like Mr. Kruse did in the Fall, Mrs. Frakes only covered a single unit all Spring, leaving the kids badly behind and underprepared for 10thgrade math). I reached out to the administration to express my concern about this unacceptable situation and they granted me a meeting at the end of April (see Attachment A for a transcript of my email to the admin team).
In my meeting with Ms. Schmerer, Ms. Armistead and Mr. Dockery they informed me that they had hired a new math teacher for the upcoming school year. This was welcome news but did little to remedy the current situation with Cleo’s math class. Mr. Dockery admitted that hiring Mrs. Frakes as a long-term sub was “the best bad decision [he] could make at the time.” That struck me as an honest but not particularly reassuring statement, given that half of the BHS math students were paying the price as a result.
I also used this opportunity with the administration to ask a handful of questions about the budget. The primary message that Ms. Schmerer delivered was that the budget is shrinking. I asked about alternative or additional revenue streams – a local tax, philanthropic donations, etc. – but she did not respond with any energy for those ideas, nor did she suggest any other budget fixes herself other than ominously suggesting that there would likely be significant teacher layoffs in the coming years.
As we headed toward the end of the school year, teacher contract negotiations worsened further, finally breaking down altogether. Multiple teachers reported that Ms. Schmerer laughed audibly as the teachers walked out at their final failed negotiation meeting, which struck the staff as highly inappropriate and further damaging to relations.
In late May I learned of the involuntary teacher transfers. This was a disturbing piece of news, 1) due to how teachers were informed of their reassignments (out of the blue, via email, and in apparent violation of teacher contracts*), 2) because the transfers would have a potentially negative impact on both of my kids, and 3) the impacted teachers are all union members, including top leadership and members of the contract negotiation team.
*The BSD teachers’ contract regarding involuntary transfers states, item #3: “An involuntary transfer will be made only after a meeting between the teacher and the principal at which time he will be notified of the reasons for the transfer.”
When I learned of the transfers, Cleo had just signed up for her high school classes and had opted to enroll in Speech and Debate. Our family has been moved and inspired by the Speech students – in particular, their performances at Sweet Speeches. Cleo had just made the decision to take on the heavy workload of that challenging class her freshman year but it was suddenly unclear whether Speech and Debate would exist any longer if Ms. Pearson was being transferred to the middle school. We were also extremely disappointed to learn that Ms. Hawthorne, with her deep subject expertise in high school history and global studies, was being transferred to the middle school. Cleo had been looking forward to Ms. Hawthorne’s classes after two years of lackluster social studies curriculum at the middle school with Mr. Volk, a new teacher at HLMS. The transfer of Ms. Guzman, the middle school’s star English teacher, from ELA to an intervention role was also a blow. In Cleo’s experience, Ms. Guzman is one of the best teachers at the middle school – passionate, rigorous, and engaging - and we were crestfallen that Uma would not have the opportunity to be challenged by her.
We were not the only ones feeling upset. A high school student boldly organized a student protest in support of teachers in front of the district office, which was attended by students, parents and members of the community. This youth-led action was a brave engagement of students’ first amendment rights, as established in the U.S. constitution in 1791. It could have been a unique springboard for the schools to have conversations about the role of civic engagement in a healthy democracy, but instead administrators chose to shame and frighten some students for participating. A senior in the Speech and Debate class told me that seniors were advised not to participate in the protest, intimidated by a rumor that they might be barred from graduation if they did. At least two middle schoolers who wanted to participate in the protests were brought to tears by the HLMS principal.
I wrote an email to Ms. Schmerer, Ms. Armistead and Mr. Dockery on June 6th, asking for clarification about the involuntary transfers and expressing my concern about the deepening communication and trust issues plaguing the district. I received a very short response from Ms. Schmerer that did not address any of my questions (I have included that thread below, Attachment B).
