Reader has questions for School Board

 s chosen the old tried and true method of dealing with your headache: the buy-out.

This is hardly the creative solution many hoped for.

However, it does provide you an opportunity to clear the air by answering questions about how you got into this mess.

How about providing the public with your side of the story?

First and foremost, do you intend to deal with any of the allegations High School Principal Jedd Sherman made public?

What disrespect would have been shown to him by allowing him to discuss his evaluations in an open meeting?

 Had an attempt to remove or buy-out Sherman been made prior to this school year? If so, what was the result?

The public has heard and read Superintendent Terry Schmidt offered Sherman a teaching position at his administrator’s salary. Was this Board approved? Did the Board, or any member of it, discuss the offer with Schmidt or was he acting independently?

 Was there ever discussion amongst the Board of how vague Schmidt’s evaluations of Sherman were?

 Why did Schmidt retract the accusation Sherman disregarded school policy when he advised an employee to file a police report regarding a breach of the school’s computer security?

Will you tell the public what led to that security breach?

Why were you reluctant to discuss this earlier?

You did hear Sherman mention May 5 names could be redacted from the public discussion, correct?

And what was the reason Sherman decided it was necessary to alert police about the incident?

Was this considered an action that made him less than a “team player”?

Was anyone punished as a result of the investigation?

 According to the Red Oak Express, you as a Board took over a year approve an evaluation tool Schmidt had been using. Why such a long delay?

Again, according to the Express, Sherman claims Schmidt ignored a portfolio he submitted. Why?

Could you please detail whether Sherman was criticized for reporting a bullying incident from 2012?

What was that bullying incident?

Was it the only such incident Sherman was criticized?

What exactly was the disagreement over the need and location of a handicapped-accessible restroom?

When Schmidt wrote of Sherman’s “reactionary writing” in 2012, what was he referring to and why would he censor him?

Did you ever offer to discuss with Sherman outside of Schmidt’s presence allegations the Superintendent harassed and bullied him?

Did you ever offer to bring in an unbiased mediator to resolve the obvious personal differences between the two administrators?

Did you ever offer Sherman a waiver so you’d be more comfortable holding discussions in open session? Isn’t that idea proffered by the Iowa Association of School Boards?

As to the current allegations of open meetings violations:

When in 2014 did you as a Board discuss Sherman’s performance or discharge? Your Response to the Iowa Public Information Board indicates you never had such discussions, either in open or closed sessions. How can that be? If true, do you believe you fulfilled your duties to deliberate before acting?

If the complaining parties agreed, would you be willing to allow a retired Iowa Supreme Court Justice or District Judge to listen to the recordings of the meetings in question to determine whether your characterization of the exact content of the closed discussions is accurate? 

In closing, in order to show the public your dedication to transparency, would you request Schmidt’s permission to allow public review of your evaluations of him? Perhaps then the people who elect you will know the person who evaluates administrators is being thoroughly scrutinized.

 This letter is my opinion, and I have not shown it to or reviewed it in any manner with Sherman or his family.

Josiah C. Wearin