A Salem man who claims he was harassed and threatened by special interest groups outside of a school board meeting last year is taking his case to state officials.

Last week after the Salem-Keizer School Board turned down his request for a full public hearing in the matter, Mike Slagle vowed to take the appeal to the Oregon Department of Education. He is pursuing grievances that he was harassed by others at a school board meeting last year.

“If we had some kind of resolution, then perhaps we could have in-person board meetings again,” Slagle said. “I want to resolve this conflict within our community.”

The board closed off the public’s attendance to in-person meetings after a contentious public meeting last August. In an interview this week with Salem Reporter, Board Chair Ashley Carson Cottingham defended the board’s actions.

“Our first order of business as a school board is to conduct the business of the school board – and we’ve been doing that successfully, at every meeting, before and since,” she said. “Safety is of the utmost priority to us; we don’t want youth, staff, board members or the public to be at risk.”

Citizens can still participate in the meetings despite them not being allowed to appear in person, she added. Public comments can be made via teleconference technology or in writing.

But now, the district is considering how to open the doors again.

“We are considering a step forward later this month,” Carson Cottingham said. “I don’t think it will go back right away to what it looked like … prior to August.”

Slagle, an aerospace inspector who lost a race for school board in 2021, in an interview explained why it’s important for the public to attend board meetings in person.

“Being in person, when you get to speak, it’s a little more powerful than showing up at a Zoom meeting or writing text into the board meeting,” he said. “This school board can sit behind their screen and make policy and not feel the weight of the people that are in person, either agreeing or disagreeing with what they’re doing.”

Board Director Satya Chandragiri agreed.

“Online is not a good substitute for people sitting and watching,” he said. “They don’t show what others are doing. That’s the reason public meetings are public — so the public can watch our people talking to each other.”

Chandragiri said that allowing the public into school board meetings is more important than ever because the board is dealing with many issues and the community is “divided.”

“This is a time to bring everybody in,” he said.

Slagle claimed in a complaint to school officials that Aug. 9 he was “verbally harassed, called racially-motivated names, and threatened” by Latinos Unidos Siempre outside of Miller Elementary School, where the meeting was held. 

Chris Baldridge, director safety and risk management Services, investigated the incident and released the findings to Superintendent Christy Perry a month later. 

Baldridge determined that Latino association and Salem Keizer We Stand Together “verbally engaged with members of the other group in a negative manner.”

The report said prior to the meeting, Slagle took pictures of LUS, whose members asked him to stop. But it was after the meeting when tensions between Slagle and the Latino group “escalated to its highest point.” That’s when more than a dozen individuals began to “circle Slagle while yelling obscenities and pointing in their direction,” according to Baldridge.

Baldridge reported that Slagle’s and the groups’ actions violated the district’s “Every Student Belongs” policy.

Baldridge concluded that continuing board meetings with public attendance is “no longer in the best interest of the district” and recommended the board “immediately cease” those types of proceedings “for the length of time it takes for the two groups to mediate a resolution.”

An additional investigation by former Marion County UnderSheriff Greg Olson found Baldridge’s investigation adequate.

Slagle disagreed with Baldridge’s report, turning to the board’s public grievance procedures.

Those procedures are something the school district has to have by law, according to Paul Dakopolos, the school board’s attorney. The procedures are included in administrative policies set by the Oregon Department of Education, he said. 

Typically, complaints start at the school level, but others, like Slagle’s case, start with examination by district administrators, according to Dakopolos.

Superintendent Christy Perry reviewed whether further investigation was merited. After examining Slagle’s complaint and prior investigative findings, she concluded another investigation was not needed.

“I do not believe further investigation will change the conclusion, recommendations, or implementations,” Perry wrote, before telling Slagle, “It saddens me that this event has had a negative impact on you. My desire is that all within our community are safe at any district event they attend.”

Perry advised Slagle that he could appeal her decision to the school board chair and vice chair.

