Litchfield elementary meeting reveals transparency concerns, discontent on embattled board

By Madeline Ackley
Twitter: @Mkayackley

A recent Litchfield Elementary School District board meeting raised questions about the district’s level of transparency and revealed long-simmering discontent on the board of five.

A document that was adopted last April detailing protocols on how board members are to communicate with the public, the media and internally was again brought before the board on Tuesday, sparking renewed debate. 

The protocol stipulates a variety of communication policies,  including placing restrictions on board members when speaking with or responding to questions from the media. 

The protocol, which can be read here, was likely established as an attempt to help mitigate a cascade of controversies and protests that have persistently dogged the board since the start of the year. 

Newly appointed board member Dr. Dennis Dowling stated that he felt the district ought not to dictate when board members can and cannot respond to media requests. He stated that immediately following his appointment he received an interview request from a publication that was not named at the meeting. 

“I sent an email to the superintendent in which I said ‘did you know this person?’” Dowling said, referring to the reporter who had made the interview request. 

“My question was do you know this person. That’s all,” Dowling said. “I get a response back that says ‘well you need to contact our...media relations person.

“Well, I don’t think I really have to. I think I’m capable of saying I was born in Northern California in an interview,” he said, adding that the response from governing board staff was “very clear to me I was not to talk to the media.”

Independent Newsmedia reached out to Dowling shortly after he was appointed to the board. Dowling initially agreed to an interview but did not respond to a follow-up email. 

Board member Jeremy Hoenack interjected stating that he agreed with Dowling and called the protocol a “violation of the first amendment” that would “muzzle” board members.

Board member Kimberly Moran interjected, arguing that the protocols aren’t a muzzle but a  “professional courtesy.” 

“So it doesn’t say on there that you have to run every question or everything by anyone at the district,” Moran said in response to Hoenack “You’re just giving them a heads up.”

“I agree with you,” Dowling said to Moran. “But that’s not the response I got back.”

“Fair enough,” Moran replied.

The protocol presented at the meeting makes plain that board members are not being asked to simply notify the superintendent’s office about a media request. 

The media relations protocol is three-pronged. It states that board members must contact the superintendent and district public relations “before engaging with or responding to the media (including interviews, written statements, and “off the record” conversations).”  

Board members must immediately alert the superintendent’s office “upon learning of potentially negative news items about the District” and that the “governing board president or designee shall be the spokesperson for the Governing Board.”

Governing board members are not district employees, but are elected by residents of the district (though they are sometimes appointed by the Maricopa County School Superintendent when a seat becomes vacant mid-term) and beholden to voters, similar to a city council.

Litchfield elementary district board members are unpaid.

Board slapped with open meeting law violations, transparency concerns

This is not the first time the Litchfield school board has been accused of being less-than-transparent with the public. 

The board was recently slapped with several open meeting law violations by the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. 

In a letter responding to reports of transparency violations, the Attorney General’s Office stated that the board had “violated the Open Meeting Law by taking a closed-door approach” when crafting its equity initiatives, which had led to heated debates about critical race theory and anti-racist curriculum in schools. 

The district has always denied its intention to teach critical race theory. The hotly-debated equity statement was crafted in response to higher levels of discipline and lower test scores among the district’s Black and Hispanic students.

The AG’s letter called out Moran specifically for violating open meeting law when she held up a sign that said “not true” as a resident was speaking during the public comment period at an April 13 meeting. 

On the day of the meeting, the general counsel for the Arizona School Boards Association spent an hour presenting the board the ins and outs of Arizona’s Open Meeting Law, including a detailed explanation about rules board members must follow during public comment.

“Ms. Moran's actions violating the Open Meeting Law immediately following Open Meeting Law training are extremely concerning,” the AG’s letter read. 

It stipulated that Moran must re-take open meeting law training within 60 days of the letter.

Tuesday board meeting grows contentious, reveals long-simmering discontent

The Tuesday meeting escalated as Hoenack began lobbing insults against the board and superintendent which he accused of being secretive and untrustworthy, indicating he would not abide by the communication protocols as presented.  

Hoenack has long been an adversarial figure on the board. He was a staunch opponent of the district equity initiatives and passed along internal documents to members of the public that he felt proved their lack of openness.

“My experience is... this district has been secretive and I’ve been saying that over and over and over again,” Hoenack said. “And I’ve been chastised and I’ve been humiliated and...I’ve been made a fool of. 

There’s no cooperation in this district. None whatsoever,” Hoenack said.

Board President Danielle Clymer questioned the purpose of agreeing to such a document if the board is not unanimous. 

“This document affects the five of us...if we can’t all agree, and Jeremy has already said he’s not going to abide by this, what’s the purpose in having this document?” Clymer posed. 

“Just suspend the document and move on. If we can’t all agree to be professional and give a heads up when a phone call happens and when an email comes through...there’s no point,” she said.

Three-quarters of the way through the meeting, Hoenack began loudly denouncing the board as “liars,” “despicable” and “a bunch of people who hate America.”

“You’re unbelievable, you’re despicable...you’ve been lying to me month after month...the Attorney General said you’re all full of it and you’re all liars...so got take it and shove it,” Hoenack said about two hours into the meeting.

“You all make me sick. It’s sickening. You’re sickening...You have no clue what you’re doing here at this place. It’s utterly hopeless. Pass the damn thing, whatever you want. There’s a thing called the First Amendment, you guys never learned it. I don’t think you learned anything in school. Certainly never learned history or anything else.”

“Do whatever you want I don’t care,” Hoenack continued. “It doesn’t matter what you pass, what you don’t pass.”

Hoenack proceeded to get up and begin leaving the ongoing meeting. “I gotta go because I’m having a medical issue here... I’ll come back another time,” he said. 

As Hoenack was removing his mic and walking out the door he continued shouting, “You don’t give a s*** about academics...I’ve never met such a group of disgusting people in all my life.” 

The meeting continued after Hoenack’s departure and the updated communication protocols were adopted by the four remaining board members.

When asked about the contentious Nov. 30 board meeting, the district issued a boilerplate response: “The role of a school board member is demanding and can be stressful at times. We appreciate our Board Members for volunteering their time and energy for the benefit of our award-winning district.”

When asked if the district has a policy of not allowing board members to speak to the press individually, the district stated only that, “The protocols are best practices to ensure consistent messaging from Litchfield Elementary School District,” and provided a link to the communication protocol document.

Madeline Ackley can be reached at mackley@iniusa.org or found on Twitter @Mkayackley.