Making sense of it all: An analysis of the documentation surrounding the Corey Wise termination controversy
Estimated Read Time: 11 minutes
On April 13, 2022, a 33-page Charge of Discrimination (“The Complaint”), with numerous allegations of discriminatory conduct by our newest DCSD board members, was filed on behalf of Corey Wise by his attorneys.
The content of “The Complaint” left many lingering questions for our community, and 10 days later, DougCo Collective published two blogs (“Coffee House Conversation” and ”Prioritizing White Hegemony and Exhibiting Hostile Animus Towards Minorities in DCSD”) that analyzed the allegations made in “The Complaint.” Our ”Coffee House Conversation“ blog ended with this note:
“What is notable is that Directors (Mike) Peterson, (Christy) Williams and (Becky) Myers all testified at the hearing for the COML lawsuit on Feb. 25. The information we have from media sources about the hearing is limited to the context of conversations held by the board directors in violation of the open meetings laws, and we do not have details about their testimony regarding the ultimatum given to Wise.
So a lingering and very important question – will Wise’s recording of the coffee house conversation on Jan. 28 confirm that he was given an ultimatum, in contradiction to the sworn testimony the three directors gave on Feb. 25?”
During public comment at the BoE meeting on June 21, Douglas County resident Robert Marshall made a bold statement. In one hand, he held what he said was a copy of the Feb 25 COML hearing transcript, and in the other, he held a USB drive that he said contained the recorded conversation Wise had with Peterson and Williams on Jan. 28. He accused both of perjury, due to conflicting statements made about predetermining Wise’s employment prior to meeting with him on Jan. 28, and giving him an ultimatum to either resign or be terminated for cause.
All of the information was publicly released and included the COML hearing transcript, the coffee house conversation audio, and pieces of the conversation audio transcript.
It is worth noting, one-way recorded conversations (such as the Jan. 28 conversation) are legal in the state of Colorado.
Because this is a lot of information to sort through, we will dissect to show which components appear to be conflicting. To create some ease in reviewing all of the varying statements, we have created a couple of graphics to assist in understanding the full context.
Minds made up?
The biggest issue of the newly released hearing transcript and the recorded conversation is the contradiction about whether the BoE majority members had made up their minds about firing Wise prior to the conversation Directors Peterson and Williams had with him on Jan. 28.
The BoE majority members have publicly stated that they had not decided to fire Wise before the Feb. 4 Special BoE Meeting. Williams stated, “I was truly trying to give the Superintendent the opportunity to look at the options and have time to think about it,” (29:02). Director Peterson noted this a couple of times, “…no laws were broken, nothing was unethical, I initiated a conversation with Corey because I wanted to address some concerns I had” (38:18) and “There is not an ultimatum of retire now or else you will be fired.” (51:10)
At the Feb. 25 hearing, both Peterson and Williams testified that no decision had been made about Wise’s employment prior to their Jan. 28 meeting, and that they did not give Wise a job ultimatum. Interestingly, Peterson and Williams were not subpoenaed, and therefore not even required to provide any of this testimony.
Here is one sample of Peterson saying a decision had not been made (p. 99, lines 18-20). Peterson was asked, “And you – you stated that no decision was made by the board prior to the February 4th public meeting, correct?” to which he replied “Correct.”
Peterson also indicated that there was not a job ultimatum given to Wise (p. 82, 18-25: “No. We did not ask him to resign immediately. We asked him to consider a variety of options.” A follow-up question was asked, “And those options were resign, retire, or be terminated?” To which Peterson responded: “No. We reviewed his contract. We went over every option on the contract. Resignation was not on the contract, although I believe it was contemplated within it, and we asked him to consider that and get back to us with what he thought.”
Williams also testified that options were provided, and not a job ultimatum (p. 57, 14-19): “We -- we had a discussion with Mr. Wise, and President Peterson did talk to Mr. Wise about different options. One of which would be retirement, one would be resignation, and then, obviously, the other ones would be termination, termination with cause, unilaterally. So there was [sic] a lot of options talked about that day.” Williams was questioned again about the options or ultimatum question (p. 64, 5-10): “Now, I want to talk to you about, you were asked questions in regards to your meeting on September 28th with former Superintendent Wise -- I'm sorry -- January 28th of 2022, did you give any indication during that meeting that he was going to be terminated?” To which Williams replied, “No. We just gave him options.”
Interestingly, Director Myers, who was not subpoenaed to testify and was not a part of the conversation on Jan. 28 with Wise, provided testimony at the Feb. 25 hearing and indicated that there was a decision made to give Wise a job ultimatum (p. 22, 14-22). She was asked: “And, again, all of these conversations you had with your fellow members concerning the plan to ask Mr. Wise to resign his position, you -- you were aware that that's what was going to be asked of him; is that correct?” to which Director Myers responded, “Yes.” She was then asked: “The four of you had decided that that would be the kind thing to do, to let him resign rather than vote to terminate his contract?” To which she replied, “Correct.” She was asked a third time (p.23). “Had you discussed that with the -- any set of --President Peterson, Vice President Williams, or Miss – Director Winegar, that it was the better approach, was to ask him to resign immediately?” to which she again replied, “Correct.”