I also reached out to Ms. Armistead directly, someone I’ve had a longstanding and appreciative relationship with since 2017. We spoke by phone and she named budget shortfalls and test scores as the primary reasons behind the transfers but did not go into extensive detail. On June 9th I attended the school board meeting, which was packed with teachers, students and parents. As board members, you witnessed a public comment period filled to its half hour limit. Every single person there spoke out of concern or anger about low teacher pay and the involuntary transfers: they described poor communication from the district, broken trust, a loss of goodwill, and battered teacher morale. Unfortunately, the public comment format did not allow for dialogue with the district at a time when we were all urgently seeking answers from them.
The June 9th school board meeting then catalyzed a subsequent gathering of teachers, parents and students on June 19th, during which we collectively compiled a long list of questions for the Superintendent. Ms. Schmerer had told me that the district would be releasing a public statement about the involuntary transfers after graduation. When graduation came and went with no public statement, I followed up again by email. The Superintendent then informed me that they would not be releasing anything until “all the meetings with the teachers conclude.” The radio silence from the district around issues that have a major impact on our teachers and students’ classroom experience was deeply frustrating and unsatisfying.
For this reason, I found myself once again in Ms. Schmerer’s office at the end of June, this time with another parent and our long list of questions. She was generous with her time, meeting with us for 2.25 hours. Sabrina Belletti was present for the first half hour before departing for another meeting. I have included the list of parent questions below, for your reference (Attachment C).
The Superintendent emphasized that her primary focus is on improving academic rigor, particularly at the high school level. She explained that the district has goals for what their typical high school graduate should “look like” and that high school students are currently underperforming, as measured by ELA and math test scores. She mentioned twice, with evident pride, that Bandon has a student-teacher ratio of 14:1*
* This is unfortunately a misrepresentation of the actual classroom reality in each school. Uma’s fourth grade class at Oceancrest had a 28:1 student-teacher ratio this year; class size shrinks in the higher grades creating an overall district average of 14:1. Oceancrest teachers, however, are increasingly being asked to do more with less: they must manage over-crowded classrooms; they no longer have a dedicated PE teacher, therefore each teacher has to teach PE and forfeit a prep period every day; they lost a math specialist; and the new school calendar that was approved at the June 9th school board meeting takes away three of their critical prep days - at the start of the year, at Christmas break and at the end of the year.
Ms. Schmerer also provided some useful clarifications about the school budget, although I was surprised when she could not tell us what the total annual school budget actually is. We spent a large part of the meeting drilling down into the specifics of the involuntary teacher transfers. This is already a long-winded letter (my apologies!) but I feel it’s important to share this information in detail because I am concerned there are some holes in the district’s logic around these transfers, or worse, that it is targeted retaliation. I will walk you through what I’ve learned regarding each involuntary transfer, teacher by teacher.
Jen Ells, high school Art and PE teacher, vice president of the teacher’s union and member of the contract negotiation team: Jen is being sent to teach elective art a couple periods per day at the middle school. She will no longer teach PE at the high school and will offer fewer art electives at BHS. Her involuntary transfer is the only one that addresses budget issues by spreading an existing teacher out between the two schools to fulfill demand for classes in both buildings. Of all the transfers, Ms. Ells’s seems the most straightforward and logical, in terms of making best use of an existing teacher.
