An email sent by Van Vreede to teachers, urging them to support the recall, has raised significant ethical and legal questions, particularly given her role in setting the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) raises for teachers. 

Key Points:

• • Conflict of Interest: Van Vreede’s dual role as a recall proponent and a key decision-maker in setting teacher salaries raises significant ethical concerns.
  • Professional Boundaries: Teachers are pressured to engage in political activities during working hours, disrupting the educational environment.
  • Legal Repercussions: Van Vreede’s actions could lead to censure, violation of school policy, and potential legal consequences.
  • Impact on Teacher Morale: The situation has split the staff, causing fear and division among teachers.
  • Public Accountability: The community must decide what kind of school board they want and demand ethical behavior from elected officials.
  • Support for Affected Teachers: Clear communication of policies and professional development on teachers’ rights are essential to support affected teachers.

Van Vreede’s Email & Its Implications

The email, which has been shared with our newsroom, shows Van Vreede asking teachers to support the recall effort and to get other teachers to sign the petition. While the names of the teachers involved have been removed to protect their identities, the content of the email is clear in its intent. Van Vreede’s position on the board gives her significant influence over the annual pay raises for teachers, a fact that complicates her request for support in the recall effort.

The ethical implications of this email are multifaceted:

1. 1. Conflict of Interest: Van Vreede’s dual role as a recall proponent and a key decision-maker in setting teacher salaries raises questions about the appropriateness of her actions. According to the Wisconsin Association of School Boards’ Code of Ethics, board members should avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof. By asking teachers to support the recall, Van Vreede may be perceived as leveraging her position to influence their actions, which could undermine trust in the board’s impartiality.
   2. Professional Boundaries: Teachers are expected to maintain a professional environment focused on education. Engaging in political activities during working hours can disrupt this environment and detract from their primary responsibilities. The pressure to support the recall during school hours could create a hostile work environment and affect teacher morale. While the email does not explicitly instruct teachers to campaign during school hours, it is evident that the most convenient place for teachers to reach out to one another is at school, further complicating the situation. This raises the question: Are the teachers who are engaging in political activity during school hours putting the students first?
   3. Legal Considerations: Wisconsin law emphasizes the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest and using one’s position for personal gain. If it is found that Van Vreede’s actions constitute a misuse of her position, she could face legal repercussions, including potential censure by the board or other disciplinary actions.

Consequences and Recommendations

Given the gravity of the situation, several potential consequences and recommendations have been proposed:

1. 1. Recusal from Pay Raise Discussions: Van Vreede must recuse herself from participating in the upcoming discussions on teacher salaries for the 2025-2026 school year. Anything less would create controversy and undermine the credibility of the process. The public should demand this recusal to prevent further corruption and ensure fairness.
   2. Censure by the School Board: The school board may consider censuring Van Vreede for her actions. Censure is a formal statement of disapproval that, while not legally binding, serves as a public reprimand and a means of holding board members accountable for their conduct.
   3. Public Accountability: Ultimately, the public has a role to play in holding the school board accountable. Community members must decide what kind of school board they want—one that upholds ethical standards and holds administrators accountable, or one that engages in actions that could undermine public trust.
   4. Clear Communication and Policies: School administrators should clearly communicate and enforce policies regarding political activities on school grounds. This includes reminding staff of the employee code of conduct and the consequences of violating these policies.
   5. Professional Development: Providing professional development sessions on teachers’ rights and advocacy can empower teachers to stand up for themselves and their colleagues. Understanding their legal protections and how to effectively advocate for their rights is essential.

Additional Concerns

Van Vreede’s actions not only cause division among staff but also put them at risk. Campaigning on school grounds is forbidden by school policy and the employee code of conduct manual. This raises the question: What would Van Vreede stand to gain from such a risky action that has divided our community?

The recall committee’s website points out that Angela Hansen Winker is just the first target. Jeff Nelson is up for election and the two new school board members Anthony Decker and Mike Mollen who were elected this past April by defeating the previous School Board president overwhelmingly, with 82% of the votes cast against former president Nicole Gerend are next. Why would Van Vreede take such a risky step? Why would she put others in jeopardy? Why does she want to remove four board members, starting with Angela Hansen Winker? What more do we need to find out?

Teacher Reactions

While a few teachers have come forward to claim they speak on behalf of all teachers, this is not the case. There are teachers who are speaking out behind the scenes, afraid of retaliation. This situation has definitely split the staff, creating an environment of fear and division. Teachers who oppose the recall effort feel pressured and worry about potential consequences for their careers. Are these teachers, who are engaging in political activities during school hours, putting the students first?

As this story continues to unfold, we encourage readers to share their thoughts and opinions on the matter. What kind of school board do you want for our community? One that holds administrators accountable, or one that orchestrates recalls against those who do?

Stay tuned for further updates on this developing story.

[1]: Wisconsin Legislature: Chapter 19 – General Duties of Public Officials, including Conflict of Interest Laws