Category: Facebook Warriors

Breaking News: Wrightstown School Board Recall… …Looks More Like a Coverup

Wrightstown, Wisconsin – Misconduct and conflicts of interest involving past and present key members of the Wrightstown Community School District (WCSD) Board and the Wrightstown Area Baseball Association (WABA).

• Controversy: WABA’s request to sell beer on school property was denied, revealing deeper issues.
• Referendum Plans: Andy Space and Nicole Gerend secretly planned an $18.5 million referendum without full board approval.
• $1,000,000 Concession Stand: Plan sought inclusion of  concession stand for WABA to be paid for by tax dollars. 
• Lack of Transparency: WABA members were allegedly informed of referendum before the school board.
• Conflict of Interest: Nicole Gerend was the School Board President and the WABA Treasurer while seeking tax payer dollars for concession stand raises serious conflict of interest concerns. 
• Red herring: Throw others under the bus to deflect from the real issues at hand before getting caught. 
• Call for Accountability: Using ones governmental position shouldn’t be an avenue to enrich the clubs public officials are  are affiliated with. 
• Special Interest for Special People: Other student groups are unfairly sidelined, raising concerns about favoritism and fairness.

Concession Stand Controversy

The community is aware the School Board denied the sale of alcohol on school property for WABA tournaments. However, previous attempts to secure a concession stand via referendum attempt was unknown to the full board. Prior to the April 2024 election Andy Space and Nicole Gerend embarked on a covert mission to push through a new $18M+ referendum. Open records request confirms this referendum included a $3 million shed and a $1 million concession stand for WABA, all without knowledge or approval from the entire school board. Space’s response to allegations posted on Facebook with his permission by Tiffany Van Vreede confirms their intention. Space states in his response, “I was authorized by the previous Board to explore options for athletic facilities expansion.”  Unfortunately, for Space and Gerend there are no meeting agenda or board meeting minutes to corroborate his story. So who gave him this permission exactly?

Lack of Transparency

Andy Space, in the July board workshop meeting, claimed that WABA members were fully behind the referendum that would grant them a $1M concession stand behind the elementary school, and would vote in its favor of the referendum if it were to get approved by the board. This revelation surprised community members, questioning the transparency and integrity of the process. How does one organization get their project included in a referendum while others are left out?

SERIOUS Conflict of Interest

The situation becomes even murkier with the involvement of Nicole Gerend, then school board president, who also serves as WABA’s treasurer. This dual role raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest. Wisconsin state law is clear on this matter: public officials are prohibited from using their position to obtain financial gain for themselves or organizations they are associated with. Violations can result in severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment. To make matters worse this summer board member Tiffany Van Vreede recused herself from voting on alcohol sales on school property because her husband is also a WABA board member. One would think Van Vreede understands the conflict of interest of being a board member and seeking financial gain from an organization you are involved with. She did the right thing. 

Red Herring, Gaslighting, Preemptive Fabrication, Damage Control  

When the truth is going to come out and you’re terrified what do you do? Some people ask for forgiveness, others try to weasel their way out of it, and yet there are others who are so prideful they will divide an entire community, tear it apart to cover up their abhorrent behavior because they believe they just might believe they are better than most people and possibly above the law. 

The community has been told to look at the Board President Angela Hanson Winker over the past three months demanding her recall. This is the same person who ended the defeasance double tax because she believed the community was was lied to regarding the referendum payback. Allegations were added changed moved on their website made less important more important as the petition drive forged forward in local taverns, wrestling events, and other events. 

Eerily similar to Strasser’s, “The Wave” the recall committee has marketed an idea so powerful that it has split our community in half.  Personal interest over holding people accountable? Covering up serious malfeasance by creating a sideshow that is tearing the community apart is something this community needs to serious look into and then ask. Is this type of school board you want?

Call for Accountability: The actions of Space and Gerend, along with the three board members who supported them, have cast a dark shadow over the WCSD. The recall petition against Angela Hansen Winker, who stood against this unethical behavior, is seen by many as a desperate attempt to cover up the truth.

Special Interest for Special People:  Only if You Get Away with It. 

The actions of Board members in prioritizing the Wrightstown Area Baseball Association (WABA) over other student groups are deeply unfair to the parents and children involved in a myriad of other activities. What about basketball, wrestling, dance, cheer, track, FFA, FBLA, drama, robotics, football, cross country, soccer, music, band, and the forensics programs? These groups also deserve equal support and funding. Does it sound fair to the parents and kids in these activities that their needs are being sidelined for the benefit of a select few?

Is it also fair the families who are actively involved in WABA? When board members use there power in seeking a $1M concession stand using tax payer dollars to benefit the group they are also a board member of? It isn’t fair and it isn’t right to put these families in this situation. 

The blatant favoritism shown by Board members is not only unjust but also detrimental to the spirit of community and equality that our school district should uphold. This kind of drama is the last thing our community needs but it is exactly what the community received in an attempt to cover up this issue.  It’s time for transparency and fairness for all students and their families.

