{"id":41644,"date":"2022-03-17T20:00:52","date_gmt":"2022-03-18T02:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/how-the-cortez-school-board-ousted-its-superintendent\/"},"modified":"2026-03-31T03:02:22","modified_gmt":"2026-03-31T09:02:22","slug":"how-the-cortez-school-board-ousted-its-superintendent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/how-the-cortez-school-board-ousted-its-superintendent\/","title":{"rendered":"How the Cortez school board ousted its superintendent"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><figure class=\"wp-block-image naviga-inline-image\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com\/?uuid=7fd852e7-9658-5a3b-9761-8674ff0c0ee2&amp;function=cover&amp;type=preview&amp;source=false&amp;width=2000\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1150\" alt=\"Pictured here, the Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 Board of Education prepared  to enter into executive session in a Jan. 18 meeting.  In that executive session, Board President Sheri Noyes asked for former Superintendent Risha VanderWey's resignation.\" class=\"naviga-image\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><span class=\"caption\">Pictured here, the Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 Board of Education prepared  to enter into executive session in a Jan. 18 meeting.  In that executive session, Board President Sheri Noyes asked for former Superintendent Risha VanderWey's resignation.<\/span><span class=\"credit\">Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 YouTube<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n<p>Montezuma-Cortez Board of Education President Sheri Noyes acted alone in asking former Superintendent Risha VanderWey to resign, and the board\u2019s related electronic communications likely violated Colorado\u2019s Sunshine Law, according to the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition.<\/p>\n<p>School board emails and messages obtained through a Colorado Open Records Act paint a picture of a secretive ouster in which Noyes asked board members to be silent about the \u201clogistics\u201d of VanderWey\u2019s resignation, and in a private group chat she asked board members to vote on the terms of VanderWey\u2019s separation agreement. She asked board members to reply individually.<\/p>\n<p><figure class=\"wp-block-image naviga-inline-image naviga-align-left alignleft\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com\/?uuid=ebf25cd7-560e-599e-8dde-83f8078a32c8&amp;function=cover&amp;type=preview&amp;source=false&amp;width=2000\" width=\"600\" height=\"964\" alt=\"Risha VanderWey\" class=\"naviga-image\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><span class=\"caption\">Risha VanderWey<\/span><span class=\"credit\">Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 YouTube<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image naviga-inline-image naviga-align-left alignleft\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com\/?uuid=8554b8f7-9eb3-5f61-a795-dc1b0d01436a&amp;function=cover&amp;type=preview&amp;source=false&amp;width=2000\" width=\"821\" height=\"1383\" alt=\"Sheri Noyes\" class=\"naviga-image\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><span class=\"caption\">Sheri Noyes<\/span><span class=\"credit\">Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 YouTube<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><p><em id=\"emphasis-c38884a5b3177550912f7cdcc5281916\">The Journal<\/em> learned about the school board\u2019s decision-making process after examining more than 100 emails and messages it obtained through a Colorado Open Records Act request<em id=\"emphasis-e0fabb51120ea4c399c25dacd3adfd88\">. The Journal<\/em> requested all electronic communications exchanged between board members in January that discussed VanderWey.<\/p>\n<p>The documents show that Noyes expedited VanderWey\u2019s resignation when she asked the superintendent to resign during an executive session of the board\u2019s monthly meeting on Jan. 18.<\/p>\n<p>The board announced publicly that it would enter the executive session to discuss VanderWey\u2019s evaluation. Colorado law prohibits public bodies from making decisions during an executive session.<\/p>\n<p>The board met behind closed doors for more than an hour, and VanderWey was present for a portion of the meeting. The board did not discuss VanderWey publicly during the open meeting that followed.<\/p>\n<p>It was unclear whether the board reached a consensus to support Noyes\u2019 request that VanderWey resign. At least one board member said he knew of no prior decision.