Tag Archives: CORA

Financial fraud in WPSD

In August of 2023, the WPSD cut a check to Merit Academy for $270,155 in money from the ESSER III grant the district received from the federal government (this was COVID relief funds). I believe this meets the definition of fraud, as I’ll outline below.

The WPSD budget for the 2022-2023 school year (fiscal year 23, or FY23) – allocated all ESSER money to be spent on the five ‘traditional’ public schools. None was allocated to go to Merit Academy.

Merit FY23 budget didn’t include any ESSER grant money (in fact, there’s only $15,273 in federal money listed)

Money moving from the WPSD to Merit Academy is documented in a monthly ‘flowthrough’ spreadsheet – these monthly spreadsheets never showed any ESSER grant money.

On 1/31/23, Merit headmaster Gwynn Pekron reached out to Del Garrick requesting ESSER grant money; she was told that all money had been allocated for FY23, and that Merit could request money in FY24 if they wished (click here to read the email exchange).

In early June, Merit Academy again reached out to the WPSD about ESSER grant money, requesting money from FY24 (as previously suggested by Del). However, the FY24 budget passed by the board on June 14th showed $858,241 in ESSER grant money, none of which was allocated to go to Merit Academy.

On June 30th, 2023, Merit Academy submitted an invoice to the WPSD requesting $270,155 in ESSER grant money. That invoice was processed and paid in August 2023 (presumably, the delay was due to the district being closed for summer break).

As Merit had not budgeted to receive any ESSER money, they created multiple ledger entries on 6/30/2023 to retroactively justify the expense of the ESSER grant money (click here).

One consequence of this process was that the WPSD started the year with an inflated grant balance, that caught up to the district in January. In January of 2024, middle school parents received an email that an after school academic assistance program was being cut immediately; we were told it was due to a lack of funds to continue the program (funds were quickly reallocated to continue this program). Data obtained from a CORA request showed the ESSER grant fund was already grossly overdrawn, and the budget for that had been slashed from the original $858,241, to now only $523,524 (that difference, $334,717, is greater than the $270,155 that went to Merit in August and is as yet unexplained).

When I asked the board of education about this, director Kimbrell told me, “We were required to include Merit in the allocation of ESSER funds but the prior staff did not include them in the FY22-23 budget even though it was against the law not to.” The CDE’s website does not support the claim that it’s against the law not to include Merit (scroll to the bottom of that link).

So in summary, the board never approved any ESSER grant money to go to Merit Academy, in either year. This substantial sum of money was allocated to be spent on the other schools. Instead of going through the proper channels of including this in a budget (which then allows the public to be aware of how this money is being spent), the district operated outside of board overview and negotiated this directly with Merit Academy. The board approved a budget for FY24 which had inaccurate fund balances as a result. The WPSD deceived the public about where this money was being spent, by not only never including it in any budget, but purposefully publishing a FY24 budget that showed money to be spent in the district that didn’t actually exist (I believe this can best be described as fraud).

There’s another side to this that warrants further investigation. Merit Academy started life as a contract school under ERBOCES, NOT the Woodland Park School District. ERBOCES awarded some ESSER grant money to Merit Academy for the previous fiscal year, FY22 (this is the $10,845.60 number you see in the general ledger screenshot linked above). The question I have is, how did the state and federal governments determine the amount of ESSER grant money to award to the WPSD? If they based this calculation on the number of pupils in the district, it’s clear that Merit Academy was not part of the district at the time of ESSER grant money calculation…did ERBOCES receive extra ESSER grant money that should have been transferred to WPSD when Merit Academy was absorbed into the district in the 2022-2023 school year?

WPSD leadership emboldened by lack of oversight

After voters rejected change last fall, and with the Colorado Department of Education handicapped by no legal authority to actually provide any oversight, Ken Witt and the WPSD board of education seem to be growing bolder, knowing there’s no real accountability in Colorado.

Recently, in responding to a single CORA request of mine, I believe the WPSD:

  • Violated my rights under CORA
  • Limited my rights to public participation in a school board mtg
  • Admitted to violating Colorado Sunshine Law
  • Issued a sworn statement that is legally incorrect

Here’s the timeline of events:

3/8 – agenda published for 3/13 regular board meeting

3/8 – board packet emailed to board members

3/8 – CORA req #617 submitted for board packet for 3/13 mtg; district sent confirmation of receipt at 3:54PM 3/12

3/13 – board mtg gets postponed one week due to weather

3/13 – 11:06AM, district sends email that for CORA #617, “These materials are not available under CORA because they are protected under the deliberative process privilege.”