The people of Wrightstown deserve better.  The members of WABA deserve better.  The community deserves a school board that operates with integrity and transparency. The actions of a few should not tarnish the reputation of the entire community or one organization. It is time for those involved to step down and for the community to come together to rebuild trust and ensure that such misconduct is never repeated. 

Stay tuned for more updates as this story develops. 

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

Buboltz & Space integrities questioned over serious and flagrant violations of State Law regarding non compliance with Human Growth and Development (HGD), Sex Education.

Key Points:

• Buboltz called out by Space for never complying with state laws regarding Sex Education, forgets to comply with same law.
• Superintendent Andy Space’s misleading statements
• $16,000 in additional legal fees due to noncompliance with state statutes
• Lack of transparency and failure to establish a required advisory committee
• Gerend misunderstanding of Board responsibilities
• Intervention by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL)
• District forced to comply with the law
• Ongoing efforts to rebuild trust and ensure compliance
• Recall effort against School Board President Angela Hansen-Winker

Reflecting on the events of the past year, the Wrightstown Community School District continues to grapple with the fallout from a series of legal and financial missteps that have left the community reeling. The district’s noncompliance with Wisconsin state statutes regarding the teaching of SEX EDUCATION know as Human Growth and Development without approved curriculum and community committee has not only tarnished its reputation but also resulted in over $16,000 in additional legal fees.
At the heart of this controversy is Superintendent Andy Space, whose actions and statements have raised serious questions about his commitment to adhering to following state guidelines and statutes. Space, who took over from former Superintendent Carla Buboltz, was recorded admitting violations of state statutes, further exacerbating the district’s legal woes.

Timeline of HGD Noncompliance

The issue first came to light on February 16, 2022, when a concerned parent read the text of Wis. Stat. § 118.019 at a school board meeting. Despite being aware of the requirement for a human growth and development advisory committee, the district failed to establish one. Former Superintendent Buboltz assured the parent that forming such a committee would be part of the district’s goals for the 2022-23 school year. However, over a year passed without any progress.

On June 19, 2023, Buboltz hastily organized an advisory meeting, giving the concerned parent less than 24 hours’ notice. The meeting, held on June 20, 2023, was poorly attended and did not provide attendees with an opportunity to review the curriculum. Despite this, the school board was misled into believing that a proper advisory committee meeting had taken place.

Misleading Information and Lack of Transparency

The district’s failure to comply with state statutes continued under Superintendent Andy Space. During an August 17, 2023, meeting, Space admitted that the district had never followed the statutory requirements and dismissed the importance of compliance. He stated, “A majority of the school districts don’t even follow the state statute” and “it’s not that someone doesn’t want to follow the state statute, but it’s out of sight out of mind.” These statements highlight a troubling disregard for legal obligations and a lack of initiative to rectify the situation.

School Board President Nicole Gerend falsely claimed that the curriculum was developed by the state, contradicting Wis. Stat. § 118.019(2), which states that the school board is responsible for establishing the curriculum. She said, “The curriculum, the standards, that’s developed by…the state comes out with standards,” showing a clear misunderstanding of her responsibilities.

Gerend further compounded the issue by stating that the board does not review all the curriculum, despite this being a statutory requirement. She later tried to explain that approving the annual curriculum standards was equivalent to approving the curriculum, which is not the case.  It was also revealed that the Wrightstown Community School District was using curriculum from the State of Washington without proper review or approval. Former Superintendent Buboltz initially informed the curriculum committee that the curriculum was from the State of Washington but later denied this.

Additionally, a concerned citizen who read the statute to the full board and sent emails to the board members during Buboltz’s tenure found that the emails were never received. The committee that was eventually set up did not meet the proper requirements, even though Space was notified in advance of its noncompliance. 

Legal and Financial Repercussions

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) intervened, demanding that the district comply with state law. WILL’s letter highlighted the district’s ongoing violations and the lack of transparency in providing parents with accurate information about the curriculum. The district’s practices have undermined the statutory purpose of fostering a partnership between parents and students.

Today

The Sex Ed controversy of last year undoubtably is connected todays events and the recall of Angela Hanson Winker. The recall effort against Hansen-Winker is being led by board member Rayn Warner, a close friend of Andy Space. Space opted for early retirement in January 2025, amid allegations concerning contractual matters, school purchases, open meeting law issues, legal counsel issues, board/staff relations, and insubordination. His early retirement, instead of facing a public hearing, raises questions about the motives behind the recall of Hansen-Winker. 

Hanson Winker demanded that the district follow the law embarrassing Space, previous board president Gerend, and their allies. 

