Discussion that occurred in what the Summit School District said is an unintentionally released executive session recording sparked backlash from the Summit County Education Association. 

The agenda for the executive session — which was part of the Wednesday, Nov. 19, Summit School District Board of Education meeting — stated the district’s reasoning for the closed-door meeting was “for the purposes of the (board)/superintendent personnel check-In” and was “part of the superintendent’s annual evaluation process.” A news release sent out by the Summit County Education Association Sunday, Nov. 23, stated the executive session “was, in reality, more than an hour of board members berating (Summit County Education Association) President Joe Kassay and other advocates for Education Support Professionals seeking a collective bargaining agreement.”

The Summit County Education Association also accused district officials of having discussions that bordered on “political plotting” in the executive session relating to onboarding newly elected board members.

In a Nov. 24 news release, the district stated the executive session was accidentally placed in a publicly accessible folder.

“While the release was unintentional, we recognize that once public, it has caused disappointment, concern, and a level of misinterpretation,” the news release stated. “Some of the comments made, under the stress of an accelerated timeline to provide a pathway to unionization, lacked a level of discretion needed in a professional setting.”

Responses to claims from executive session

Many of the association’s concerns outlined in the release related to what district officials said in the executive session about Kassay and efforts to discourage district officials from formulating a policy to set guidelines and expectations around unionization. Supporters of unionization made public comments at board meetings, posted on social media and emailed district administration to show opposition to the “H Series” policy.

Kassay, a history teacher, is already in a teachers union and was advocating on behalf of non-licensed staff members who sought unionization. District officials said they support unionization, but they also said they wanted to create what is known as an “H” Series policy first. Kassay, other members of the Summit County Education Association and some non-licensed staff members pushed back against the creation of this policy, deeming it overly bureaucratic. The board approved the “H Series” policy at the Nov. 19 meeting.

In the executive session that followed the vote on the “H Series” policy, Superintendent Tony Byrd said Kassay is “going to get more relentless.” Board member Vanessa Agee agreed and said she’s “never thought (of Kassay) and strategy in the same sentence.”

The Summit County Education Association told the Summit Daily they were particularly upset about a comment Agee made that said, “They took the high road — I’m pretty sure they were in the underpass the whole time,” according to a recording of the meeting. 

Summit County Education Association’s release said Agee’s comments made in the meeting were “disheartening, deeply condescending, dismissive and a clear reflection of how profoundly out of touch she is with the lived reality of the staff in this district.”

In response to the claims, Agee told the Summit Daily she wasn’t sure how the association came to that conclusion because she feels the board is very supportive of staff and their right to unionize and that this is evidenced by Summit School District being one of the highest paying school districts in rural Colorado. 

She said she entered the executive session feeling exhausted and defeated after months of back and forth with those seeking to unionize because she felt it wasn’t understood that she and the board supported unionization. She said they just wanted to ensure there was a policy created beforehand that best supported all parties. She said the frustration “took (her) away from what (her) usual professional standards would be,” and she said she apologies for that. 

The district’s release reiterated the board and superintendent’s support for unionization, but it acknowledged their role in the divide between officials and some staff members. 

“We can continue a cycle of mistrust and division—or we can step into this challenge to learn from mistakes and grow together,” the release stated. It said Byrd has been consistently calling for third-party facilitation to build trust and strengthen relationships and said the board continues to support this call. 

The Nov. 19 press release from the Summit County Education Association additionally condemned the board discussing newly elected board member Jenniffer Gonzalez in a manner the Summit County Education Association felt bordered on “political plotting.”

Agee said in the session Gonzalez had the potential to “weaponize (policy governance)” against the rest of the board. Policy governance is the framework the board operates under. She asked the road of the board “how would we deal with that?” She said Gonzalez had first amendment rights and it would “take a lot to censure someone.” 

Board President Consuelo Redhorse said it is “95% positive” that the board will hear from Gonzalez that they are failing the students in the district, particularly latino students. Gonzalez, hailing from Panama, said she planned to put more focus on the success of latino students during her campaign for a seat on the Board of Education and made unsubstantiated claims the district was inflating grades of latino students. The district disputed the claim that it was inflating grades. 

The Summit Daily News reached out to Gonzalez offering her the opportunity to respond to the comments made about her in the executive session, and Gonzalez said she did not wish to comment.

The Summit County Education Association posted the executive session recording to its Facebook page on Nov. 23 alongside the release in response to what was said during the session.

District defends executive session discussion

The Summit County Education Association said it did not feel the discussion that occurred in executive session fell within the purview of what the district was permitted to discuss during it per what is permitted in Colorado Open Meetings law. 

At the start of the meeting, Redhorse said this discussion was a transitional, strategic conversation involving a personnel check-in with the superintendent, reflection on the board’s actions and looking forward to the board’s future with new members slated to join following a Nov. 5 election. 

Summit School District director of communications Kerstin Anderson said the cited exemption, which is C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(f), allows for executive session discussions related to “personnel matters.” 

She said Byrd and Redhorse affirm that the discussion held during the executive session appropriately fell under the purview of the cited exemption. 

“The purpose of the session was to conduct a strategic, end-of-term personnel check-in aligned with the Superintendent’s annual evaluation process,” she wrote in an email to the Summit Daily. “The conversation focused on leadership reflections, governance dynamics, and preparations for an effective transition with the incoming Board. These topics were specific to performance, communication, and governance practices, all directly related to the Superintendent’s role and leadership effectiveness—thus qualifying under the personnel matters exemption.”

Agee, who works in communications professionally, told the Summit Daily that one of the purposes of an executive session in this setting includes talking about the new board and “headwinds,” so discussing upcoming board members and their transition into the role was appropriate to discuss in that setting. 

She said executive sessions provide a private, confidential setting for the board to discuss topics like legal personnel or financial issues away from the public eye. She said it is space for more candid and open conversations.