3/13 – 11:32AM, I sent an email reply: “You make a claim of deliberative process privilege; I request that my rights under C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(XIII) be respected. Per that section of Colorado law, I request “a sworn statement specifically describing each document withheld, explaining why each such document is privileged, and why disclosure would cause substantial injury to the public interest.” I also request that, per the same cited law, ” the custodian shall apply to the district court for an order permitting him or her to restrict disclosure.”

3/18 – The district sent a sworn statement signed by Superintendent Ken Witt, with these claims: “

  1. It is my opinion that the document is privileged under the deliberative process exception of CORA because it constitutes the confidential deliberations of the WPSD Board of Education which have not yet been released to the public or discussed in an open meeting.
  2. Disclosure of the document would cause substantial harm to the public interest because it would quell open and honest deliberations by members of the WPSD Board of Education when drafting, editing, and reviewing board packets prior to their public release.”

3/20 – the postponed 3/13 board mtg is held

3/21 – after several queries about the status of the district court order, I instead receive the results of my original CORA request #617. This exceeded the three day deadline the law requires them to provide a single document in. They never did get the court order as required, they just ran out the clock until it didn’t matter anymore.

Because the packet had been distributed to the board on 3/8 for use in a public meeting, it is not a protected document under 24-72-202(6.5)(c) – therefore it is subject to CORA.

I spoke in the public comment portion in the 3/20 mtg; not having access to the board packet prior to the mtg deprived me of the opportunity & right to provide comment relevant and based on information to be presented in the board meeting (knowing only general topics in the agenda).

The statements by Witt suggests a Sunshine Law violation, by saying there were ‘confidential deliberations’ outside of the public eye, that were the reason to withhold the document.

Ken Witt issues sworn statement which might violate both the Colorado Open Records Act and the Colorado Sunshine Law

The district found itself in a new position last week with a Colorado Open Records Act request. When the agenda for the 3/13/2024 board meeting went out on 3/8, I submitted a CORA request for the board packet for that meeting. These packets contain the reference materials to be presented in the board meetings; you can view the packet from the last board meeting here to get an idea. Under Colorado law requiring no more than a three-day turnaround for a request for a single document in the district’s possession, I thought this would result in me getting the board packet at least an hour before the actual meeting. Some districts make a habit out of providing board packets prior to regular meetings, as the CDE’s Board President Handbook even describes on page 12, so this request was not anything unusual.

As you know, weather prompted postponement of the meeting to the following Wednesday, 3/20. Instead of providing the board packet to me as required by law, the district sent me this message on the date the CORA request was due, 3/13:

These materials are not available under CORA because they are protected under the deliberative process privilege.

Deliberative Process Privilege is a very specific legal term, defined in Colorado law as follows:

Records protected under the common law governmental or “deliberative process” privilege, if the material is so candid or personal that public disclosure is likely to stifle honest and frank discussion within the government, unless the privilege has been waived.

C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(XIII)

Is this a valid assertion? Colorado law section 24-72-202(6.5)(c) covers the definition of these work products, documents that would be not be accessible via CORA. In this case it’s quite clear, saying that work products specifically do NOT include:

(IV) Any materials that would otherwise constitute work product if such materials are produced and distributed to the members of a public body for their use or consideration in a public meeting or cited and identified in the text of the final version of a document that expresses a decision by an elected official.

24-72-202(6.5)(c)

These board packets are distributed to board members when the meeting agenda is sent out. In this case, that would be on 3/8. So by the time my CORA request was due on 3/13, the board packet had met the qualifications above and could not be considered a work product protected from disclosure.

Normally I’d hit a brick wall at this point, not interested in engaging in any legal action, especially for something as innocent-seeming as just a board packet that I know the district would release under CORA after the meeting has taken place. But by invoking ‘deliberative process privilege’, the district created a bit of a mess for themselves. The Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition pointed me to some very interesting information about this legal term. Colorado law (see C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(XIII)) sets requirements for an entity to withhold documents, if the requestor knows the law and makes suitable requests. The first requirement is:

…the custodian shall provide the applicant with a sworn statement specifically describing each document withheld, explaining why each such document is privileged, and why disclosure would cause substantial injury to the public interest.

C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(XIII)

I requested such a statement, and here is what the district provided to me on 3/18/2024:

Ken Witt is claiming that the board packet “constitutes the confidential deliberations of the WPSD Board of Education”. However, the board isn’t allowed to deliberate outside of public, unless and executive session is called. That’s what the Colorado Open Meetings Law is all about. So it seems he’s violating Colorado Open Records Law by using a violation of the Open Meetings Law as his excuse?

’23-24 preliminary enrollment numbers

It took a few CORA requests, but I finally have the preliminary enrollment numbers for our school district, as of the end of August. These are absolutely not final, it’s the count in early October that matters, but it’s a valid data point that shows where we’re starting this year at. I’ll update these numbers once the official October count is complete.

