Ann Arbor board votes to proceed with termination of Community High teacher after months of debate

The Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education voted on Wednesday to proceed with terminating the employment of Community High School teacher Emma Hamstra, following hours of public comment and legal arguments.

Supporters gathered in force to oppose the recommendation, telling trustees that Hamstra had a five-year record of positive evaluations and that the challenged assignment — a poem described by parents and colleagues as “aesthetically and intellectually demanding” — had been taught previously without incident. Emma’s family and former students pleaded with the board to reconsider, describing late delivery of written charges and procedural gaps. “There is no problem whatsoever with this poem apart from the fact that it is aesthetically and intellectually demanding,” said Andrew Schroeder, a parent who urged the board to restore Hamstra.

Emma Hamstra’s counsel, David Nacht, urged trustees not to end a teaching career over a judgment call and said the way the matter was handled raised serious due-process concerns. “We can tolerate that without destroying a career,” Nacht told the board, arguing that termination was disproportionate and warning that the district’s handling of the case could open it to complaint or litigation.

Trustees debated in public and conducted a roll-call vote after the discussion. Trustee Schmidt moved to adopt the resolution acknowledging receipt of the termination recommendation and to proceed with terminating Hamstra’s employment; Trustee Wilkes supported the motion. The roll call recorded six trustees voting yes and Trustee Mohammed voting no; the motion carried.

Several parents and teachers had also warned of the district’s legal exposure if evidence and charges were provided only shortly before a vote. “If you have a legal opinion of counsel… saying we have no liability for wrongful exposure, you’re legally comfortable,” said John Potto, a parent who urged the board to consider the financial risks to the district.

The board made clear that personnel confidentiality constrained what it could say publicly about the underlying complaint. The motion that passed directs the district to proceed upon the formal termination recommendation; the resolution and personnel records were acknowledged in public but the board did not provide additional substantive details about the allegations.

Next steps: the board recessed to closed session later in the meeting for evaluation and other personnel matters. Members and the teacher’s counsel indicated that any future legal steps would be handled outside the public meeting record.