Minden, NV — A lawsuit about public records has led to admissions of confusion and possibly untrained conduct among Douglas County School Board trustees. The case, focused on allegations of trustees conducting board business outside of official meetings, wrapped up recently in Douglas County District Court, presided over by Judge Thomas Gregory.
The controversy began when multiple public records requests were submitted by locals Joe Girdner, Robbe Lehmann, Dean Miller, and Marty Swisher in May and July 2023. These requests targeted trustees Katherine Dickerson, David Burns, Susan Jansen, and Doug Englekirk, accusing them of withholding key documents that would reveal private dealings concerning board operations and potential outside influences.
During the proceedings, trustee Dickerson expressed her shock about the legal action, stating she had not realized she was being sued until the hearings commenced. Her comments during the hearing underscored a broader narrative of trustees being ill-prepared to handle such legal emergencies. “I have never been in a court of law in my life,” Dickerson admitted, highlighting her reliance on legal counsel for understanding the implications of her signed statements and compliance with document production requirements.
This lawsuit underscores a potentially systemic issue within the board regarding awareness and adherence to legal and procedural responsibilities. Rick Hsu, former legal counsel from Maupin, Cox, and LeGoy Law, had previously advised trustees against using personal communication devices for board matters, guidance that was evidently unheeded. Revelations in court about Burns not receiving an official district phone despite attempts from staff, as well as trustees using personal email accounts for board activities, exposed significant procedural failings.
Moreover, the trustees’ defensive claims of ignorance about the distinctions between board duties and other concerns indicated a lack of basic training on the critical aspects of open meeting laws and board governance practices. Yvonne Wagstaff, a board member since January, painted a picture of an ad-hoc training system that leaves trustees scrambling to educate themselves mostly during their own time, without systematic instruction on their roles and responsibilities.
The settlement from a March 27 hearing that preceded this court decision was only a partial resolution, requiring further document searches and additional training concerning Nevada’s open records law. This was scheduled for revisitation at the April 9 school board meeting, where trustee Carey Kangas successfully motioned for renegotiation of the terms to better favor the district.
The situation District Judge Gregory contemplates now is multifaceted. Should he find the trustees liable, they will face not only the burden of legal costs but possibly civil penalties, a consequence that could punctuate the need for stricter compliance and better training amongst the trustees. Gregory’s decision is pending but will be issued in writing at a later date.
This lawsuit, beyond its immediate legal implications, raises important questions about transparency, accountability, and the adequacy of training for elected officials who govern public education resources and policies. The outcome could force a reckoning on how board members are prepared for their roles in safeguarding public trust and adhering to the law.