Kate Hawthorne, high school Global Studies and History teacher, active member of the teacher’s union and the contract negotiation team: Ms. Hawthorne is being transferred to teach Social Studies at the middle school, swapping places with Zach Volk. This transfer does not achieve any budget objectives (neither teacher is being asked to teach more classes), nor is it in response to test scores (there is no state testing in Social Studies). Ms. Hawthorne has significant subject expertise in the classes she offers and has developed an engaging, student-centered curriculum over the years. She has a reputation for being an excellent teacher who emphasizes critical thinking. Ms. Schmerer said that they made the decision primarily because it would be good for Ms. Hawthorne’s career development and resume to have middle school experience. This seems like an odd justification to me, if indeed the Superintendent’s main goal is to improve academic rigor at the high school. Why would you remove an experienced teacher who provides a rigorous, rich academic challenge to high schoolers and replace her with an inexperienced middle school teacher? Additionally, if you are motivated by the perceived best interest of the teacher, wouldn’t you first ask the teacher if indeed this transfer is what she wants at this point in her career? When I posed these questions to Ms. Schmerer, she told me that she couldn’t reverse the transfer because “there’s a group of parents who will show up if Kate isn’t moved out of the high school.” She described them as a group that’s “getting hot – there are parents that want these changes and will get loud.” She would not elaborate on who these parents were, or why they wanted Ms. Hawthorne removed, but the comment casts doubt on her claim that the transfer is an altruistic effort to support Ms. Hawthorne’s overall career development. It also suggests that the Superintendent is beholden to a certain group of parents in the district who have a specific agenda. If that’s the case, it is fundamentally problematic and a cause for deep concern.
Ashley Pearson, high school ELA and Speech and Debate coach, union president and a member of the contract negotiation team: Ms. Pearson is being transferred to the middle school to teach English. In addition to teaching middle school ELA, Ms. Pearson would also be asked to offer Speech and Debate as a 7th/8th grade elective and teach one period of Speech and Debate at the high school per day. Speech and Debate would be offered additionally as an after-school extracurricular. Ms. Carey would be moved from the middle school to replace Ms. Pearson in high school ELA. The Superintendent said that test scores were the primary reason to shuffle ELA teachers between the schools. According to Ms. Schmerer, high school test data places BHS students in less than the 50thpercentile in math and ELA, and scores slid 10% over the past year. Meanwhile, said Ms. Schmerer, Ms. Carey has doubled her middle school students’ scores in math and ELA. Additional relevant context:
Ms. Pearson suffered a stroke this year, a fact that is not widely known. She returned to teaching after a period of recovery but has faced major health and medical challenges and had to scale back her teaching responsibilities. That’s important context when actions are being taken against a teacher because of low test scores.
Ms. Pearson is currently the only teacher in the district with the necessary qualifications (a Masters Degree in Communications) to teach Speech and Debate as a dual (college and high school) credit course for seniors. She coached the current cohort of Speech and Debate students to statewide victory this year, winning the entire title for 4A/3A/2A/1A schools, with one BSD student winning two individual events at the state championship (a feat that is nearly unheard of). BSD students also qualify for the national tournament each year. The program is highly rigorous and competitive, is one of the few courses at the high school that offers a college-level academic challenge (and credit), and it provides an opportunity for profound personal growth for all students.
Ms. Pearson is challenging her involuntary transfer and has filed a lawsuit against the district for being forced out and involuntarily transferred to an undesired position. This of course places the dual credit Speech and Debate program – arguably the most rigorous academic opportunity offered at the high school - in jeopardy, since there is no one else with the necessary qualifications to teach the class. I also wonder: if test scores are not where we hope them to be, isn’t the first step to work with a teacher to find ways to improve those scores, rather than punishing them with a forced transfer? And if teacher performance and test scores are a genuine problem, how will ELA test scores be impacted at the middle school by this transfer?
Ms. Guzman, middle school ELA teacher, Secretary Treasurer of the teacher’s union and a member of the contract negotiation team: Ms. Pearson would replace Ms. Guzman, the current 7th/8th grade ELA teacher, and Ms. Guzman would be reassigned to an intervention role at the middle school. Again, this transfer does not achieve any budget objectives and it is difficult to understand how it is in the best interest of middle school students, since Ms. Guzman has long been regarded as one of the best, most rigorous teachers at the middle school. She has worked hard to improve 5th to 8th grade ELA instruction to support better student outcomes, to reduce the number of students requiring intervention, and to prepare kids for high school. If the district’s argument is that Ms. Pearson is not a strong teacher, how does putting her in Ms. Guzman’s position support the continued success of middle school students (whose test scores are currently high, with the exception of the fifth grade).