<\/p>\n<p>The next day, VanderWey was given a written ultimatum: Resign or be fired. According to a Jan. 19 letter from Noyes to VanderWey, if a separation agreement wasn\u2019t reached by Jan. 21, the board planned to terminate her contract.<\/p>\n<p>It was unclear who made the decision to give VanderWey the ultimatum.<\/p>\n<p>VanderWey has not publicly addressed her leave from the district.<\/p>\n<p>However, Noyes made it clear in emails to board members on Jan. 20 that she \u201ctook sole initiative to ask for (VanderWey\u2019s) resignation first,\u201d without consulting the board.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI do want to apologize for not bringing you all in to give your thoughts when she asked if were (sic) terminating her,\u201d Noyes said in emails to board members. \u201cInstead, I took sole initiative to ask for her resignation first, with out (sic) asking what you all may have thought on the question. This being said, I can only learn from my mistakes and or\/quick decisions and promise to do better.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-pdf-embed\"><iframe class=\"article-pdf\" src=\"https:\/\/dur-prod-public-pdfs.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/kJbXwhC1PGlKc_ZtsVUwY6q0bao.pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:500px;border:1px solid #ddd\" loading=\"lazy\">\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/dur-prod-public-pdfs.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/kJbXwhC1PGlKc_ZtsVUwY6q0bao.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Letter from Sheri Noyes to Risha VanderWey Jan.19.pdf (Download PDF)<\/a><\/p>\n<p><\/p><\/iframe>\n<p class=\"naviga-pdf-link\"><a href=\"https:\/\/dur-prod-public-pdfs.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/kJbXwhC1PGlKc_ZtsVUwY6q0bao.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Letter from Sheri Noyes to Risha VanderWey Jan.19.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>On Jan. 21, VanderWey\u2019s resignation was official. Her resignation came six days after she received low marks on a performance evaluation, on Jan. 15. She had spent less than seven months on the job.<\/p>\n<p>A news release Jan. 29 from Noyes attributed VanderWey\u2019s resignation to \u201cphilosophical differences.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Board Director Cody Wells disagreed with the board\u2019s Jan. 29 official statement.<\/p>\n<p>In an instant message to Noyes, he attributed VanderWey\u2019s resignation to \u201ca poor evaluation due to job performance and district liability\u201d rather than \u201cphilosophical differences\u201d between the board and VanderWey.<\/p>\n<p>In an interview with <em id=\"emphasis-742ba3d5ddfa363272b0d03d7c105763\">The Journal<\/em>, Wells declined to talk about his reference to \u201cdistrict liability.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Wells was the only board director to discuss the evaluations with <em id=\"emphasis-9373e43f3ca0aa0ebf492ee51e9c5f55\">The Journal.<\/em> On March 9, Wells told Th<em id=\"emphasis-e8fb29e0cffce5db6d2f2e0f69c96c74\">e Journal h<\/em>e wanted to talk because he had mixed feelings about the Jan. 18 meeting.<\/p>\n<p>He emphasized that he did not want to tarnish his relationship with other board members, but said he thought the Jan. 18 executive session was to be about VanderWey\u2019s evaluations, and nothing else.<\/p>\n<p>Noyes and Board Directors Sherri Wright, Stacey Hall, Jeanette Hart, and Layne Frazier have not responded to requests for comment on VanderWey\u2019s leave or their evaluations of her.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t see a need for any discussion concerning Dr. Vanderwey (sic),\u201d Board Director Ed Rice said in an email to <em id=\"emphasis-88c3e200bb2ac37ac36de20a3e04f4a3\">The Journal<\/em>, adding that he was willing to discuss the district\u2019s future plans.<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-element naviga-subheadline1\">Questions of legality<\/div>\n<p>Jeff Roberts, executive director of the <a href=\"https:\/\/coloradofoic.org\/\" id=\"link-4fe10645adf00d5836e3578a2377ca7e\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition<\/a>, told <em id=\"emphasis-f5e074e0a009f725509e0936970fa005\">The Journal<\/em> he would be \u201csurprised\u201d if the Montezuma-Cortez School District had a policy providing one board member the power to ask for the superintendent\u2019s resignation.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a board decision to hire and fire a superintendent,\u201d Roberts said. \u201cI just have never heard of a board president having that power on their own.