Dr. Dyb’s Leave Lacking Documentation

Interesting enough, in a recent document (February 13, 2017 Questions Raised) the school board answered questions regarding Dr. Dyb’s leave approval.

The board stated that Dr. Dyb’s leave was approved at the January 3, 2017 special board meeting.

In the minutes from this meeting, when the board convened into open session at the end, there was “no report and no action taken.”

If that is the case, how were they able to put him on leave on December 2, 2016 (one month prior to approval of the leave) and publish his leave in the Waupaca County Post on December 15, 2016? Continue reading “Dr. Dyb’s Leave Lacking Documentation”

Advertisements

A Response to the February Board Response, part 1

At the February 13, 2017 I-S School Board Meeting, the school board prepared a response that was distributed to those in attendance. This is a response to their response to the op ed that was printed in the Waupaca County Post on February 8, 2017.

Please keep in mind that a letter to the editor in the newspaper is only allowed 500 words. This requires the writer to fit a lot of information in a very small space. The school board was not limited to a word count in their ability to comment.

The school board begins their letter of February 13th saying that they are saddened and sickened. They also state that this unrest has been occurring for the last several months. As far as I have been able to track, questioning began at the beginning of January 2017, I was not aware of any “growing discontent for the last several months“. They also state that the actions of the people asking questions “threatens to destroy a community and a School District that has long been considered one of the best in the State.”

I’m not sure why they started their letter this way. They chose words to evoke a reaction in the people who would be reading. What about the letter made them sad and sick? How is a community asking questions a “threat?” Continue reading “A Response to the February Board Response, part 1”

A Response to the February Board Response, part 2

If you are starting here, please read part 1 first.

The Tennis Courts

The op-ed written by Timdal, Olson and Opperman stated: There is no documentation of meetings regarding the status change on the privately –funded tennis court project. The school board approved the project at the October 10, 2016 meeting and work began.

The school board stated in their February 13th response, that the statement above is inaccurate, because the project wasn’t approved on October 10, 2016. Actually, the tennis project was approved conditionally at the December 2015 school board meeting. The board also stated that the conditional approval was dependent on the Tennis Association signing the Memorandum of Understanding that was drafted and that they never signed it. The board brings up that it was discovered that the memorandum was never reviewed by the lawyer. It is implied in the boards response that they discovered that the lawyer hadn’t reviewed it after October 1, 2016. Continue reading “A Response to the February Board Response, part 2”

Open Letter to the School Board

 

The following communication occurred between January 16th and January 22, 2017. It was written as an open letter to the I-S School Board and the Waupaca County Post was included on the email. All email addresses have been removed to protect people’s privacy.

Subject: Open Letter to the Iola-Scandinavia School Board

January 16, 2017

To the Iola-Scandinavia School Board:

As a school board member, you have been elected for an extremely important job in our community. You have agreed to donate your time and personal resources in order to serve the parents, students, and school district. I am grateful that you care enough about our community to give your time in this service.

I would like to reference some information that is on the school district website, which contains the following document, “School Board Member Responsibilities” (http://www.iola.k12.wi.us/cms_files/resources/161.pdf). This is part of the Policy Manual, Series 100 – Board of Education. I assume that when someone becomes a member of the school board they acknowledge and agree to do their job according to these guidelines, including the following excerpts, from Parts 1, 2, and 4:

“A school board member should honor the high responsibility that his/her membership demands:

  • By thinking always in terms of “children first.”
  • By understanding that the basic function of school board members is “policy-making” and not “administrative” and by accepting the distinction between these two functions.
  • By refusing to “play politics” in either the traditional partisan manner or in any petty sense.
  • By refusing to make statements or promises as to how he/she will vote on any manner.
  • By making decisions only after all facts bearing on a question have been presented and discussed.
  • By winning the community’s confidence that all is being done in the best interests of school children.”

On Wednesday, January 4, 2017, three images were snapchatted to a few of the high school students at I-S High School. Of the three images, one said, “Bombing the school tomorrow” and another post said, “Shooting up the school tomorrow.” All of these snapchats were sent by one student who attends the I-S High School.

Unfortunately, none of this information was communicated to parents or teachers at the school. Many students, including my own, came home from school on January 5th (the day after the snapchats were sent) and informed their parents of the snapchat messages and that the student who sent them was not at school that day.