Since this is the first year of universal pre-K in Colorado, I’m excluding those numbers from each years’ comparison. Just focusing on Kindergarten through 12th grade. Also note, I’m using CDE data for previous years (download the ‘membership_grade_by_school’ files). Merit Academy has many students in their homeschool enrichment program, and the CDE counts those as 50% (for funding purposes). So for consistency, I’m applying the same 50% there (for ’23-24, they have 60 students in this program so that counts as 30 in the numbers below; they had 59 the previous year).

In summary, this is yet another year of declining enrollment in our school district, even considering the growth in Merit Academy.

’21-22’22-23’23-24
Traditional Public School enrollment174916761592
Total District Enrollment*203620071986
* – Merit was legally part of ERBOCS in ’21-22, not WPSD, but is being counted as WPSD for comparison here

Here’s the breakdown by school for the same time period. Merit has shown growth, the other schools are decreasing. Note the sharp drop in the Middle School for this year is largely due to moving 6th grade from that school to the three elementary schools.

This school board has consistently voted to boost Merit and ignore our traditional public schools, and these numbers reflect that. We continue to see declining overall district enrollment, too.

If you have concerns about me not including preschool in these numbers, here are the enrollment totals WITH preschool included:

’21-22’22-23’23-24
Traditional Public School enrollment183217911721
Total District Enrollment*211921222085
* – Merit was legally part of ERBOCS in ’21-22, not WPSD, but is being counted as WPSD for comparison here

Lastly, note that per CDE data, in the ’22-23 school year, 473 students in our district opted out, and went to schools in other districts. We don’t know what the numbers are for ’23-24 yet.

Continue reading →

Mental health services in the district

In case you missed it, last spring the district made huge cuts to the mental health services in our schools, refusing to reapply for grants that totaled about $1.2 million and paid for about fifteen jobs in our community. We ended up with some academic advisors in the high school (not licensed counselors), and Witt saying each school would have one counselor in it. Shortly before school started, they sent this email to parents:

WPSD has partnered with Mindsight Health, a mental health support service, to offer professional care and support for our students and in partnership with their families. 

Mindsight Health is a skilled team of highly trained mental health professionals passionate about school-based mental health services. Their mission aligns with our commitment to provide the best possible educational experience for our students, recognizing that the mental health of our students plays an important role in academic achievement. 

Partnering with Mindsight Health allows us to offer students and families mental health support services within our school systems. WPSD remains dedicated to ensuring parents are actively involved in seeking and receiving mental health support for their children. Mindsight Health professionals will be available to provide individual therapy to district students and can meet with their families to discuss how best to support their student. With this partnership, we aim to empower parents and guardians to engage with their child’s mental health needs, working hand in hand with WPSD and Mindsight Health professionals.

Additionally, we have dedicated space within our high school for Mindsight Health professionals to meet with students upon receiving parent or guardian consent. This private space will ensure the confidentiality of information exchanged between Mindsight Health professionals and the

students and families. Moreover, this service is accessible to WPSD students of district run schools that have a qualified need, with Mindsight Health first working with the family’s insurance to ensure coverage.

What sets Mindsight apart is its dedication to tailoring its services to meet the unique needs of each student. By carefully pairing students with a therapist whose skill set complements their individual needs, Mindsight ensures that every child receives personalized attention and the

most effective support possible.

To learn more about Mindsight and its services, please visit their website at www.joinmindsight.com.

For questions, please contact Kim Moore, CAO, at kmoore@wpsdk12.org.

We’ve looked into Mindsight, and they’re a small Colorado Springs based company with questionable experience. They specialize in these in-school mental health services so seem to be just part of the latest trend to privatize our schools. Founded two years ago, they are a very small company, with two people showing up on LinkedIn, and another co-founder not popping up there – and no information about their staff on their website. Despite that small size, they claim to be supporting 18 different schools in this area. I’ve heard rumors from district insiders that the Mindsight reps are not experienced (one said she is starting her course work, but hasn’t had a class yet), and that there are long wait lists (two months), and while I lack proof of those claims, it does seem plausible with the information they’ve made publicly available.

So, the district chose a small Colorado Springs based company to provide mental health services. Are there other companies that they should have considered as well? Absolutely…and one that instantly stands out is Bloom, a local company started by our former Mental Health Supervisor Laura Magnuson. She’s attracted some experienced staff to her business, and it’s located right here in Woodland Park. I was really curious why they chose Mindsight over our local option of Bloom, so I submitted a CORA request for any RFPs (Requests for Proposals) for mental health services…the response was, “”There are no documents responsive to this request.”

What did this no-bid deal with Mindsight involve? Another CORA request dug up the written agreement we have with Mindsight. I’ll include some bullet points below, but you can read the entire document for yourself at this link.