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Most decisions \u2013 especially one to give the superintendent an ultimatum to resign or be fired \u2013 should be made within the public eye, Roberts said.<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-scoreboard\">\n<h4 class=\"scoreboard-title\">The Colorado Open Records Act <\/h4>\n<p>The Colorado Open Meetings Law states:Members of boards and commissions risk violating the open meetings law when three or more (for a local public body) use email or text messaging to discuss public business, either in a single transmission or in succession. Such electronic conversations are inherently closed because there may be no way to provide advance notice and allow the public to \u201cattend\u201d and observe the meeting.\u201cTwo members of a local board (unless two constitutes a quorum) may email each other about public business with no concerns. The messaging becomes a \u201cpublic meeting\u201d if one of those board members forwards the email to a third member. Also problematic: Two members of a board texting or emailing each other during a public meeting about a matter being discussed in that meeting. Such discussions are supposed to occur in public. Elected officials may exchange emails about scheduling and their availability, and other emails that do not concern the \u201cmerits or substance\u201d of pending legislation or public business, without worrying about violating the open meetings law. They may also forward information, pose a question \u201cfor later discussion by the public body\u201d and respond to inquiries from individuals who are not members of the public body. \u201cMerits or substance\u201d is defined as \u201cany discussion, debate, or exchange of ideas, either generally or specifically, related to the essence of any public policy proposition, specific proposal, or any other matter being considered by the governing entity.\u201d C.R.S. \u00a7 24-6-402(2)(d) (III).An exception for Colorado Mountain College allows the board of trustees to make decisions electronically under certain circumstances because the trustees serve a large geographic area that is often difficult to travel in winter. C.R.S. \u00a7 23-71-119(2).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>The Colorado Open Records Act does allow a private email exchange among three or more board members that does not concern the \u201cmerits or substance\u201d of public business, such as scheduling and availability, items for future, public agendas and responses to public inquiries.<\/p>\n<p>VanderWey\u2019s separation agreement with the district, signed Jan. 27, provided her a severance payment of $54,597.70 and a release of claims for both parties. The agreement prohibits the board and VanderWey from discussing the separation agreement with a third party.<\/p>\n<p>VanderWey had requested payment through the end of her contract, June 2023.<\/p>\n<p>Noyes asked the board to vote about the terms of the agreement, and the wording of news releases about VanderWey, in what are known as \u201cserial meetings,\u201d \u201cwalking quorums,\u201d or \u201cdaisy chain\u201d discussions. She sent all board members the same information \u2013 sometimes in one email or group text, sometimes in separate messages \u2014 and asked for individual replies by message, email or phone.<\/p>\n<p>Amid COVID-19 outbreaks, the Montezuma-Cortez school board experienced backlash for suggesting the use of \u201cdaisy chain\u201d votes to decide if it would close or suspend classes. The board decided to avoid the \u201cdaisy chain\u201d vote because it lay in a \u201clegal gray area,\u201d then-President Wright said.<\/p>\n<p>On Wednesday, a judge in Colorado clarified the issue, ordering the Douglas County school board to comply with the open meetings law and held  that a series of one-on-one meetings violated the \u201cspirit\u201d and \u201cpurpose\u201d of the statute, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.denverpost.com\/2022\/03\/09\/douglas-county-school-board-member-injuction-colorado-open-meeting-law-judge-rules\/\" id=\"link-98bc52c7bf001d4e23e34fe8b5112d66\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The Denver Post <\/a>reported. In that case, four members of the board met privately one-on-one to discuss replacing former Superintendent Corey Wise, who was fired in February.<\/p>\n<p>A Pagosa Springs attorney, Matthew Roane, filed a formal complaint with the Montezuma County District Court Feb. 24 alleging that the Montezuma-Cortez school board violated Colorado\u2019s open meetings law in a series of private meetings deciding on  VanderWey\u2019s paid administrative leave and separation agreement without notice to the public.