As a parent of children in the district, I am upset at how this was handled, as are many other parents. There was no communication with the parents or the school staff regarding the incident, how it was handled, and any future actions that would be taken to protect the students.

It was communicated by the school board members to the parents at the I-S School Board Meeting on January 9th, that the following people were notified of the snapchats: Principal Sara Anderson, the Iola Police Department, and the Portage County Sheriff’s Department. It was also stated that action was taken to protect the safety of the staff and students and that the threat was deemed not credible.

An email was sent out on Wednesday, January 11, 2017 from Business Manager Sarah Thiel, providing an “Update Regarding Recent Safety Concern.” This was a good attempt at making things right, unfortunately, the email never explained what the threat was and what steps were taken to ensure that this would not happen in the future. There were many parents who received this email, but had no idea what the email was in reference to.

When inquiring of teachers if they knew the status of the situation, some mentioned that they were never informed about the threats.

As parents, we understand that there are things that will happen outside of our control. The one thing that the school district does have control over is their ability to communicate with the community what happened and what the plan is going forward.

The Policy Manual, located on the school website, states that the district administrator is the person responsible for deciding dismissal of students and subsequent action after the procedures have been followed (Section 723.1 Bomb Threats). I was unable to find a policy for an active shooter situation, only a brief mention of individuals with weapons on school premises under Section 723 (Emergency Plans), which was last revised February 11, 2008, many years before the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, CT, in which a 20-year old shot and killed 20 children and six staff members [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting].

Without a qualified district administrator currently in place (carrying the qualifications necessary to fulfill the duties of administrator), our district is left vulnerable. I have the utmost respect for both principals, the current business manager and the district staff to effectively do the jobs for which they were hired. I give them my full support and trust them with my children. I have seen their compassion with my own children, their ability to handle sensitive situations, and I greatly appreciate all that they do for our schools.

I also understand that while the current administrator is on leave, there needs to be someone who can stand in his place in the interim. However, I am not confident that the two principals and the business administrator have the time to perform not only their full-time duties, but also that of the district administrator. I believe this is especially true after the response by the district to the community regarding the aforementioned threats.

Many in the community have unanswered questions regarding the leave that District Administrator David Dyb was placed on in December 2016, especially after he successfully encouraged support for the referendum that provides the district the ability to increase the funds they receive from the taxpayers in the district. I know that there were others who worked hard to push the referendum through, but he and Business Manager Sarah Thiel were the ones able to answer people’s questions and help them understand why this was a great move for our district.

When Dr. Dyb moved into our community, he became a part of it. He joined the Iola Lions, volunteered for events throughout town, and made a point to be at most extra-curricular school events. Because of this, he was nominated for the Iola Chamber Person of the Year award this month. People in the community have seen him as a caring individual, who loves this community and would do anything to help it succeed.

I understand that personnel matters cannot be openly discussed, but I am concerned that the board has not handled this situation in a manner above reproach, due to the fact that Dr. Dyb is still on leave and a decision hasn’t been made on his future with the Iola-Scandinavia school district. If there are grounds for dismissal, then he should have been dismissed immediately. If an investigation needed to happen, that can be done while he is still working and there is no need to put him on leave unless he is endangering students or staff.

Many in the community are losing confidence in the school board and many rumors are being circulated about the board’s motivation for Dr. Dyb’s dismissal. Some rumors suggest that Dr. Dyb was removed in order to replace him with someone that you have chosen from within the school district. Unfortunately, this brings division to our community and not unity. The question the school board should be asking itself in all of these situations is, “What is best for the students?”

My hope is that each of you will read over the document on the school website, “School Board Member Responsibilities” and look at the decisions you have made in the past in light of these guidelines. Examine yourselves and decide to change if you know that you haven’t been following them. If you are not willing to follow them, now is the time to step down and allow someone who will to take your place.

The taxpayers in this community have the right to know the answers to the following questions:

  1. When will an Active Shooter Policy be established for our district?
  2. How will the school district communicate with the community and its staff regarding threats to student and staff safety in the event of an active shooter situation or shooter threat
  3. What information will be included in that communication and when should it be disseminated?
  4. Will the student who issued the threat be allowed to return to school? If so, what precautions have been taken to make sure that students and staff will be safe?
  5. What are the plans for the district administrator position?
  6. When will a decision be made on Dr. Dyb’s future with the district?
  7. What steps will be put in place to find a replacement if it is decided Dr. Dyb is terminated or another course of action is taken?