Call for Accountability

The actions of Andy Space and Carla Buboltz have put the Wrightstown Community School District in jeopardy. Their disregard for state statutes and lack of transparency have cost the community dearly. Although the committee was eventually properly formed and the curriculum was approved by the board after several controversial sex education topics and slides were removed, this entire debacle was avoidable. It cast a shadow over the integrity of both superintendents, giving the community a black eye and causing significant embarrassment.

In summary, the Wrightstown Community School District’s failure to comply with state statutes has led to significant legal and financial repercussions. The actions of Superintendent Andy Space and former Superintendent Carla Buboltz have cast a shadow over the district’s integrity, resulting in a loss of trust within the community. The recall effort against School Board President Angela Hansen-Winker further complicates the situation, raising questions about the motives behind the recall. The district must prioritize compliance with state laws and work diligently to rebuild the trust that has been shattered.

Overview:

Selective Sharing:  Tiffany Van Vreede chose to share only part of the information regarding Superintendent Andy Space’s resignation, omitting crucial details about the inaccuracies in his statements.

Questionable Motives:  Why did Van Vreede decide to withhold the full truth from the community? What does this say about her integrity and understanding of her role as a school board member?

Impact on Community Trust: Van Vreede’s actions have caused division within the community and raised concerns about transparency and accountability.

Severe Allegations Against Andy Space:  The allegations included issues with school purchases, open meetings law violations, poor board and staff relations, and insubordination.

Van Vreede’s Role in the Recall: She is actively engaged in the recall against Angela Hanson Winker and has been vocal in slandering fellow board members.

Misunderstanding of Responsibilities:  Van Vreede’s stance on trusting the administration and not getting involved in day-to-day operations shows a lack of understanding of her duties as a school board member.

Van Vreede’s Attempt To Conseal Truth Exposed

During the recall, a Facebook post by Wrightstown Community School District board member Tiffany Van Vreede ignited a firestorm of controversy. Van Vreede shared statements from recently retired Superintendent Andy Space, painting the school board negatively. However, she failed to mention that Space’s response to the allegations against him was riddled with inaccuracies, as pointed out by the school board attorney. Van Vreede was aware of these inaccuracies, having been present in the meetings and in possession of the attorney’s corrections. Van Vreede had the official response from the district council and chose not to share this with the public. 

The Initial Allegations

The controversy began when Superintendent Andy Space was essentially forced to resign following multiple allegations of misconduct. These allegations included issues with school purchases, violations of open meeting laws, poor relations with the board and staff, and insubordination. The severity of these allegations was such that, absent a contract with the school district, Space might have been walked out of any other job.

The Decision to Retire

Faced with these allegations, Space chose not to go to a public hearing to answer questions brought up in the investigation. Instead, he opted to retire. This decision came after a meeting with Board President Angela Hanson, Winker, and board member Rayn Warner, during which Space was reportedly harassed and verbally assaulted. This incident was reported to the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, who advised contacting the school’s outside counsel.

The Investigation

An action plan was developed to improve Space’s performance, but more concerning information came to light. During this time, the board voted to bring on a new law firm while the firm assisting with Space’s action plan continued its work. By September, it became evident that more serious issues were at play, leading the new legal counsel to recommend a full investigation into Space’s conduct. Board attorney James Macy informed the board of this recommendation, and despite some questions, there were no objections, and the investigation commenced.

The Allegations

Two months later, Macy provided an update, revealing several allegations against Space. Although the investigation was incomplete, there was enough evidence to proceed to a public hearing, allowing the community to understand the situation and giving Space a chance to explain his perspective. Macy also offered a second option: negotiating with Space. Faced with severe allegations, Space resigned before negotiations began, avoiding a public hearing.

The Facebook Post

Space was given the opportunity to respond to the allegations in writing, but his response contained several inaccuracies, which the attorney corrected and shared with all board members. Despite knowing this, Tiffany Van Vreede posted Space’s response on Facebook, spreading misinformation and causing division within the community.

Wrightstown Community Reaction

Community members are now questioning Van Vreede’s motives. Why would she share only part of the story, knowing that Space’s claims were false? This selective sharing has caused a rift within the community, with many demanding transparency and accountability from their elected officials. Additionally, concerns have been raised about Van Vreede’s ties to an organization seeking a $1 million project on school grounds, further complicating the situation.

The Bigger Picture

Van Vreede’s actions have not only undermined trust in the school board but have also highlighted her misunderstanding of her responsibilities as a board member. She has been one of the most vocally active individuals on Facebook and in the community, slandering fellow board members and attempting to stop them from fulfilling their statutory obligations. Her insistence on trusting the administration and not getting involved in day-to-day operations shows a lack of understanding of her role, which is to ensure accountability and transparency.

As the community grapples with these revelations, the question remains:  What type of school board do we want? One that covers up corruption, or one that stands for integrity and transparency? Do the actions of Tiffany Van Vreede point to an interest in protecting herself and her allies or is leaving out key information for the public to view necessary for her to do what is in the best interest of the students, teachers, and community of Wrightstown?