  • The agreement is for one person (or equivalent total support from multiple people) to support the district.
  • Mindsight may use interns for these services.
  • Both verbal and written permission from parents is required before initiating any mental health services.
  • Mindsight is not a ‘crisis response organization’
  • Mindsight will have access to student information, schools, and classrooms, as might be expected.
  • If Medicaid or private insurance are not applicable for a particular student, the district will pay the fees.
  • Travel expenses will be reimbursed at a rate of $30 per day.
  • Last but certainly not least – the initial term of the MOU is from August 1, 2022 through July 21,2023 (yeah, they wrote this for the wrong year).

Resignation Letter from a Gateway teacher

With the gag order in place (policy KDDA), teachers have rightfully felt afraid to speak up. Every now and then though, we see one of them expressing their frustrating when (sadly) resigning…the latest was Rebecca Johnson, a teacher at Gateway for the last 10 years or so, who resigned last month. She emailed a very well-written and detailed letter as her resignation, and I finally obtained a copy via CORA. Please, read it for yourself to gain some insight into what our teachers have been going through in our district.

District hires Gessler Blue to appeal CORA lawsuit

As a followup to my earlier post about District Legal Expenses, it has come to light that in March, the district hired law firm Gessler Blue LLC, and as the contract states, this is for the express purpose of appealing the CORA case where the court ordered the district to release surveillance video (which was leaked to NBC here). Principal Partner Scott Gessler bills his time at $425/hr (other lower staff billable rates are mentioned in the contract). Gessler is a former Colorado Secretary of State, was an attorney on Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, and was also the target of an ethics investigation which ended up costing the state over $515,000 in legal fees (Gessler was found guilty).

Thanks to the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA), you can read his contract with our district here.

District Legal expenses

The current board has greatly expanded the use of outside legal counsel, compared to previous boards. Here’s the data:

  • In the ’19-20 fiscal year, the district spent $15,608.48 on legal expenses (link).
  • In the ’20-21 fiscal year, the district spent $63,532.14 on legal expenses (link). This was the year the district reviewed the charter school application from Merit Academy.
  • In the ’21-22 fiscal year, 7 months of which were under this current board, the district replaced legal counsel with Brad Miller’s office and spent $145,872.56 on legal expenses (link1, link2).
  • In the ’22-23 fiscal year, the district spent $171,250.21 on legal expenses (link1, link2).

What is the board spending our money on? It’s hard to say, they’re pretty secretive as the attorney invoices get heavily redacted. Here’s one from April of last year. What sort of information is being hidden from us? A bit of insight can be gained by looking at the invoice from May of last year, which is the only one received in unreacted form. That will show you the sort of information the district is choosing to keep secret. Judge for yourself if it’s appropriate. One thing you’ll note is soon after Miller came on, the board started using lawyers to redact CORA requests, something done by district employees previously. That’s just a small portion of overall legal fees, but does raise the question of why the board felt necessary to include lawyers in all of those documentation reviews.

7/2/2023 Weekly Update

Last week:

Here’s what’s coming up this week:

  • The Thursday, July 6th City Council meeting agenda contains a line item, “Celebration and Congratulations to Gateway Elementary for receiving the Governor’s Distinguished Improvement Award.” It’s great to see Gateway staff get the recognition they deserve…better late than never! This council meeting also features a discussion, “Council discussion on Woodland Park School District’s Sales Tax IGA.” (IGA is Inter-Governmental Agreement)

Colorado Governor’s Distinguished Improvement Award (Gateway Elementary)

As previously reported here, Gateway Elementary was honored with the Governor’s Distinguished Improvement Award recently! The thing is though, no one in Woodland Park seemed to know about it until I posted it on Facebook. We found reference to it on the CDE’s website, and a couple weeks after making this info public, the district did finally issue a press release about this.

I learned via CORA that Superintendent Ken Witt received two emails from the CDE about this back on April 27th (email 1, email 2). Here’s what Witt received:

Good morning,


On behalf of Commissioner Anthes, I am pleased to invite you to participate in CDE’s School and District Awards Ceremony on Thursday, May 18 from 2:00-4:30 p.m. to recognize the achievements of your district from 2022!


The award designations for 2022 were noted on School Performance Frameworks, and our Competitive Grants and Awards team will be reaching out to you following this email with a list of your award recipients.


We are hoping that you can attend the awards ceremony and reception and look forward to hearing from you. Knowing that it is a very busy time of year, we will also be delivering award banners and certificates to districts who are unable to attend. Attached you will find an invitation with event details including how to RSVP.


Kindest regards and congratulations,
Rhonda Haniford

source

Not only was our district a no-show at the awards ceremony, but I’ve heard nothing about any of the promised award banners and certificates. It’s not clear why the board and superintendent are handling this the way they are.