When (month and year) does the school board hope to have a new district administrator hired?

I appreciate your time in these matters and I anticipate a timely response.

Respectfully submitted,

Diana Jones

 

Subject: Open Letter to the Iola-Scandinavia School Board

January 17, 2017

Diana,

Thank you for reaching out to the school board with your concerns.  I will do my best to address your concerns and answer your questions.  I have included any and all input given to me from the entire group.

Thank you for pointing out the duties of a school board representative.  I speak on behalf of our entire board when I say this is possibly the most thankless, difficult position we will ever hold.  I don’t think any of us would be here if we did not hold the interests of our children to the highest level as well as our staff and entire community.  It is rare to hear what you have done right as a board member  (we don’t require a pat on the back); however, to have our character brought into question every time someone does not agree with a decision we make is another story.  We caution you to remember, it is very easy to judge without all of the facts, and unfortunately, we are unable to share all of the facts for legal, ethical, and confidential reasons – much of the time.

After the regular school board meeting on January 9, 2017, we have worked with our Administrative team trying to right what the community felt was wrong.  We created a statement to go out to all parents and community as requested.  You’re right; we did not share details of what happened, as it is illegal to do so.  The fact that many were confused by our statement is the very reason we omitted this initially, as sometimes it can raise more anxiety than awareness of the situation, especially since this was deemed a non-credible threat.  One correction to your original statement, our staff was indeed notified of the threat.  An email was sent to staff members. 

The safety committee will be meeting next week and our Administration along with trained professionals will sit at a table and again discuss the ultimate safety of our children, staff and community.  We assure you, the safety of students, staff and community is of utmost importance to us and we do not take this topic lightly.

We have developed a chain of command and list of duties that have been divided between our Administration and Directors during Dr. Dyb’s sabbatical.  Please realize, our administrative team was already responsible for many of these duties/tasks, as Dr. Dyb over-saw their work.  We feel our 3 interim administrators are very qualified as they, along with our entire staff, are the very reason our district is as successful as we are. 

It must be said that the success of the referendum was owned by many people working behind the scenes.  Most do not want the recognition for all their time and effort, as this was accomplished as a team.  The I-S Vote Yes Committee, the community, the board of education, the administrative team, all of our staff and students but most importantly – SARAH THEIL.  She was the lead school district employee and owned the referendum.  Sarah spent tireless hours preparing our district for this.  We will not stand for her hard work, and the work of many people to be ignored.

As for community relations, we have never stated that David was not a community asset.  We respect his dedication to our community and have thanked him for this on numerous occasions. 

As your board of education, we have spent many hours making sure we do what is in the best interest of this district.  This includes the most recent decision to grant Dr. Dyb a sabbatical leave of absence through at least March 2017.  Dr. Dyb is still employed by the district; there is not a “future” decision to be made at this time.

You mentioned the community is losing confidence; losing confidence seems to be a theme.  We as a collective board are losing confidence as well.  It is very easy to ridicule, pose allegations, and concoct rumors when you do not have all of the facts, facts that we are legally unable to share with the community.  We would urge everyone to ask themselves what they really know to be true, not what you’ve heard or feel or read on Facebook, but what you really know to be true.   We are not intentionally withholding information, you have elected us to do this job and we are unwilling to break the law to end to the emotional whims of individuals fueling conspiracy theories.   We are trying to allow Dr. Dyb the time and privacy he deserves all while our community creates private social media groups and sabotages the success of our district, because why? Because we cannot share all of the facts?

We cannot control all of the rumors and allegations.  One way you and others may be able to help with this would be to provide Dr. Dyb with the privacy and patience he deserves.  Another possibility would be to not include the public newspaper in your letter to the board, which is only incites media backlash in the community.  Please ask yourself, is this putting our children first?

I believe we have all read the school board responsibilities, in fact they were read to us by a previous board president. To be honest, I am not sure any one of us would spend the amount of time in this seat, after fulfilling our full-time careers and family duties, if we were not here for the right reasons.

