The administration and board should be taking an opportunity this evening to start healing the wounds in the community. This could be accomplished by apologizing to Gehrke and Simmons, admitting that some mistakes were made in the St. Croix Meadows strategy, and outline a plan that would bring about collaboration moving forward. Instead, it appears they will forge ahead with a continuation of the July devisive tactics and waste more of our precious resources.

I also agree with Phil. I stand behind Gehrke, the people should have the right to hear and speak out about the topics of the School Board. The first question this attempt to stifle the board members and citizens raises is, what is the school board up to? If it is above board, why the gag order? This leads to only one possible answer, is the school board up to criminal activity? If so, lets give them rope and let them hang them selfs. There is no question the time has come for a change of board members, we need more like Gehrke that is willing to keep the boards actions transparent to the citizens. I say thank you to Sandy for sticking your neck out and risking getting sued by the Superintendent, keep up the good work!!

I also agree with the above comments. There is Definately a need for change with the current school board members and superintendent. It is part of public office to hear people's opinions and concerns and it is healthy to be able to debate and discuss both sides without being fearful of retaliation for your ( or your constituents ) beliefs. Last I checked this was American and we have the right to express our opinions. I think the majority of the board needs to start making some public apologies for what I would consider inappropriate behavior. Keep up the good work sandy!!!

From the press release: "The policies prohibit school board members from hearing citizen concerns about the schools. They require board members to report all private communications from citizens to the Superintendent."

In the hierarchy of management, the school board is over the superintendent. Why are board members supposed to report citizen communications to the superintendent?

Finally the school board will be formalizing what many of us have known all along. It will be nice to see it in writing, won't it? The superintendent calls the shots and the school board members follow along like little minions. All they need is a rope to hold onto like a bunch of preschoolers following their teacher down the hallway. Except in this case, by following the superintendent they are not representing the taxpayers of this district, they are kowtowing to an unelected, but very fire-able superintendent. Despicable.

Seven PDFs have been added to this post that show the policy changes that is expected to be proposed by attorney Mick Waldspurger later during tonight's school board meeting.

I apologize if the quality isn't the best. I just quickly scanned them using my cell phone while sitting at the meeting.

This Superintendent/Board has done enough damage to the community. Time to fire the Supt and un-elect the lock-steppers on the board. While we are at it.....unload the MN atty that puts his foot in his mouth and hand in the taxpayers wallet. These people are incredibly naive if they think that the electorate is stupid.

Mike, thanks for posting the pdf's. I just finished reading them and I can not beleive what I just read. What scares me more than that is the current board members are going to go along with this! The Superintendant is building a brick wall around her and the board members she likes and has the same agenda. This will keep the citizens from knowing what the board is up to or commenting on the action the board is taking. This is just wrong. I just hope that the citizens of Hudson School District take the time to see what is happening.

Is there a way to "recall" school board members or fire a Superintendent?

The chain of command in this heirarchy , clearly broken at the superintendant level and with the body that gives her authority, ends with the voters. We are at the top of the chain and need to mend its broken parts.

With all the practice we've had lately doing recalls, it looks like it's time to play another game of elect anyone other than who we have now.

I just updated this post with information from a vote at tonight's meeting.

The vote sounded like 6 to 1 to me.

I sat through this meeting and it was a blatant, coordinated attack by the rest of the board, the superintendent and their lawyer to silence Sandy and any other future dissent. It was beyond reprehensible.

Why do we allow them to continue doing this? They are tearing apart our community! They are not acting in the best interests of our children and community. What a joke and embarrassment. What steps do we need to take to make change happen? Can elected officials be fired? Something needs to be done before they get more out of control and the damage they cause is too great. * sigh*

MIKE do u have the issue sheet that they had regarding the secondary space beginning planing process that they discussed briefly right after the policy topic?

Did anyone else hear them say that the first phase of the secondary space issue (over the next 12 months) will be handled internally only, i.e. without public input? Holland specifically stated that the October 30th meeting will be a board working session, and the public will only be allowed to listen, not speak. Why would they disallow intelligent, concrete ideas from the community?

all in all it was...all just bricks in the wall

Can we say a dictatorship by elected officials. What an utter joke. Their grand scheme failed. Back to business as usual. Throw em all out save one with common sense.Their direction is going to land them in court sooner than later. Tax revolt on the horizon.

