School board members testify at trial, verdict expected this week

BY MCKENNA HARFORD MHARFORD@COLORADOCOMMUNITYMEDIA.COM

Following a four-hour trial on Monday, a judge will decide if four Douglas County school board members broke Colorado Open Meetings Law when they red former Superintendent Corey Wise last year.

Douglas County District Court Judge Je rey Holmes listened to arguments over whether board President Mike Peterson and board members Becky Myers, Kaylee Winegar, and Christy Williams violated the law when they participated in a series of one-on-one conversations to discuss a plan to terminate Wise.

In March last year, Holmes already ruled against the majority members of the school board, saying the conversations held outside public view do violate open meeting laws.

e majority school board members did not want to admit fault, choosing to appeal the initial ruling and rejecting a settlement. After school district attorneys missed the ling deadline for a jury trial, Holmes will again rule on the case brought to the courts through a lawsuit led by State Rep. Robert Marshall, D-Highlands Ranch.

Marshall is asking Holmes to nd the board broke the law, prohibit future serial conversations on public business, and declare the decision to terminate Wise was invalid.

Wise was red without cause in a 4-3 vote on Feb. 4, 2022.

Myers, Peterson, Winegar and Williams said they didn’t support the direction Wise was taking the district, including enforcing a mask mandate and implementing the district’s equity policy.

Prior to the board meeting, Peterson and Williams met with Wise on Jan. 28, 2022, telling him they had a four-vote majority and asking him to resign.

On Monday, Geo Blue, an attorney for Peterson, Myers, Williams and Winegar, argued that board members are allowed to have oneon-one conversations and maintained that there was no violation of the law because the conversations didn’t include debate or formal action regarding Wise’s position.

“ e legislature chose to say they are only public meetings if three or more members meet,” Blue said. “At the end of the day, so long as the votes are taken in public, with debate and with discussion, then there’s no harm to transparency.”

Steve Zansberg, Marshall’s attorney, argued that Colorado open meetings law prohibits elected of- cials from any conversations about public business outside of public meetings, regardless of whether formal action is taken.

“All of those conversations of public business were meetings under the open meetings law, which denes a meeting as any kind of gathering convened to discuss public business,” Zansberg said. “It doesn’t matter if a decision was made.” e parties also disagreed whether Peterson and Williams’ meeting with Wise constituted an ultimatum for Wise to resign or be red.

In a recording of the meeting, submitted as evidence in the trial, Peterson told Wise if he didn’t want to resign, the board would move forward with termination.

“If you call us Monday and say ‘No, Mike, I don’t think I’d like to resign, I’d like to move forward with a termination,’ then we can get to a special meeting and appoint a hearing o cer,” Peterson said.

In testimony on Monday, Peterson said he, Williams and Wise discussed Wise’s options regarding ending his contract, but an ultimatum was never issued.

“We did not say ‘Superintendent you need to resign or else,’ we discussed the resignation as one of the many options he had available,”

Peterson said.

In addition to arguments that the board didn’t violate open meetings law, Blue said if the judge nds serial meetings are illegal, he should decide that the board xed any violation of the law by holding the Feb. 4, 2022, meeting where they discussed and voted on Wise’s termination publicly.

“ e Feb. 4 meeting was a threehour long, properly convened meeting, in which the directors debated the issue and voted,” Blue said. “ e only conclusion this court can reach is that was a cure.”

Zansberg said the subsequent meeting does not x violations of open meetings law because the Feb. 4 meeting happened after Marshall sued the board.

“(Blue) has cited no case in Colorado where a public body cured an improperly made decision after a lawsuit challenging that decision was led,” Zansberg said.

Following testimony and arguments, Holmes said he would issue a written ruling within the week.

As of April 6, the school district has spent around $152,000 on legal fees in this case.

For updates on possible verdicts, visit the website at coloradocommunitymedia.com.