In response to  your specific questions:

  1. Our staff have had active shooter training and there are procedures in place for addressing an active shooter.  It is not recommended to develop a policy of your emergency plan as this can be used inappropriately by someone wanting to cause harm. In other words, a publically states policy gives our procedures for how to protect our student to the potential perpetrators.  Despite some people’s desire to do so, we will not provide our strategies to the bad guys.  Our safety committee will meet next week; we will again address this concern.
  2. As mentioned, we are looking into our communication protocol following a threat.  We have decided to do this after listening to our community at the last board meeting. This will also be discussed at the next safety committee meeting.  Several difficult questions to be considered, include: 1) Does the school district inform the community of a “non-threat” as determined by the law enforcement professionals?; 2) If yes, what non-threats are communicated and which ones are not?  Where is the line drawn?; 3) If we communicate non-threats, does it create a situation where a real threat is not taken seriously?
  3. What happens to the student(s) is confidential and dependent on the situation. There are HIPAA laws and guidelines followed for this.  All students and staff were and are safe from the “non-threat”; otherwise, they would not have been allowed and would not be allowed to attend school.
  4. We do not have additional plans; Dr. Dyb is still employed by the district.  He will remain on sabbatical through March 2017, please allow him this time.

Thank you for taking the time to reach out to us and for your genuine concern of the district. Please let us know if we can answer any further questions.

Board of Education

Administration
Subject: RE: Open Letter to the Iola-Scandinavia School Board

January 19, 2017

To the Iola-Scandinavia School Board:

I very much appreciate the time you spent to craft a response to my email. Letters are always difficult. One can read an email over and over, not realizing at times that something can be misconstrued by the reader. It doesn’t matter how hard one tries to make things inoffensive – someone can usually find offense. I apologize for any offense, none was meant.

My intention of including the newspaper in my email is because as a school board, you are held accountable by the taxpayers in the district. It is not like a regular business where the boss can call you in and share their thoughts with you. Every other position in the district has someone that is a part of the district making sure that they are doing their job. As a constituent, I felt like I had no choice but to bring this to the attention of the newspaper. You could easily bury my email and not respond and no one would be the wiser.

I love this district and the people in it – including the people on the board. I will be spending the rest of my life in Iola. I will be raising my kids here. I will be working here. I will be supporting the community in whatever way I can. My ultimate desire is to support the board in whatever way that I can.

I am confident that all of you that are currently on the school board are devoted to our community. I say that in my first paragraph – you are right that you wouldn’t do this job unless you cared about the district and the kids. I have also based almost my entire letter on facts – I do not like to speak on items that are hearsay. I did include one rumor at the end, because I thought it was important that you know what people are saying.

Please know that I appreciate all that you do for our community.

Best,

Diana

I have included notes throughout your email below in order to clarify some of the points that I made. If it is in blue, then it is text from my original email. If it is in red, then it is a point of clarification or a question that I would like an answer to.

Subject: RE: Open Letter to the Iola-Scandinavia School Board

Diana,

Thank you for reaching out to the school board with your concerns.  I will do my best to address your concerns and answer your questions. I have included any and all input given to me from the entire group.

Thank you for pointing out the duties of a school board representative.  I speak on behalf of our entire board when I say this is possibly the most thankless, difficult position we will ever hold.  I don’t think any of us would be here if we did not hold the interests of our children to the highest level as well as our staff and entire community.  It is rare to hear what you have done right as a board member  (we don’t require a pat on the back); however, to have our character brought into question every time someone does not agree with a decision we make is another story.  We caution you to remember, it is very easy to judge without all of the facts, and unfortunately, we are unable to share all of the facts for legal, ethical, and confidential reasons – much of the time.

As a school board member, you have been elected for an extremely important job in our community. You have agreed to donate your time and personal resources in order to serve the parents, students, and school district. I am grateful that you care enough about our community to give your time in this service.

I really am grateful for your service. There are so many things behind the scenes that no one knows you are carrying and that you do all for the sake of the district. I know some of you personally, I have a high respect for you and consider some of you friends as well. I hope that continues.

After the regular school board meeting on January 9, 2017, we have worked with our Administrative team trying to right what the community felt was wrong.  We created a statement to go out to all parents and community as requested.  You’re right; we did not share details of what happened, as it is illegal to do so.  The fact that many were confused by our statement is the very reason we omitted this initially, as sometimes it can raise more anxiety than awareness of the situation, especially since this was deemed a non-credible threat.  One correction to your original statement, our staff was indeed notified of the threat.  An email was sent to staff members. 

When inquiring of teachers if they knew the status of the situation, some mentioned that they were never informed about the threats.

I spoke directly with a few teachers that I just happened to see around town and asked if they knew if the student was returning. They had no idea what had happened.