It's time to remove Mary B-E.

First she rams through the dog track purchase to further her own career as a lobbyist, and now she seeks to silence those on the board that DARE to disagree with her.

Time to end the power trip and self interest.

Finally the public is beginning to realize the self-serving agenda that has fueled this Superintendent as well as the Board. She is trying to silence all detractors in an effort to rule with an unquestioned iron hand. If you take the time to view the contracts awarded to small vendor’s miles from Hudson you’ll begin to understand how corrupt this Administration is. There is money flowing out every month to questionable sources. When it’s finally exposed the damage will be severe but the District can then start to heal.

(From Patch article "School District Investigation Finds Board Member Violated Policies", July 11, 2012): "I was elected to the board to represent the public, to ask questions to try to create some transparency, and that's what I'm doing," Gehrke said.

(From Ms. Gehrke's press release in this article): "They require board members to report all private communications from citizens to the Superintendent." This is called transparency.

Hypocrisy, pure and simple. BTW, what part of any of the district policies "gags" a board member or limits anyone's right to free speech?

Kari, Do you have a different copy of the proposed policies? These proposals are way out of line. You and Kaiesersatt are the only ones that think they're okay. This will NOT get him re-elected when his term is up.

they all need to go- -from B-E to H-A and all of the assitants they put in place AND this School board except for the now sane voice in Sandy -- Holland is probably sad he can't get money for his Y again -- what a joke he is. Get Kaisersatt out of there - FIRE THIS GROUP - they are arrogant and should be investigated.

country boy says, "Can we say a dictatorship by elected officials." This is the same as the dictatorship by U.S. Rep. John Boheher, U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor and the tyranny of the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. Same tactics, national and local.

I read the policies that were included in the article. Unless someone gives me an example of something more specific that is out of line or limits anyone's rights, there is no argument. "Because I said so" may work at home on the kids, but it doesn't apply to the real world.

Kari, do you see nothing wrong in the paragraph dealing with staff communication to the board? How can the board know what is going on, if everything is filtered through the superintendent?
Or that the super can tell board members when its OK for her to visit schools (is it so she can make sure everything is the way she wants).
Or that the super sets the board agenda and board members have no right to request an agenda item

And many other or's. And you feel that there is nothing wrong with this??????

A school board is meant to govern and leave management to school administrators. I see the proposed policies as a way of making sure of that.

@Laura - I'm certain you would expect elected officials to follow our state laws - wouldn't you? You wouldn't want them making up their own rules. With that in mind, I'd ask you to read Wis Stat. 120.12(2) which say, "School board duties. The school board of a common or union high school district shall: (2) General supervision. Visit and examine the schools of the school district, advise the school teachers and administrative staff regarding the instruction, government and progress of the pupils and exercise general supervision over such schools." Nowhere does it say a board member needs permission from any employee of the district first to do so.

A state statute stating a duty require of an elected person can not be handed over to someone else by resolution or local policy. And since Wis Stat 118.24 (2)(b) says "The school district administrator shall not be a member of the school board and shall not engage in any pursuit which interferes with the proper discharge of the duties." It would seem this school district is dealing with a superintendent who is trying to do just that, and also backed by a less than credible lawyer, giving not only poor advice, but trying to twist the rules to fit his desires as well. This is some unbelievable stuff here. I see expensive lawsuits on the horizon should this type of action continue.

Peter, Step off your soapbox...this thread concerns the willfull rule making by MBE and a shiftless high priced legal mouthpiece to control the district from her chair. Fire the supt, lawyer and recall the kool aide slurpers from the board. That is all.

County boy, I don't know whether it would be wise to fire MBE, because her contrast goes (as far as I can remember) until 2014. Firing her now would be rather expensive.

Is it possible to recall school board members? If that would be possible, a school board could be elected that is willing to keep MBE under control, and take the power to rule back into its hands.