<\/p>\n<p>First Amendment and media attorney Steven Zansberg, who also serves as president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, represents the plaintiff in the lawsuit against the Douglas County school board, Robert Marshall.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cCertainly distributing the same email to every member of the board (discussing the public business of the board) by the board chair is unquestionably a violation of the open meetings law as a series of daisy chain communications,\u201d Zansberg said.<\/p>\n<p>Zansberg said Noyes\u2019 request for individual responses is \u201cpretty clear evidence of an intent to evade the law.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat\u2019s not ambiguous, there\u2019s not a gray area: It\u2019s black and white,\u201d Zansberg said.<\/p>\n<p>Under open meetings law, three or more board members may not meet to discuss public business unless the public is notified and given the opportunity to \u201cobserve that discussion in real time,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt can be done in a series of communications, where three or more members are discussing public business by relaying information between them,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>Zansberg reviewed some of the Montezuma-Cortez school board\u2019s communications and said they are \u201cdefinitive, irrefutable\u201d proof of a violation.<\/p>\n<p>Merely \u201cadopting a position\u201d or reaching any sort of decision in an executive session, even informal, is an infraction of the open meetings law, Zansberg said.<\/p>\n<p>Further, Noyes would be in violation of the law even if she asked whether any board member disagreed with her decision, Zansberg said.<\/p>\n<p><figure class=\"wp-block-image naviga-inline-image naviga-align-left alignleft\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com\/?uuid=a04fbba7-274c-5fbe-958e-cb7ab70f1c2c&amp;function=cover&amp;type=preview&amp;source=false&amp;width=2000\" width=\"1275\" height=\"1650\" alt=\"Montezuma-Cortez Board of Education Directors Jeanette Hart and Ed Rice cast their votes in a group chat available to all board members, messages obtained by The Journal show.\" class=\"naviga-image\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><span class=\"caption\">Montezuma-Cortez Board of Education Directors Jeanette Hart and Ed Rice cast their votes in a group chat available to all board members, messages obtained by The Journal show.<\/span><span class=\"credit\">Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 YouTube<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image naviga-inline-image naviga-align-left alignleft\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com\/?uuid=061e03cd-6715-5867-b471-a5122d448b12&amp;function=cover&amp;type=preview&amp;source=false&amp;width=2000\" width=\"1275\" height=\"1650\" alt=\"An excerpt of a conversation between Board Director Cody Wells and Board President Sheri Noyes, received by The Journal under a Colorado Open Records Act request.\" class=\"naviga-image\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><span class=\"caption\">An excerpt of a conversation between Board Director Cody Wells and Board President Sheri Noyes, received by The Journal under a Colorado Open Records Act request.<\/span><span class=\"credit\">Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1 YouTube<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><p>Noyes\u2019 emails to residents who asked about the board\u2019s actions were ambiguous. In a response to a resident, Noyes said the board could not speak about VanderWey\u2019s leave because it was a \u201cpersonnel matter\u201d discussed in executive session.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe reasons behind any decision or vote is (sic) actually supposed to be \u2018secret\u2019 due to the executive session laws,\u201d she said in another email.<\/p>\n<p>And as speculation and unofficial word of VanderWey\u2019s leave circulated among Cortez residents and school employees, Noyes blamed a \u201cbreach of confidentiality.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI will not break laws to put minds at ease when people feel they have a \u2018right\u2019 to certain information,\u201d Noyes wrote in an email to a parent.<\/p>\n<p>In messages obtained by <em id=\"emphasis-f89e4568b2ffc6d883c27272f1c2e15a\">The Journal,<\/em> Noyes contended that the district was \u201cvery transparent,\u201d while in other messages she urged the school board not to discuss VanderWey\u2019s leave with the public or reporters.