The safety committee will be meeting next week and our Administration along with trained professionals will sit at a table and again discuss the ultimate safety of our children, staff and community.  We assure you, the safety of students, staff and community is of utmost importance to us and we do not take this topic lightly.

We have developed a chain of command and list of duties that have been divided between our Administration and Directors during Dr. Dyb’s sabbatical.  Please realize, our administrative team was already responsible for many of these duties/tasks, as Dr. Dyb over-saw their work.  We feel our 3 interim administrators are very qualified as they, along with our entire staff, are the very reason our district is as successful as we are. 

I have the utmost respect for both principals, the current business manager and the district staff to effectively do the jobs for which they were hired. I give them my full support and trust them with my children. I have seen their compassion with my own children, their ability to handle sensitive situations, and I greatly appreciate all that they do for our schools.

I also understand that while the current administrator is on leave, there needs to be someone who can stand in his place in the interim. However, I am not confident that the two principals and the business administrator have the time to perform not only their full-time duties, but also that of the district administrator. I believe this is especially true after the response by the district to the community regarding the aforementioned threats.

I am not questioning the skills or the character of Principal Sara Anderson, Principal Stacey Wester, and Business Manager Sarah Thiel. I believe they could do the administrator position, I just don’t believe they have the time to do 1-1/3 full times jobs (although I appreciate that they are willing to). I deeply value them and have an admiration and respect for them. I have entrusted my children to them and love talking to them when I stop in at the schools. I consider them friends and hope that even in the midst of this that will remain. They have supported my children and myself in one of the most difficult times of our lives. Each one of these people mean a lot to me.

It must be said that the success of the referendum was owned by many people working behind the scenes.  Most do not want the recognition for all their time and effort, as this was accomplished as a team.  The I-S Vote Yes Committee, the community, the board of education, the administrative team, all of our staff and students but most importantly – SARAH THEIL.  She was the lead school district employee and owned the referendum.  Sarah spent tireless hours preparing our district for this.  We will not stand for her hard work, and the work of many people to be ignored.

I know that there were others who worked hard to push the referendum through, but he and Business Manager Sarah Thiel were the ones able to answer people’s questions and help them understand why this was a great move for our district.

I agree with you completely that there were others who worked hard to push the referendum through and I mentioned that in my original email. I supported the referendum and still support it.

As for community relations, we have never stated that David was not a community asset.  We respect his dedication to our community and have thanked him for this on numerous occasions. 

My letter does not mention that he was not valued as a community asset by the board, although I can see why you would think that is why I included that information.

As your board of education, we have spent many hours making sure we do what is in the best interest of this district.  This includes the most recent decision to grant Dr. Dyb a sabbatical leave of absence through at least March 2017.  Dr. Dyb is still employed by the district; there is not a “future” decision to be made at this time.

You mentioned the community is losing confidence; losing confidence seems to be a theme.  We as a collective board are losing confidence as well.  It is very easy to ridicule, pose allegations, and concoct rumors when you do not have all of the facts, facts that we are legally unable to share with the community.  We would urge everyone to ask themselves what they really know to be true, not what you’ve heard or feel or read on Facebook, but what you really know to be true.   We are not intentionally withholding information, you have elected us to do this job and we are unwilling to break the law to end to the emotional whims of individuals fueling conspiracy theories.   We are trying to allow Dr. Dyb the time and privacy he deserves all while our community creates private social media groups and sabotages the success of our district, because why? Because we cannot share all of the facts?

I understand that personnel matters cannot be openly discussed, but I am concerned that the board has not handled this situation in a manner above reproach, due to the fact that Dr. Dyb is still on leave and a decision hasn’t been made on his future with the Iola-Scandinavia school district. If there are grounds for dismissal, then he should have been dismissed immediately. If an investigation needed to happen, that can be done while he is still working and there is no need to put him on leave unless he is endangering students or staff.

I wrote this letter prior to the announcement about the sabbatical, so I did not have that information. I also did not ask you to break the law by providing me with information that you legally cannot give. The questions that I asked at the end of my email are the ones that I figured you could answer. I mention that I understand that personnel matters cannot be discussed. I placed this paragraph to show how dismissals are handled in the business world. I understand that this is a school district and things may be handled differently. The important thing that I was attempting to get across is typically when a person is let go from their position (unless it is a general layoff), there is no surprise by the employee or those that work with them. In this case, the community that you are accountable to was surprised that Dr. Dyb was on placed on leave.

