Posted yesterday in the Colorado Politics website:

Lawyers for the Woodland Park School District and the local teachers’ union agreed on Wednesday to mediate their dispute over a policy that allegedly infringes on employees’ constitutional right to free speech.

Last month, the Woodland Park Education Association and its president, Nathaniel Owen, filed suit against the district, seeking to strike down a prohibition on employees speaking to the press or posting on social media about school matters without the superintendent’s prior approval. The district warned that neutering the policy would embolden “dissident” teachers in a school board election year.

At a Sept. 13 conference, U.S. District Court Judge Gordon P. Gallagher cautioned that portions of the policy, in his view, “do have problems.”

In lieu of holding a hearing on the plaintiffs’ request to block the policy’s enforcement through a preliminary injunction, Gallagher asked the parties if they would be amenable to revamping the document themselves. He disclosed that U.S. Magistrate Judge Maritza Dominguez Braswell, the lone federal judge stationed in Colorado Springs, had offered to mediate the dispute.

“We think that’s a great idea,” said Matthew J. Werner, the attorney for the district. The plaintiffs’ attorney similarly agreed to meet with Dominguez Braswell.

Earlier this year, the school district revised its policy on press releases and interviews. Previously, the policy focused on the superintendent’s role in communicating to the public. However, the modifications now prohibit employees from being interviewed by the media about school operations without authorization.

Moreover, the policy prevents staff from posting on social media “in their capacity as employees” about district decisions, unless granted permission. Violations of the policy “will be considered to be insubordination.”

The teachers’ union challenged the manner in which the district issued the policy, as well as the substance.

“Employees can no longer speak on matters of public concern without fear of reprisal from the School District,” lawyers for the plaintiffs argued in seeking an injunction. Teachers are “prohibited from being able to speak at School Board meetings, post information on social media, or make comments to the media on matters of public concern regarding their working conditions and learning environment.”

The district countered that eliminating the policy would increase criticism and disrupt operations.

“To grant the Union’s Motion would require an injunction that would embolden dissident School District employees to make public statements on social media as official school representatives,” wrote Werner. “The School District faces significant employee dissent should the injunction be imposed during an election year and a tumultuous and contentious political climate.”

In May, NBC News reported on the tumult in the district, in which a conservative school board member likened their “divide, scatter, conquer” tactics to those of former President Donald Trump. The superintendent has also minimized the importance of student counseling and the board president derided the teachers’ “psycho agenda.”

Other controversies included the board’s condemnation of voluntary mental health screenings for children and their embrace of a conservative social studies curriculum that state board of education members called “too extreme.” Amid the outcry after the school board approved a charter school allegedly without prior notice, board member David Illingworth urged the then-superintendent to create a “list of positions in which change in personnel would be beneficial” — apparently referring to terminations.

The teachers’ union lawsuit is the latest effort to confront the district’s leadership. Gallagher, the district judge, suggested that the constitutional claims about the district’s restrictive communication policy had merit.

“As written, on its face,” he said, some sections “do have problems. Problems that can potentially be corrected. But problems nonetheless.”

The parties agreed to try mediation over the next two to three weeks. Gallagher said if they still wish for him to rule on a preliminary injunction afterward, he will proceed. 

“I will await her report on that issue,” he said, referring to Dominguez Braswell.

The lawsuit also challenges the district’s decision to provide staff with professional liability insurance through the Professional Association of Colorado Educators, which the plaintiffs have called an anti-union organization.

The case is Woodland Park Education Association et al. v. Woodland Park School District et al.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/courts/colorado-springs-federal-judge-to-mediate-woodland-park-schools-free-speech-suit/article_50c26db4-5283-11ee-b9af-c712dfa6edb3.html?fbclid=IwAR2iAFPlHjRypb-O5AyNmjJEkY0xwZjvlDr0-de5Ds5BFjJG9nnTzgoCjJQ

Staff claimed they were in the dark about the new policy, which requires prior approval from the superintendent for posts about school or district decisions.
— Read on www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/next-with-kyle-clark/lawsuit-woodland-park-school-board-violating-staffs-right-to-free-speech-new-media-policy/73-2564a21d-3a41-416e-8e3d-3d07413e8bfa