Elk River board narrows legal representation after heated debate

The Elk River School District Board on March 10 amended and approved a change to how the district and board will be represented by outside counsel, voting to center Kennedy & Graven as primary counsel while allowing Squires, Walsberger & Mace to complete existing litigation matters.

Public commenters urged the board to change legal representation. Chad Burkholder told the board he wanted "new legal counsel, legal representation" and said earlier advice had not protected his son after a school assault. David Mayes urged the board not to approve continuing the current district legal firm, saying the community had been "worn down by issues related to the legal services provided by Squires, Walsberger, and Mace." Another speaker, resident Steve Filer, encouraged community participation in a proposed facilities task force but also thanked the board for its work.

Discussion among board members focused on who should have authority to hire counsel. Director Nordos moved an amendment to "designate Kennedy and Graven as the sole legal counsel for the district while allowing Squires, Walsberger, and Mace to complete their existing litigation matters," arguing the board, not the administration, should control selection. Opponents said removing hiring authority from the superintendent and chair would be disruptive and could limit the administration's ability to select specialized counsel for particular matters. Director Nordos stated, "I truly feel that taking the ability to hire law firms out of the administration's hand is the wrong choice." Director Steinbrecher and others defended the amendment as aligning with prior board practice and continuity.

The board conducted a roll call on the amendment and the amended main motion. The amendment passed and the main motion, as amended, also carried. The result places Kennedy & Graven in the primary role approved by the board; the transcript shows the board approved the approach while allowing the incumbent firm to complete ongoing litigation.

The board chair opened the vote and called for a roll call during the action; several board members spoke during the roll call. The meeting record shows substantive disagreement in public comment and among board members about the proper division of authority between the board and the superintendent on legal representation. The board did not provide a published tally in the meeting transcript included here; the minutes record that the amendment and the main motion passed.

Moving forward, the board indicated the change is intended to separate legal representation for governance matters from day-to-day district administration matters and to provide a transition process so existing litigation work can continue to completion.