Oshkosh school board hears hours of public comment over teacher’s social media post; no disciplinary action taken at meeting

Oshkosh — The Oshkosh Area School District Board of Education heard a sustained and often emotional public forum on Sept. 24 after members of the public addressed a widely circulated social media post by a district employee that commenters said referred to Charlie Kirk and to his death. Speakers urged both protection for the teacher’s free-speech rights and, in contrast, removal or discipline for language some described as condoning violence.

Why it matters: The comments forced the district and board to confront questions about where private speech by employees ends and workplace discipline begins, and whether a teacher’s off-duty social media posts affect students’ sense of safety in classrooms.

Many parents, former students and district employees spoke in defense of the teacher, saying the post was made on the employee’s personal account outside school hours and arguing that the teacher had created a safe classroom environment. Justin Opperman, who identified himself as a parent and former student, said he was “really concerned about a Facebook post made by somebody who works in the district” and asked whether students had seen the post. Former students and parents repeatedly said the teacher encouraged critical thinking and did not inject personal politics into classroom instruction.

Other speakers said the post crossed a line. Multiple commenters described language in the post as justifying or celebrating the removal of a political voice and said that condoning violence is incompatible with being around students. Attorney Gary Yates and others invoked the First Amendment while urging the board to follow constitutional protections, but speakers who called for discipline countered that employment policies and professional codes can impose consequences even for off-duty speech.

The meeting record shows that speakers referenced Oshkosh Area School District policy numbers during their remarks (identified in testimony as “policy 7544” and “policy 3362”), the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and Wisconsin Administrative Code chapter PI 34. One speaker urged the board to consider the Supreme Court precedent described in testimony as Pickering v. Board of Education when weighing employee speech protections.

Board and staff response: District administrators and board members did not take formal disciplinary action during the meeting. Board President Wyman moved the public forum to the start of the agenda to accommodate the large number of speakers; the board’s rules prevented rebuttal or debate during public comment, and the transcript reflects that board members did not respond to speakers during the forum. Administration later said the district is reviewing the matter and that any policy or personnel follow-up would be handled through established procedures; no specific action timeline was announced at the meeting.

Voices from the crowd: Supporters emphasized classroom experience with the teacher. Amberlynn Gilbertson, who said she was a former student, told the board the teacher “never brought politics into the classroom” and described creative writing and club activities the teacher led as safe spaces. Several parents said their children thrived in the teacher’s classes and that punitive action would chill teachers’ willingness to speak publicly.

Speakers calling for discipline described the post as unprofessional and harmful. Sarah Scherzer cited Wisconsin Administrative Code PI 34 and said social media use that elicits violence could amount to sanctionable conduct. Jeffrey Watts said the post taught “hatred and violence” and asked the board to consider accountability.

Next steps: District administrators said they are reviewing the situation and related policies; a district staff member said more detailed follow-up on policy and potential personnel actions could be provided at a later meeting or in a weekly memo. No motion, vote or employment decision was recorded on this item during the Sept. 24 public meeting.

The public comment portion of the meeting began with Justin Opperman and included more than two dozen speakers from across Oshkosh who were allowed three minutes each under the board’s public comment rules. After the forum the board took a short recess and then continued with the evening’s business.