Keeping MBE under control would take a group of doctors with some heavy meds.

MBE is not a school board member, she does not vote. She sits in on all meetings so she knows what's going on in her district. Policy #2200 (latest revision was Nov. 1990) states that all board meetings are held in the presence of the superintendent. No laws being broken here.

School board members may still visit schools, they just can't do it in secret. (There's that transparency thing again). Arranging it through the board, then superintendent, then school is mostly a safety precaution, but also ensures that the board is working together as a team and not against one another.

Board meetings are meant to be productive, this is why they have an agenda. Citizens have every right to speak at meetings, but to maintain order and civility, there has to be limits. This is common and acceptable in many other forms of government.

I still don't understand how open communication regarding district matters is a bad thing. I'm a rather big fan of accountability.

Accountability ? This School Board is about as unaccountable as they come. They frivolously spend money with no regard for the people who worked to give it to them. Can you seriously say that the Board acted in an accountable way in regards to the SCM debacle. They should have never spent a dime until they were sure that it would fly. Instead they commissioned plans, opinions, and consultants to render paid for results that were no ware near unbiased. Who’s accountable for that?

I just want to remind everyone to keep personal attacks out of the comments.

It was inevitable that major changes would be coming to the School Board and Superintendent. The public no longer supports the stifling dictatorship which has been jammed down the public's and teacher's throats. To work in constant fear if somebody hears you talking to someone else that will lead to punishment and termination along with blatant attempts to publically humiliate individuals cannot be sustained.

The time is rapidly approaching to put a School Board in place that embraces the public rather than hiding from it and allows teachers the opportunity to freely communicate amongst themselves, parents and the district administration. Working together is the only way out of the mess we currently find ourselves. Stay tuned changes are coming!

The school district approached the city officials before it went to referendum on the dog track and requested that the property be rezoned. The city officials refused and said they wanted to wait to see the outcome of the referendum, proabably assuming it would never pass anyway. Once the referendum passed, the city found itself between a rock and hard place because now the school would be asking them to rezone the property. The city officials were the ones that requested all the studies from the school district.

Sorry, that excuse will not fly. The School Board has already tried to blame the City and we all know better. This entire process was mismanaged from the beginning and doomed from day one. Despite public feedback the process went forward wasting tax payer’s money on a long list of hired guns to do the bidding for Mary and the Board. Nope, the blame rests just where it is with Administration and School Board (exception Sandy).

Bob, then how do you explain why the referendum passed in every municipality? I would say that was clearly public feedback. Don't tell me the citizens were uninformed because that is simply an insult to everyone who voted yes. I'm sorry, but I think you have a biased opinion when it comes to the school district.

VOR, Stick to the subject on this thread. The dead horse has been kicked enough. You vote yes folks lost...move along. Discussion here is about a dictatorship under construction to stifle any input that they perceive is not in THEIR interest. These are elected folks that are not representing all peoples. We need a new board to oversee MBE. I for one am not sorry for my biased opinion of the Admin/board and do not care if you like it or not. What has been done to this community is shameful acts perpetrated by the current regime. When MBEs' contract is up....send her packing.

Ok country boy, since you have all the answers, maybe you should run for a position on the school board.

VOR, How about steppin' up to the plate yourself? In previous threads you have laid out all the answers according to you and the yes group. I have no desire to serve on the school board as long as MBE and you yes kool aiders continue to worship at the alter of the administration that can do no wrong. The fact remains that the space problem was known back in 2001 and this class act admin/ board layed on their bins for 10 years. Have at it.

CB, so I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. You are right in that it is time to move forward to find a solution to the space needs. After all, it should be about what's best for the students in this community. They are, after all, our future.

This school board and superintendent just put the people of their district through the wringer by wasting a year on a pipe dream to take city property and turn it into a high school. They misjudged, mismanaged, misunderstood, miscommunicated and were kicked out of City Hall. This mess caps off an entire decade of their wholesale failure to deal with the secondary space issues. So, at their first meeting following this latest debacle what do they talk about for FIVE HOURS?? Answer: School board politics! Unbelievable. They should be talking for five hours about how they are going to extricate themselves from the gigantic hole they have created for themselves regarding secondary space. But no. It's more important to clamp down on a school board member. You can't make it up. Superintendent Mary Bowen-Eggebraatan must go. Now. Resign or be fired.

