Ongoing Kent School Board drama flares up again among members

The ongoing drama between Kent School Board member Donald Cook with fellow board members and Kent School District leaders took a lot more twists and turns over the last week or so.

The often-heated conflict started in February when the board formed a Labor Policy Committee that excluded Cook, one of its five members, for contract discussions with district unions because his wife teaches in the district. Cook has fought the formation of that committee ever since.

Among the latest developments:

Cook briefly walked out of the board meeting Wednesday evening, Oct. 9 after discussion of a measure put on the agenda that night to repeal the resolution adopted in February. Cook became upset when he tried to get Board President Meghin Margel and Board member Tim Clark to explain why they brought up the measure and received no specific answers. Board members Awale Farah and Andy Song were absent from the meeting.

“It makes no sense that it was passed in the first place and now you are removing it,” Cook said prior to walking out of the boardroom. “You are not admitting it shouldn’t have been done, and no one is willing to say why it was done. I’m not being provided any information. …I ask you a question and you refer to the district lawyer (Curtis Leonard).

“This is why people don’t trust us and why they don’t pass bonds and levies. You bring it up the last minute (with no opportunity for public input) and say it has to be done today or the world will fall apart.”

Cook tried to get Leonard to explain the reasons behind the proposal, but Leonard replied that most of the conversation can only be discussed in executive session.

When Cook later pressed Margel for reasons why the board wanted to rescind the resolution, she had a short reply.

“It has served its purpose, it’s time to move forward,” Margel said. “We’ve discussed it in the past, it will not be discussed today.”

After Cook walked out, Margel called for a brief recess. Cook then returned and Clark called for a vote on the proposal to repeal the resolution adopted in February.

Margel and Clark voted to pass it. Cook didn’t say yes, no or abstain when asked for his vote, so Margel marked down his vote as abstaining. The measure passed 2-0-1. The board had a quorum of three, so only two votes were needed to rescind the resolution.

Lawsuit dismissed

The board action came just a week after a King County Superior Court judge on Oct. 2 dismissed a civil lawsuit filed by Cook against the Kent School District.

Cook, and district resident and parent Greta Nelson, filed the suit in March in response to the controversial resolution adopted in February by the board to restrict Cook from participating in union contract discussions, claiming he should not have been excluded.

Judge Nicholas Straley agreed with a motion to dismiss the case filed by school district attorneys because notice about the civil lawsuit was filed one day late (31 days, instead of 30 days) with the board secretary after adoption of the resolution on Feb. 28.

Nelson, in a social media post, took responsibility for missing the filing deadline. She and Cook initially filed the suit without the help of an attorney.

Nelson said she assisted Cook with his complaint and filing, “but failed to double and triple check the requirements of RCW (Revised Code of Washington) 28A.645.010(1) for anything I was missing.”

Nelson said it’s a challenge to take on a government body.

”The odds are seemingly insurmountable for a member of the public to take legal action on their own and without error, without incurring the significant costs of retaining legal counsel in order to be successful,” Nelson said.

Cook plans to appeal the decision. Court documents he filed claim he was personally impacted by the passage of the resolution and has standing as an “aggrieved party.”

“I am not deterred by the case being dismissed by King County Superior Court Judge Straley,” Cook said in an email to the Kent Reporter.

Cook’s suit claims the resolution impacted his personal life and emotional well-being.

“Plaintiff Cook has been thrust into a state of uncertainty regarding his electability caused by the diminished role he now plays with respect to labor matters and oversight of the district regarding its largest expense (its staff),” according to the civil suit.

Lara Hruska, an attorney with Seattle-based Cedar Law, which was eventually hired by Cook to take on the case, said she will appeal the decision.

​”We think this dismissal was legally incorrect and are filing a motion to reconsider and intend to appeal if the judge doesn’t change his order,” Hruska said in an email. “Interesting that the district has now rescinded the resolution but that doesn’t moot our case.”

The initial appeal must be filed with King County Superior Court, but if Straley doesn’t change his ruling, the appeal will go to the state Court of Appeals.

School district response

The communications department of the school district issued a press release Oct. 10 in response to the court rulings and the board vote to rescind the resolution that kept Cook off the Labor Policy Committee.

The district said the board adopted the resolution in February “due to the potential for conflicts of interest, unfair labor practices, and the disclosure of confidential information.”

District staff further described its stance.

“The Labor Policy Committee provided security and confidentiality for the District and all bargaining groups, since funding for negotiated contracts with all of the District’s 10 labor groups comes from the same District budget,” according to the statement. “Any conflict of interest could have an impact on all other bargaining groups. With Resolution 1669 in place, this past spring, the District settled contracts with the Kent Education Association, as well as other unions through the collective bargaining process.”

Straley also denied a motion by Cook to amend the complaint on a claim that his First Amendment rights were violated for the board not allowing him to participate in certain meetings or to even know about the meetings.

“It is undisputed that Mr. Cook continues to be able to vote upon ratification of any collective bargaining agreement the District reaches with any of its unions,” according to the ruling. “In addition, Mr. Cook retains the ability to address concerns and his opinions to fellow Board members and to members of the public regarding union matters or any other issue. Under the circumstances, passage of Resolution 1669 is not a sufficiently adverse action to implicate First Amendment concerns.”

The district statement then added that the board voted to rescind Resolution 1669, so it would have no further force or effect.

“The Kent School District Board looks forward to focusing without distraction on the core work of the District: Student learning,” according to the statement.

Cook frustrated

Early in the board meeting, Cook asked fellow board members in a motion to approve the district to pay his legal fees in the case.

“I propose that my legal fees be paid since we are removing the resolution,” Cook said.

Neither Margel or Clark seconded the motion, so it wasn’t added to the agenda.

Cook later said during the meeting that he has spent about $45,000 on legal fees, with about $6,000 of that from public fundraising.

Cook also asked Margel, Clark and staff if a similar resolution will be passed when the next round of union contract talks come up, but never received an answer.

In his board report near the end of meeting, Cook further vented his frustration.

”I’ve tried to get this repealed for 10 months,” Cook said about the resolution. “No reason was given why we are repealing it or any admission that it was the wrong thing to do for this district.”

Cook, elected by voters last year, began to choke up as he further talked about the resolution that singled him out.

“I’m disappointed in the board, it drives me crazy because I try my hardest to do what’s best for the district. …and I still have these sort of things happening,” Cook said. “It speaks volumes why people are frustrated with this board and look at us and ask why are we so dysfunctional, these are reasons why.”

Cook said he thought after walking out prior to the vote to rescind the resolution to not return so the vote couldn’t occur without a quorum.

“If I had left, it would’ve sat for two weeks,” he said. “But I wanted to allow you to do this to me, it’s still the right thing even though you look at me like I am beneath you. …it’s beyond frustrating, but I won’t do things you do to me back to you.

“But you go home and sit with this action and recognize the things you did to a fellow board member. I would never take you out of the conversation. …This is beyond anything I could have imagined with this board.”

With that final statement, Cook packed up his things and walked out of the meeting for a second time, just before Clark and Margel gave their board reports, the final agenda item.

Margel than asked Leonard, the district attorney, if she should end the meeting with only two board members remaining.

“With no quorum, it makes sense to end,” Leonard said to Margel, which she did.