<\/p>\n<p>After VanderWey\u2019s resignation, the district received a \u201chigh volume\u201d of Colorado Open Records Act requests, said Human Resources Director Cynthia Eldredge during a Feb. 8 board meeting.<\/p>\n<p>The board created a formal document to field the requests, and a fee of $33.58 per hour after the first hour of retrieving records. <em id=\"emphasis-c6f0c57a801c92822493f830bfba98ed\">The Journal <\/em>requested the board exchanges Feb. 1, and received the documents Feb. 15.<\/p>\n<p>Residents wanted to know whether the board voted to remove VanderWey. In an email comment, Wright emphatically denied a vote was taken.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI will tell you that it is illegal to take a vote in executive session, and THERE WAS NO VOTE TAKEN. When the board is released to answer SOME of these questions they will,\u201d she wrote.<\/p>\n<p>No board member responded to requests for comment on the board\u2019s decision-making process about Risha VanderWey\u2019s resignation and her separation agreement.<\/p>\n<p>Noyes reminded board members not to reply within the group chat several times, noting that she wanted to \u201ckeep things legal.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Colorado Association of School Boards did not respond to a request for any state policy outlining protocol for terminating a superintendent\u2019s contract.<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-element naviga-subheadline1\">Documents reveal \u2018daisy chain\u2019 vote<em id=\"emphasis-42d29ac27fa7822042bd001ba226527d\"> <\/em><\/div>\n<p>Instant messages between board members received by <em id=\"emphasis-9f6acf5c65ccad5bb9be73523995631e\">The Journal <\/em>revealed that the Montezuma-Cortez board did vote through an electronic chat about VanderWey\u2019s separation agreement. Some comments surrounding the vote were redacted.<\/p>\n<p>When considering the separation agreement, the board voted 4-3 to remove conditions about nondisparagement and voted 6-1 to deny VanderWey a monetary payout of her insurance premium through June. The removal of the nondisparagement clause would \u201callow us to respond to any negative or incorrect information that might be out there\u201d Noyes wrote in a group message.<\/p>\n<p>The insurance payout was $4,868.50.<\/p>\n<p>In a message to Noyes, Wells said that $5,000 was a \u201csmall price to pay\u201d to \u201cminimize slanderous language\u201d from VanderWey.<\/p>\n<p>The documents revealed one-on-one conversations between Noyes and Wells and Noyes and Frazier. Wells required additional discussion.<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-scoreboard\">\n<h4 class=\"scoreboard-title\">Messages between Wells and Noyes: <\/h4>\n<p>(Messages are quoted exactly as they appear over the course of a few days, minus redactions)Sheri Noyes to Cody Wells: Hi Cody, not sure if you got the reminder email but I just wanted to text you and remind you that the superintendent evaluation is due today. If you can\u2019t make that happen just let Cynthia in HR know. Thanks!Noyes to Cody Wells: (Redaction)Wells to Noyes: Okay, thanksNoyes to Wells: (Redaction)Noyes to Wells: FYI Risha has been put on paid administrative leave things are in order at the admin office please do not discuss any logistics with the public or reporters. Wells to Noyes: I would be fine with paying out the benefits if we keep the verbiage. Absolutely keep the nondisparagement paragraph. Noyes to Wells: I just sent a new text. She still can not sue us and it gives us the opportunity to reply to any misinformation that may arise from her. I feel they want this out because she has already crossed the lines. Not trying to change your mind just a little more info for you. Please reach out with your final thoughts\/concerns. Wells to Noyes: I\u2019d easily pay $5,000 to minimize slanderous language. Small price to pay. That\u2019s my stance. I don\u2019t even care that it\u2019s vague. Let it be vague. That would just keep her on her toes with what she says. Noyes to Wells: Ok leave the verbiage but the 5000 is for to pay her cash equivalent to her insurance premium. Do you want to do that or would you rather not? So it\u2019s two part situation. Wells to Noyes: That\u2019s exactly right. I very much believe that would be in the districts best interest. We\u2019ll already be putting out fires for this and I think it would go a long ways if we\u2019re not fighting her as well. That\u2019s where I\u2019m at. Noyes to Wells: Ok text isn\u2019t reading well. 1. You are for leaving the verbiage in. 2. Do you also want to pay her the $5000ish extra for her insurance premium equivalent?Wells to Noyes: Would you send me the agreement?Noyes to Wells: I do not have it