OSD director condemns colleagues' negative treatment, community criticizes board’s behavior

Olympia School District (OSD) Board Director Maria Flores, together with community members, lambasted other directors following public criticism of the out-of-town retreat on August 10 in Belfair, which she says triggered a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) breakdown.

“I will not silence myself for how much you hurt me from that behavior in the retreat,” said Flores during the meeting.

Flores highlighted the other directors’ yelling, crying, anger-posturing, and gaslighting against her, the attending public, and the press during the retreat.

The regular meeting on Thursday, Aug. 22 was held to forward some proposed changes to a policy series and hear public comments.

Attack on fellow board member

During the retreat, Board President Hilary Seidel said board members felt Flores could not fully engage in board work as she is also a cabinet member in the state's executive Educational Agency.

OSD4All representative Erika Lari wrote in an opinion piece with The JOLT, “Throughout the consolidation effort, one school board member consistently focused on solutions and community feedback, and that was Director Maria Flores.”

Flores talked about how the other directors attacked her repeatedly for “not visiting schools enough,” explaining to the public that the board knows she could not take leaves easily as she is a single mother who is also supporting her physically disabled parent, and does attend the night meetings regularly.

“Director Flores was berated to the point of a PTSD attack during lunch and somehow participated throughout the entire meeting without raising her voice or being defensive,” said Lari in her piece.

Flores attended the meeting online and explained why she was not physically present with the other directors.

“I'm not there because I do not feel comfortable being in that room after the retreat,” Flores stated. “Students, I want to first apologize to you. I should have stood up for you in that meeting, because what you witnessed was not acceptable or normal behavior by public servants and by school board directors,” added Flores.

Flores confirmed she had a PTSD breakdown during the retreat’s break but did not raise her voice until the end, unlike her fellow directors.

The director continued that she still respected her colleagues whenever she visited the schools alone during the school consolidation talks, or even when she dissented from the majority’s decisions by citing laws.

“For this retreat, I'm looking forward to having a neutral culturally competent facilitator who can help us with building trust and resolving our conflict.  I went to the retreat, and that did not occur.” Flores revealed that she sent this request in an email before the retreat.

Highlighting her qualification as a Certified Mediator by the King County Dispute Resolution Center, Flores emphasized that the directors cannot resolve their own conflicts and thus need a neutral mediator.

Flores mentioned being yelled at for every dissent she had during the retreat and for mentioning her experience at the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI).

“I witnessed the press and the public being told to be quiet, and then having a speaker played loudly so that they could not hear what was happening,” Flores revealed about what happened during the retreat. “And this meeting occurred outside of Olympia, far from our constituents.”

Flores appealed for another session with the directors involving a neutral mediator to work on issues.

Removal of report requirement before school closure

Another issue the public raised was the proposed revisions to the Policy 6000 series, over concerns that the board might remove the written analysis requirement before a school closure process starts.

“Policy 6883 is the district's policy for handling a school's proposed closure. It was the violation of this policy in particular, that led the Board to face legal action last spring that ultimately halted the school closure process,” noted Lari.

A judge halted the school closure process after it was determined that the process failed on account of a lack of notice and meaningful citizen involvement opportunities.

“The Board has considered putting a policy into play that would provide them with less information before making such a major decision,” Lari added.

Another community member commented against removing the written report, pointing out that the requirement aligns with state law.

“You're gonna have some problems if you make it less than the RCW. There's important verbiage in there. You need to look at that you have to have provision in there. You cannot cut out provisions. It cannot be that general,” said the commenter.

School board president responds

Seidel only responded by explaining that the policies under the 6000 series discussed during the meeting do not include Policy 6883, which community members commented on.

“Some of the public commenters mentioned 6000 policies that we're not discussing today because we already had a 1st reading for those in our work session… We’re here to receive a 1st reading on those policies that are sort of supplemental,” Seidel said.

Policy 6883 was one of the policies included in a preliminary reading during the board’s August 1 work session.

There were eight proposed additional policies during the meeting: 6225 (Electronic Signatures), 6230 (vendor conflict of interest policy), 6240 (food and beverage consumption), 6550 (capitalization threshold for leases or subscription-based contracts), 6570 (property and data management), 6925 (architect and engineering services), 6950 (contracts with licensed and registered professionals for capital projects), and 6959 (acceptance of completed projects).