The district’s justifications for these transfers are inconsistent and troubling, but of greatest overall concern were the multiple comments that Ms. Schmerer made throughout the meeting that construed an overarching impression she does not value our individual teachers and considers them easily replaceable. Ms. Schmerer forbid a recording of our June 25th meeting but I was allowed to take extensive meeting notes. These statements/responses made by the Superintendent jumped out at me in particular:
She indicated that she was not worried if Ashley Pearson leaves the district because “there are others who can fill her shoes in a heartbeat.” She also stated that she had a “great relationship with Ashley prior to the negotiations.” Implicit in this comment is the admission that the Superintendent no longer has a good personal relationship with Ms. Pearson because of the teacher contract negotiations. It is my opinion that a strong effective leader should not fall prey to “poor me” behavior; rather she rises above personal grievance to engage with her entire team in a fair, even-tempered way. The point is not to be best friends with everyone; it’s to create an environment where people can work constructively and respectfully together.
On the topic of teacher pay increases, she said,
o “It’s not the district’s responsibility to get teachers the extra $200-$300 per month in pension – they should have planned better.”
o “The ones that have worked here for 25 years, seems like they’re doing just fine. I’ve been to some of their houses and they’re big – they’re really nice.”
o “I encourage teachers who want to leave to leave. The ones who want to leave are the ones close to retirement…I’m not going to stop anyone if they need to make $20,000 more – I’m not going to guilt them into staying if it’s better for them to leave.” (Of the five teachers I know of who are considering leaving, only two are close to retirement).
“In a couple years there will be so many teachers looking for work [due to budget cuts] we won’t have any problem finding new ones.”
To the question of whether she was aware of the correlation between union leadership and involuntary transfers, she was vague, evasive and visibly uncomfortable.
She spoke with surprising vitriol about teachers at certain junctures. She accused them of:
o Organizing the student protest. She said at our meeting, “The teachers told the kids to do it…We have proof.” Whether or not this is true, her comment was made in an especially vindictive tone. It also undermines the agency and courage of the student who I believe was genuinely responsible for organizing the protest.
o Using illegal bargaining tactics
These kinds of statements, and the tone in which they were made, strike me as callous and disturbing. My question to the Board: Is this the view of the entire district towards teachers and staff?
Ms. Schmerer and I had a follow-up exchange via email after our meeting, which I have included below (Attachment D) and encourage you to read for your reference. In closing she wrote, “Rebuilding trust and fostering a tone of mutual respect is a high priority for me and our leadership team. I truly believe that positive change starts with openness, humility, and consistent communication, and I remain committed to modeling that.” As a parent who has had to go to extraordinary lengths this past month to extract basic information from the district about these teacher transfers - which will have a direct impact on both of my daughters - I do not give high marks for openness or consistent communication. And given the candid comments she has made at meetings and on social media about teachers, the student protests and the tension therein, I would not characterize it as a “tone of mutual respect.” What we need from Ms. Schmerer right now is not substance-less rhetoric but a commitment to undertake specific actions to rebuild bridges and mend the growing rift with teachers. What are those actions?
This brings me to the current moment in which I, a deeply concerned parent, am reaching out to the board in hopes that we can find solutions to help de-escalate and temper the toxicity pervading the district. Our current situation looks like this, in summary:
Ms. Pearson has filed a lawsuit against the district in response to her involuntary transfer. This will cost the district money at a time when the budget is already in decline and teacher salaries have fallen way behind.
Contract negotiations have fallen apart and are going to mediation on July 24th. If mediation is unsuccessful there is a possibility that it could turn into a teacher strike at the start of the new school year.
