Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and students criticize board majority, library policy and election‑era tactics at Pine‑Richland meeting
Summary
Multiple speakers during the public comment period accused the board majority of micromanaging school operations, spending excessive time on a revised library policy, and attempting to silence critics with legal threats; several speakers urged voters to elect different candidates on Nov. 4.
Speakers at the Pine‑Richland School District Oct. 20 meeting used the public comment period to sharply criticize the board majority’s conduct, the district’s revised library policy and a cease‑and‑desist letter sent to local community organizers.
Steve Kootlenius, a resident who addressed the board near the start of public comment, said the October 2023 book‑policy debate was “an attempt to fix a problem that did not exist” and that, more than 217 days after the policy passed, the district had not used the new process to remove a single title. “If these books are truly so dangerous, then why hasn't anyone use[d] your policy to remove even one of them?” he asked.
Several speakers described a pattern of what they called micromanagement and intimidation by board members. Allison Duncan, identifying herself as an officer of a group called Together for PR, said members of her organization received a cease‑and‑desist letter demanding “removal of all mentions of her from our social media and website,” and she said she was placing that fact into the public record.
Student speakers also criticized board decisions. Ben Ward, a senior at Pine‑Richland High School, said students bear the consequences of board choices: “We are the ones affected,” he told directors, urging voters to support challengers on Nov. 4. Other speakers — including Randy Augustine, Jim Buse and Brianna Baer — tied concerns about board conduct to budget priorities and to community trust.
A number of commenters urged the board to spend more time on the district’s budget and long‑term planning rather than focusing on the library policy. Mike Barber, a resident, thanked the treasurer for a recent budget meeting and said, “If we spent over a dozen hours talking about a library policy, we should have spent at least 20 hours talking about the budget.”
At least one visitor who is a current board member, Ashley Fortier, also addressed the board as a visitor and described her experience serving on the board over the past two years as often “toxic, combative, and dismissive,” saying the majority’s actions have harmed morale and impaired governance. Fortier asked the community to consider those effects ahead of the school board election.
Several speakers explicitly encouraged turnout for the Nov. 4 election and named challengers they support. The public comment segment closed before the board took additional action on those concerns; directors did not take any immediate formal action in response to the remarks during the meeting.
The transcript records a range of spellings for some board members’ names and references to legal letters; this article quotes speakers using the spellings they used on the public record.