I have just added video of the entire meeting shot by The River Channel. It's 4 hours and 21 minutes long, but random access is now much easier because the videos are now on YouTube. The topics for action portion of the meeting begins at the 2:45:20 mark.

If you watch the portion of the video where citizens speak, it is obvious they (minus Gehrke) do not want to hear from anyone who disagrees with their attorney. In fact, why do they allow their attorney to run the show at that point in the meeting? He is not a sitting board member. Let the public speak to the entire board so that they may have an outside perspective of these gagging policies. What is the attorney afraid of?

I watched the video of 10/09 from 2:44 onwards; some thoughts.

"The attacks are unfounded..." If an 'attack' is questioning and challenging, then the questionable use of that word is noted. All of these 'attacks' are indeed people's response to the SCM ramrodding and the board not listening. Unfounded? I think not!

"…consensus review…" It would be interesting to review the July 10 tapes and see if there indeed was a consensus that these policy changes/reviews were asked for.

Regarding the 'out of order' for Ms. Kunz and Mr. Weese: OUTRAGEOUS! They were attempting to address the board regarding concepts specifically related to the point at hand, and especially what had led things to this point. And since when does the attorney have a voice to speak back and help silence opposition?

Mr. Weese was using sarcasm, satire, and humor to make his point; I thought it well done, and will perhaps look for a box of chocolates as well.

Ms. Kunz looked as though she had a prepared statement; through the harsh rebuttal, she retained her composure--my hat is off to you for responding with dignity.

This was a chance for the board to start to mend fences; instead, they topped the existing fence off with barbed wire. The most sensible portion of the evening was the vote to table the policy proposals; it was refreshing to see a majority of the board vote for this motion. Perhaps a glimmer can be ascertained in this.

My wife and I watched the tape of the meeting and, although we may not totally agree with everything said by Ms. Kunz and Mr. Weese, we were shocked and outraged at the way they were treated by the attorney and President Holland. We believe that both speeches were on point with the topic and the speakers should have been allowed to speak without constant interruption. The lawyer interjecting "Point of order!" three times during Ms. Kunz' speech was insulting and humiliating. Who does this lawyer think he is? How can this board allow citizens to be treated this way? This isn't a courtroom. Pres. Holland's constant interruption of Mr. Weese's speech was also out-of-line. Mr. Weese was not straying from the topic at all, but Mr. Holland said, so condescendingly: "I'll determine when you're out of order." I saw no straying, but Mr. Holland imagined some. Where is the leeway that is provided to taxpaying citizens who are doing their best to participate in the public process? I'm sure that, if a "Friend of the District" came forward he would be given plenty of leeway to talk. Clearly, Pres. Holland just enjoys cutting off Mr. Weese. What has happened to this school board? Why do they continuously build walls between themselves and the public? I can only surmise that it's because they are following the leadership style of the superintendent -- who revels in dictatorial stealth. It's time to call for the resignation of the superintendent.

There are small lies, big lies, belly-whopper lies, twisted logic lies, half-truth lies, and then there's shading-the-truth-lies. Here's one for you. At the October School Board meeting a board member expressed concern about the policy changes that the board's Hired Gun Attorney Waldspurger was recommending, citing Waldspurger's employment experiences in Farmington and SWashington County. Waldspurger stated that he was not "fired" from the Farmington School District, but rather he "fired" them. Now it's hard to figure which of the lie categories Waldspurger's statement falls into. This is what happened. Waldspurger so disrupted the Farmington district with his divisive advice about how to remove a board member, that 3 board members were thrown off the board in the next election and Waldspurger was told his services were no longer needed. How that equates to Waldspurger "fired" them is open to interpretation. He also stated he wasn't at fault when the State of MN ruled SWashington County violated Open Meetings laws. What? He represents SWashington County. He's the lawyer responsible for keeping them out of trouble. Google these. Find out the truth. Then you decide which lie category his statements belong in.