The union has filed a Level 3 Grievance on behalf of all the teachers being involuntarily transferred, on the grounds that the transfers violate their contract. The Superintendent has not responded to the grievance. There is an allegation that she is running down the clock on the allowed response time this summer, at the end of which teachers will have been forced into their reassigned positions for the new school year. If she continues to stonewall and there is no reconciliation with teachers prior to the new school year, I fear we will lose multiple teachers next year. Surprisingly, Ms. Schmerer does not seem to find that concerning, in spite of the negative outcome for 9th/10th grade math students due to the domino effect of losing Ms. Buckley and then Mr. Kruse, leaving us with Mrs. Frakes this past year (recall that math test scores dropped 10% this past year). Every time we unexpectedly lose an experienced teacher, our students pay the price. When our principals are forced to hire unqualified subs in a desperate pinch – that is, make more “best bad decisions” - it is not in students’ best interest, nor does it add up to academic rigor within the district. We have a deep problem when our district becomes a spinning turnstyle of embittered teacher attrition; we need to be a place that recruits and retains qualified, excellent teachers, not a place that drives them away.
A chill has spread among parents and student alike who are afraid to speak out about these issues for fear of retaliation or punitive action by the Superintendent. Whether or not the threat is real, the fact that there is a perceived threat is highly problematic to the health of the district. When parents, students and teachers don’t feel safe engaging with the administration, people become siloed, destructive rumors take root, and opportunities for genuine collaboration and problem-solving are lost.
As a concerned parent, and on behalf of other concerned parents, I would like to make the following requests of the Bandon School Board:
We request a dedicated agenda item to discuss these issues at the August 11th school board meeting.
We request that the 8/11 school board meeting be held in the cafeteria, not the BHS library, so there is more space for the community to attend and engage.
We ask the School Board to recognize the gamble being played with our teaching staff – both legally, financially and relationally - and recommend that the Superintendent reverse the involuntary transfers. If there is a need for creative juggling of teachers, we ask that it be done in a collaborative manner that values their input and honors their contracts. If the Superintendent continues to insist that these transfers were made in accordance with teachers’ contracts, we ask that she cite which section of their contract she is referencing.
We suggest that the School Board recruit an outside, independent school budget analyst – someone who is not affiliated with the district or the union – to review the budget together with the administration and the staff in an effort to clear up confusion and bring greater transparency to the numbers.
We hope the Board will explore additional revenue-generating options for the school district to prevent any widespread potential teacher layoffs in the years to come, and to accommodate much-needed teacher pay raises within the district.
We request that a 360 review of the Superintendent be conducted in light of the events of the past six months.
In closing, I want to draw an analogy between farming and education. Like teaching, farming is low paid, undervalued work. The people who chose to work on my farm do so first because they have a passion for it, and secondarily for the paycheck. It requires long hours and a deep well of dedication to the work, just like the teachers who show up each day to instruct our kids. I lament that I will never be able to pay my team what they’re worth because the general consumer is not yet willing to pay the true price of food. In this country, the same goes for public education: it is horribly underfunded. On the farm, I give my staff annual raises and cash bonuses, but I have one other currency as well: goodwill. I do everything in my power to cultivate a workplace that feels respectful, appreciative, fun and positive – whether it’s silly things like stoking the team with popsicles on a hot day, working alongside them, or simply verbalizing my genuine appreciation for each of them throughout the week, face to face. As a business owner and team leader, I’ve learned that this is key to keeping morale high, and it subsequently improves retention. Even though everyone on my crew could make more money doing something else, they commit to the farm year after year – some of them going on 15 years now. It’s in large part because we keep our jar of goodwill full and overflowing.
Our Bandon teachers have done the same thing, showing up for our kids day after day, even though they could work in any other district on the Southcoast and earn tens of thousands of dollars more each year. The problem is that the jar of goodwill in the Bandon schools has been drained to almost empty. We need to turn that tide and start filling it back up. Increased pay is part of the answer, but so is returning to an appreciative district culture of respectfulness. I care deeply about the heart of our schools - teachers and kids - and hope that there is a path forward that puts them first, ahead of ego, partisan politics and personal grievance.
Thank you for hearing me out and I hope the district can start moving towards positive solutions as soon as possible. I look forward to seeing you at the August 11th Board meeting.
Sincerely,
Zoë Bradbury DeSurra