Here are other questions that I believe you can answer?   

Which board meeting (date and time) was Dr. Dyb’s leave voted on? If I am not mistaken, personnel matters are discussed privately, but voted on by the board publicly?

Which meeting was Dr. Dyb’s sabbatical voted on? Was this a private meeting and public vote? If not, how was this decided?

A special closed meeting was held on January 3rd to discuss the evaluation of the district administrator position. Dr. Dyb was not present at this evaluation meeting.

School Board Policy 223:

In January of each year, or as soon as thereafter as practicable, the Board shall devote a session to the evaluation of the District Administrator’s performance, with the District Administrator present.

We cannot control all of the rumors and allegations.  One way you and others may be able to help with this would be to provide Dr. Dyb with the privacy and patience he deserves.  Another possibility would be to not include the public newspaper in your letter to the board, which is only incites media backlash in the community.  Please ask yourself, is this putting our children first?

My intention of including the newspaper in my email is because as a school board, you are held accountable by the taxpayers in the district. It is not like a regular business where the boss can call you in and share their thoughts with you. Every other position in the district has someone that is a part of the district making sure that they are doing their job. As a constituent, I felt like I had no choice but to bring this to the attention of the newspaper. You could easily bury my email and not respond and no one would be the wiser.

I believe we have all read the school board responsibilities, in fact they were read to us by a previous board president. To be honest, I am not sure any one of us would spend the amount of time in this seat, after fulfilling our full-time careers and family duties, if we were not here for the right reasons.

Thank you for putting our children first. I don’t think I am amiss in asking all of you to please reread those responsibilities.

In response to  your specific questions:

  1. Our staff have had active shooter training and there are procedures in place for addressing an active shooter.  It is not recommended to develop a policy of your emergency plan as this can be used inappropriately by someone wanting to cause harm. In other words, a publically states policy gives our procedures for how to protect our student to the potential perpetrators.  Despite some people’s desire to do so, we will not provide our strategies to the bad guys.  Our safety committee will meet next week; we will again address this concern.

Wonderful, I am so glad to hear this. Is it possible to include that we have Active Shooter Training in one of the policies – such as Emergency Plans (723)? Is there a non-published version that staff can reference if they need to? How often does staff training occur?

  1. As mentioned, we are looking into our communication protocol following a threat.  We have decided to do this after listening to our community at the last board meeting. This will also be discussed at the next safety committee meeting.  Several difficult questions to be considered, include: 1) Does the school district inform the community of a “non-threat” as determined by the law enforcement professionals?; 2) If yes, what non-threats are communicated and which ones are not?  Where is the line drawn?; 3) If we communicate non-threats, does it create a situation where a real threat is not taken seriously?

I appreciate that communication with the community will be discussed at the next safety committee meeting. I have no doubt that everyone involved with the district (board and staff) cares about the safety of the children and the staff. I also understand the questions that you are asking regarding when and how to communicate. I agree with you that this is no easy task. Since Waupaca just had a similar incident at their school this past week, I am including the communication that I saw on Facebook by the Waupaca County Sheriff’s Department.

  1. What happens to the student(s) is confidential and dependent on the situation. There are HIPAA laws and guidelines followed for this.  All students and staff were and are safe from the “non-threat”; otherwise, they would not have been allowed and would not be allowed to attend school.

Can you tell me if the student will be allowed to return to school? I know of two students who received personal threats from this student and they are afraid if the student returns.

  1. We do not have additional plans; Dr. Dyb is still employed by the district.  He will remain on sabbatical through March 2017, please allow him this time.

Thank you for taking the time to reach out to us and for your genuine concern of the district. Please let us know if we can answer any further questions.

Board of Education

Administration

 

 

FINAL RESPONSE BY BOARD

January 22, 2017

Diana,

I apologize for the delay in answering your additional questions.

I am sorry that I cannot provide you with more information regarding Dr. Dyb’s leave at this time.  The Board is not intentionally withholding information from the community. I understand that you have questions, but I hope you understand that the District has an obligation to protect and respect Dr. Dyb’s privacy.

We are also unable to provide additional information regarding the punishment of the student involved. We assure you, the safety of our students, staff and community is top priority.

Thank you for your concern and dedication to our district.

Kristen Hoyord