yet. I will as soon as I do. Wells to Noyes: I don\u2019t care much for the philosophical differences portion. I think that just gives peoples minds leeway to believe that we\u2019re all far right wing and that we only got rid of her because of political differences. The reality is that we gave her a poor evaluation due to job performance and district liability. Now I understand that we can\u2019t just say all of that so my suggestion is that we say something to the effect of \u201cThis is a direct result of the superintendent Evaluations and the board as a whole believes that this is truly in the best interest of our entire district. We thank our entire community for their patience because confidentiality and legalities need to be adhered to throughout this entire process.\u201dWells to Noyes: 3rd option for me. ThanksNoyes to Wells: Thanks Cody. Wells to Noyes: I seen a couple of spelling errors so just make sure things are reviewed and difficult was meant to be directNoyes to Wells: Oh Ok. I will make sure. I am also having them review by the lawyer. Wells to Noyes: Perfect. I assumed but we all know how that goes. Wells to Noyes: FYI (I hate to be a pain here) but I can not get behind philosophical differences being the reason for resignation termination or administrative leave. That\u2019s not where my hearts at, that\u2019s not truthfully why she\u2019s resigning and I don\u2019t think that\u2019s an ethical reason for a poor evaluation. I truly believe that these decisions need to be performance based and not political. I\u2019ve said my peace so decide how you believe is right but know that while I won\u2019t undermine the board or its members, I will not stand behind any decisions being due to \u2018philosophical differences. Noyes to Wells: I will have to somewhat agree with you on this (redaction). I would like to state the exact reasons why too, but like we all know, that is just not an option. I can get by with using the wording working as well, but I think adding a reason why was better than leaving it just philosophicalWells to Noyes: (Redaction) I am firm on option 3. I stand by my evaluation and would rather give a truthful statement even anticipating the many challenges we would have to overcome. I still cannot support philosophical differences being the cause for resignation. Also, because we removed the verbiage around nondisparagement, she is just going to tell everyone that our statement is untrue and that is not why she resigned. Noyes to Wells: I can absolutely respect this, however, this was what the majority leaned toward. I know we will get push back no matter how it is stated and what words are used. It can be used in this sense: having a calm attitude toward a difficult or unpleasant situation. Which to a degree I believe it was as such, but I also see where you are coming from.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Wells disagreed with the wording of the Jan. 29 letter that stated VanderWey and the board had \u201cphilosophical differences.\u201d Wells argued it was not \u201ctruthfully why she\u2019s resigning.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI truly believe that these decisions need to be performance based and not political,\u201d Wells wrote to Noyes.<\/p>\n<p>In her response, Noyes wrote that stating \u201cthe exact reasons why\u201d VanderWey was resigning was \u201cjust not an option.\u201d She added that the majority of the board supported her phrasing.<\/p>\n<p>The emails and messages did not reveal the \u201cexact reasons\u201d for VanderWey\u2019s resignation or why they have remained secret. A message indicated there was a \u201cdistrict liability.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI can only speak for myself, but there were no personal issues that let (sic) to Dr. VanderWey\u2019s paid Administrative Leave,\u201d Noyes said in an email to a parent.<\/p>\n<p>Noyes responded to one resident that none of her decisions were fueled by personal politics.<\/p>\n<p>In his conversation with <em id=\"emphasis-c6471996815ce54604a494e3befd45e8\">The Journal, <\/em>Wells said that while he likely would disagree with VanderWey on some political topics, they never discussed it.<\/p>\n<p>Wells was the only board member who had not registered to vote with a specific political party, according to 2021 voting records. The other members were Republicans. VanderWey was a Democrat.<\/p>\n<p>VanderWey joined the school district amid sweeping change, including new administrative staff, a transition to a four-day week, and conversations about consolidating schools, COVID-19 and critical race theory.