Slagle responded to Perry, saying he would appeal her decision — with a caveat: that the school board chair and the first and second vice chairs recuse themselves and board members to “pick a lead and co-lead from their ranks,” or allow the appointment of “an outside and independent auditor. Slagle believed Carson Cottingham, María Hinojos Pressey, Karina Guzmán Ortiz and Osvaldo Avila “received direct support from, and provided support for” LUS and could not be impartial in his appeal. 

But board leadership did not handle Slagle’s appeal that way. Carson Cottingham and the vice chairs reviewed Slagle’s complaint and determined it did not warrant a full board hearing. 

Slagle appealed that decision Jan. 5, asking again for a hearing and recusal of certain board members from it.

But instead, board members followed the next level of procedure, examining Slagle’s complaint. Each member notified the board secretary — as opposed to voting — of whether there should be a hearing.

Upon learning the results, Carson Cottingham wrote to Slagle Jan. 27 stating that a majority of the seven-member board did not agree to a full public hearing.

“We understand this is not likely the outcome you wanted,” Carson Cottingham wrote. “We want to assure you, though, that we will continue to assess our practices and procedures to ensure safe and welcoming environments for all our students, staff, and community. We look forward to the time when we can hold our board meetings in person once again.”

In a second letter dated Feb. 6, Carson Cottingham, addressed the bias issue, telling Slagle that even if his request for recusal had been granted, no meeting would have occurred because the board would have lacked a quorum.

Carson Cottingham also told Slagle the school board has no legal authority to order mediation with the Latino organization — something he had requested.

“It was simply a recommendation to resolve differences or find common ground,” Carson Cottingham wrote. “Mediation is a voluntary dispute resolution process.”

The board chair added that Slagle could contact the executive director of the Latino organization to engage in mediation. LUS did not respond to requests for comment from Salem Reporter.

In both her letter and an interview, Carson Cottingham declined to identify what each board member had decided on holding a public hearing.

But Salem Reporter established through interviews and emails reached out and found that Satya Chandragiri and Marty Heyen were in favor of a hearing and; Robert Salazar opposed one; Guzmán Ortiz wouldn’t disclose her position, while Pressey and Avila didn’t immediately respond to Salem Reporter’s request for comment.

Heyen told Salem Reporter she wanted a hearing.

“Given the history of harassment, I wanted to see for myself all the information that was collected and how they came to the conclusion that they did,.” she said.

Chandragiri issued a statement directed at Perry and board members following the decision not to hold a hearing.

“There is no doubt that Mr. Slagle diligently followed all that was asked of him to pursue the steps prescribed by our policy,” Chandragiri wrote. “Yet it

appears to me, that the steps our board and the district has taken to prevent a just resolution of his grievances is an example of systemic oppression that is unfair and meant to crush any semblance of justice or fairness.”

Robert Salazar, who was not a board member during the contentious August meeting, issued his own statement to Slagle. 

“I find no fault with the process and findings,” he wrote. “The individual who conducted the investigation has excellent credibility throughout the state.”

Salazar believes what occurred last summer was an isolated incident. 

“The process of the district will help diffuse the issues and work towards a resolution of all parties involved,” Salazar wrote. “I think we need to be aware of dissonance that deflects from the unity that we should seek for the students of Salem/Keizer.”

In an interview, Dakopolos defended the public grievance process.

“The board has used this process for years,” he said. “The board uses this process for other complaints. This is not my process and it’s not the board chair’s process.  This is outlined in the law and this is what the school board has adopted long before this board, so I am surprised there would be a concern over fairness.”

In taking his complaint to the state, Slagle hopes an attorney would be willing to represent him at no charge.But even then, he is not optimistic about how those proceedings will go because he says he has corresponded with the state education agency in the past and officials never responded. 

STORY TIP OR IDEA? Contact Editor Les Zaitz by email at [email protected]

SUBSCRIBE TO GET SALEM NEWS – We report on your community with care and depth, fairness and accuracy. Get local news that matters to you. Subscribe today to get our daily newsletters and more. Click I want to subscribe!