ICCSD Board Director Brian Kirschling Threatened Parent with Legal Action for Criticizing Supt. Murley

An Iowa City Community School District parent wrote a letter critical of ICCSD Supt. Steve Murley's failure to comply with federal and state laws regarding the clearly inappropriate discipline of district students. She asked school board directors to read her letter during a board meeting as she was unable to get permission from her supervisor to leave work and read it aloud herself during community comment. Board directors Lori Roetlin, Phil Hemingway, and Chris Liebig were all willing to do so.

Board director Brian Kirschling's first response was as follows:

"FW: constituent comment for 10/25/16

"From Brian Kirschling

"Date: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:51 p.m.

"To: Stephen Murley

"cc

"Subject FW: constituent comment for 10/25/16

"I suspect that this is the letter that is to be read tonight. I sincerely hope is it [sic] not.

"If a board member is reading a personal letter, are these statements considered evaluative?"

Somehow Brian Kirschling and Steve Murley seem to believe that if a statement is "evaluative" of the superintendent, all such statements are confidential, despite the First Amendment's protection of free speech, including the right to criticize public officials.

Within the next 15 minutes, Kirschling threatened the parent who wrote a letter critical of Murley with "legal action" as follows:

"Re: constituent comment for 10/25/16

"From: Brian Kirschling

"Date: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:03 p.m.

"To: [Unnamed parent]

"cc

"Subject RE: constituent comment for 10/25/16

"Thank you for your comments, [parent's first name].

"Given the nature of your comments, I sincerely hope that you do not wish for a sitting board member to read them aloud in a public meeting. If you wish them to be read aloud, I would recommend that you pass them on to a non-board member to read during community comment.

"I would ask that you consider actions before do so, however, as I truly hope that you do not wish to convey the sentiment or tone that you do in letter. Sup [sic] Murley is an employee of the district and, like other public public employees, does not deserve to be insulted or attacked in public. Doing so, according to district policy may subject you to legal action as stated in the Board President's Comments at the beginning of each meeting of the Board.

"Regards,

Brian"

A board director told me that this parent, after receiving Brian Kirschling's email, was literally shaking for three hours.

She wrote to board director Lori Roetlin:

"Date: Tuesday, Oct. 25, 2016 at 4:03 p.m.

"Subject: Fwd: constituent comment for 10/25/16

"To Lori.Roetlin@iowacityschools.org

"Hello Lori,

"Given Dir. Kirschling's response, which I have shared with you, I think it's unwise for anyone on the the board to read my letter. I did not think about the implications to sitting board members when I asked you.

"I'm sorry that he feels the tone is hostile. I didn't mean it that way. I was just trying to stick with what I feel are facts. I plan to tell him that, as well.

"Thank you,

"[Parent's first name]"

In her letter to the board, the parent asked to rebuild "trust" between the ICCSD and parents. She asked to hold staff "accountable" for doing their jobs in compliance with the law. She asked that independent investigations be unbiased, thorough, and that the findings be made public. Part of rebuilding trust, she said, would be to treat parents with "respect." She spoke of the "retaliatory culture" alleged by staff and founded by the Iowa Department of Education. She said that when she asked Supt. Murley, twice, on behalf of a group of parents, if they could speak with the Department of Education, she was "ignored."

She also had a big problem with the news that the school board (4-3) "intend to give Superintendent Murley a very nice new contract with a hefty pay raise."

She added, "I am assuming you are giving him this raise because you believe he is doing an exemplary job. Just in the 2015-16 year, in the special education area, his administration has allowed multiple violations of federal law over the course of at least a year. He initially refused to address those violations; instead the administration hired a lawyer in an attempt to carry on as usual.

"How is this acceptable, much less excellent work? Who benefits from this sort of job performance? If it's not the students, maybe you need to rethink the pay raise."

If this criticism of Supt. Murley is "evaluative" it's also true. No legal action would be appropriate or acceptable in any court of law because First Amendment free speech rights outweigh any locally written, provincial documents written by a school board that thinks it has more power to control people's speech than the Constitution allows.

The gullibility of the public to believe we live in a dictatorship (not yet, just a "flawed democracy" according to the Economist, which just downgraded our republic) reminds me of an elderly client I had once in Iowa City. A local nursing home wanted her little house and property for parking space and tried to force her to sell. She really thought that the nursing home had the power to force her to sell her home to them and there was nothing she could do about it.

"This is the United States of America!" I spluttered. "You don't have to sell your house to them!" This was many years ago.

Finally the nursing home worked out a sweetheart deal. They offered her a space in the nursing home as a bonus if she'd give up or sell her home. I don't remember/know all the details. At least I hope I convinced her and her relatives that they had some bargaining power.

Don't let people push you around. Know your rights. Clearly, now that's more important than ever.