<\/p>\n<p>Months before VanderWey\u2019s arrival, school board member Lance McDaniel was ousted by a 2-1 recall vote after complaints about his comments on social media.<\/p>\n<p>VanderWey sometimes disagreed with the board\u2019s majority opinion on topics such as school closures and masking. She instigated school closures because of workforce shortages and COVID-19 cases in October, drawing mixed reactions from the community and board.<\/p>\n<p>School board meetings became increasingly turbulent as attendance increased and public comment filled the one-hour limit.<\/p>\n<p>Disagreements about hot-button, politically colored conversations led board members Jack Schuenemeyer, a Democrat, and Chris Flaherty, unaffiliated, to resign in September.<\/p>\n<p>Five of the six open school board positions were uncontested in the November election. Rice replaced incumbent Tammy Hooten. Frazier and Hart also were new to the board. Former Assistant Superintendent Lis Richard went on disability leave in January.<\/p>\n<p>Tom Burris was selected as interim superintendent while the district searched for VanderWey\u2019s replacement.<\/p>\n<div class=\"naviga-element naviga-subheadline1\">Wells\u2019 conversation with <em id=\"emphasis-4ed0ed87a1eb13730f67fe5e6ba47960\">The Journal<\/em><\/div>\n<p>For board member Wells, the outcome of the executive session was a surprise.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI believed going into that (Jan. 18) meeting that it was the evaluation only,\u201d Wells told <em id=\"emphasis-14941b29e7c6db661683bf02c9c1aa35\">The Journal, <\/em>adding that he had no knowledge about a decision to ask for VanderWey\u2019s resignation. He said it \u201cblew\u201d his mind.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI personally would have thought if there was going to be any kind of action, that should have been another meeting,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI think back sometimes,\u201d he said. \u201cCould I have navigated things better? I don\u2019t know. But that\u2019s been hard for me. That\u2019s been on my mind a lot.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He said he has a good working relationship with the board and didn\u2019t want to \u201cthrow anyone under the bus.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He spoke instead about VanderWey and his evaluation, which he said was \u201cvery fair\u201d yet \u201cvery critical.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI met with her every week. I got along with her. I liked her. And so when it when it came time to have that meeting, it was a very tough thing for me,\u201d he said. \u201cI believe she truly cared about the students. \u2026 And I think she did a very good job,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>Wells said he has been approached by people with negative comments about the district. It\u2019s an \u201cunfair overview,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere\u2019s a lot going on with our district right now, and I think it\u2019s very easy to look at kind of a lot of negative things,\u201d Wells said. \u201cBut there\u2019s a lot of really good things we have coming up with our district. I think we have the right people in the right places. Give it a little bit of time, and I think we\u2019ll have a district that we can be very proud of. I advocate for that. I believe it.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>President Noyes initially acted alone; communications were illegal, attorney says <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":41365,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[155,28,167,216,445,181,180],"naviga_topic":[],"class_list":["post-41644","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-education","tag-headlines","tag-local-news-lead","tag-montezuma-cortez-school-district-re-1","tag-newsletter-lead","tag-school","tag-schools"],"acf":[],"author_name":"dh_admin","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41644","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41644"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41644\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":85047,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41644\/revisions\/85047"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/41365"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41644"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=41644"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=41644"},{"taxonomy":"naviga_topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dh.durangoherald.com\/tj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/naviga_topic?post=41644"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}