Where the Contradictions Begin
Statements in the Jan. 28 recorded conversation contradict these public statements and the statements under oath at the Feb. 25 hearing. The statements seem to indicate that Wise was indeed given a job ultimatum on Jan. 28.
Director Peterson starts out by indicating that the BoE has already had discussion about his employment (2:36), “...Independently we've had talks of the, frankly we're looking to move to a new direction…” Director Williams reiterates this by stating (4:25), “…There is so much going on, we have to, we have to move in “different direction.”
Wise asks for the reason that the board wants to move in a different direction. Director Williams responds with a vague answer (6:12), “feel like there's probably been a lot of things happening behind the scenes to work against the four of us. So when I say me, I'm just talking the four of us, it's not a core thing, I'm specifically talking about the four of us. There have, I know things that have, I know meetings have occurred that probably shouldn't have occurred without at least Mike knowing. I know a lot things that happened and so we believe we have enough for cause. That's not the direction we want to go.”
Director Peterson follows that statement by adding “we don’t want to go that direction,” in reference to possibly firing him, and indicates there had been prior conversations with other BoE members about Corey Wise’s employment (7:00): “We did talk about this and we are prepared to go there.”
During the conversation, Director Williams (4:55) asks Wise if there are any interviews for DCSD director positions and asks him to put any interviews on hold. “I would suggest putting just everything on hold right now.” Would asking someone to suspend their job duties, including fulfilling open director positions, be a request that you would make to someone you were expecting to be working for you much longer?
Director Peterson provides the first job ultimatum in asking Wise to move up his retirement date and reiterates the four majority members want him out (7:50): “Because we’re asking you to move this up, and really that’s around having four directors that are absolutely committed to moving a new direction.” Director Peterson follows up by offering to advocate for his salary and presents the other alternative of termination (8:18), “I certainly would be prepared to advocate for at least payment through the end of June, Because I don’t think we should, to cut that off, but if we have to go for cause then, you know, we know what that looks like.”
Finally, the conversation concludes with the most apparent job ultimatum given directly by Director Peterson (10:10). Corey Wise is being given a timeframe of when he needs to let the BoE know about his employment decision, or the BoE will move to have a special meeting to have him terminated. “If you call us Monday and you say, "No Mike, I don't think I'd like to resign, I'd like to move forward with termination, then we can get to a special meeting and appoint a hearing officer, start those things, but if possible we'd like you to, excuse me, consider [inaudible] let us know.”
There is still another recording…
Additionally, a Colorado Community Media article (also includes audio recordings) released on Feb. 22, covered recorded conversations that Directors Peterson and Williams had with Directors Ray and Meek about their coffee house conversation with Wise.
In the recording, Director Peterson tells Director Meek, “And I said, 'well, we have four of us. We will talk with the other directors, but you know, once four are committed to moving in a different direction.' You know, I wanted to talk to him, and frankly see if he wanted to do things on his own terms,” In addition, Director Williams conveyed this message about her conversation with Wise to Director Ray: “he could consider his resignation, but we wanted a different direction for the future.” She then followed by definitively telling Director Ray the district would go in a different direction with leadership. This is congruent with Wise’s statements in “The Complaint”. Even among the BoE Directors, there seemed to be a message communicated that the four majority members had made up their mind and that Wise was given a job ultimatum.
How serious is this discrepancy?
The contradiction in statements, specifically the statements made under oath at the Feb. 25 COML hearing and the Jan. 28 recorded conversation, has led to accusations of perjury and a current investigation by the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office. To reiterate, the contradictions appear to be in statements Directors Peterson and Williams made about making a decision about Wise’s employment prior to meeting with him on Jan. 28, and giving him an ultimatum to either resign or be terminated for cause.
Although the statements the BoE members made at the Feb. 4 BoE meeting were not made under oath and not subject to any perjury allegation, it is distressing that our BoE members would so openly be deceptive to the entire community. From the contents of a recent press release issued by private BoE attorney, Scott Gessler, on behalf of Directors Peterson and Williams, they appear to be doubling down in their statements that they did nothing wrong.
From the MLO/Bond survey results, we know that this community has serious concerns with trusting the members of the BoE. With the recent release of this information and the continued denial of wrongdoing in this press release, we continue to wonder, can this board majority be trusted? What reparative actions will they take to earn the community support needed to be able to address the urgent issues of this district, such as the MLO/Bond and teacher/staff recruitment and retention?