WINDSOR — A rally on Thursday to support Windsor High School Principal Tiffany Riley turned into a heated argument about police reform, free speech and the Black Lives Matter movement. Riley was placed on paid leave June 12, following a controversial Black Lives Matter post on her personal Facebook page.
At one point, the small group of about six demonstrators started protesting protesters.
The rally came days after Riley filed a lawsuit against the school board, and as the community has had broader discussions about race in the wake of graffiti on town property. Riley alleges the board made defamatory remarks about her and violated her rights to free speech and due process.
As organizer Eric Gershman, a Stowe resident, spoke into a microphone on a gazebo Thursday, Jacob Garnjost, a 2016 graduate of Windsor High School, and son of Mount Ascutney School District Board member Kris Garnjost, started laughing.
Garnjost, who wore a Windsor High School T-shirt, brought a printed copy of the principal’s Facebook comments.
“Are you going to read her comment?” Garnjost yelled to Gershman in the middle of his speech as more people with Black Lives Matter signs started arriving to the village green. “Or are you just presenting a narrative?”
Gershman started asking the crowd a series of questions.
“Do you think Principal Riley is ignorant?” Gershman asked.
“Yes,” Garnjost said.
“Do you think Principal Riley is prejudiced?” Gershman asked.
“Quite possibly,” Garnjost said.
Garnjost later climbed on stage with Gershman and started reading the principal’s comments.
“Can you understand how a Black parent or a Black student who goes to Windsor may hear these comments and feel very uncomfortable she’s going to be their principal?” Garnjost asked Gershman. “It’s not her role as principal to make a public statement like this.”
Garnjost said the organizer wasn’t a Windsor resident and should “go back to Stowe.”
“What is this North Korea?” Gershman shot back at Garnjost. “We’re not allowed to come to your community?”
Garnjost told Gershman the small size of the protest indicated people from the Windsor community didn’t care about the issue.
Garnjost said in an interview that he and his family had received threats from people who didn’t live in Windsor since Riley’s departure, and he was frustrated with the fact that a non-resident was going to speak to the town.
“He came here to talk at people, not to people,” Garnjost said. “If you’re going to come here, you can’t expect people aren’t going to show up and be like ‘we don’t agree with you.’”
Gershman expected about 75 people to support Riley on Thursday, but in the end only about 13 people came — half of whom were there to criticize the principal. He would have liked to have seen more people at the event, but “whether they came to a rally or not is not indicative of how people feel about this.”
Deanna Rondos and her husband Keith, the parents of a student at Windsor High School, said other parents might not have come because they didn’t want their children to face repercussions.
“I’m sure more would have showed up,” said Deanna Rondos, who argued that all lives matter.
“There is nothing wrong with that statement,” she said.
Windsor residents Kira Kelley, Lex Johnston and Kate Gibbel, argued at length with Deanna and her husband about the “all lives matter” sentiment and police brutality.
Kelley, Johnston and Gibbel, who aren’t connected to the school, said in an interview that they believe white supremacy is a problem in Vermont.
“Accountability needs to be held for things you say, especially when you hold positions of power and influence,” Johnston said.
Gershman moved to Vermont from New York in 1997 and raised three children in Stowe.
“People were very respectful,” Gershman said of the rally. “People were bringing good and interesting arguments.”
In a phone interview, Gershman said he became concerned the school board was overstepping its bounds by blocking the principal’s right to free speech. He said that there is a narrative that if you do not support the Black Lives Matter organization, “you are somehow a racist, just by that fact.”
“Sometimes you need somebody from the outside,” said Gershman. He said he would have traveled to Arizona to argue the same points.
Gershman, who had never met Riley, described her as a person “who loves people of color, who loves police and believes the country is on a good path, but on a path that needs to be further explored and discussed.”
In an email to Mount Ascutney School District Board members on June 25, Gershman asked the board to reinstate Riley and issue an apology no later than Wednesday at 5 p.m. or he would move forward with the rally.
“We will be coming with national media backing and should you refuse to reinstate her by the deadline, we will be creating a campaign to call into question your fitness for office — and let me assure you that we will not rest until our peaceful demands are met,” Gershman wrote in the email.
Gershman also said people of Windsor were “appalled” by the administration’s decision to put her on leave for “voicing her non-racist, legitimate opinion on her personal Facebook page.”
“I can assure you there is wide and vocal opposition in Windsor,” Gershman said in the email.
Riley’s message on Facebook was posted on June 10. Two days later, she was placed paid leave.
“I firmly believe Black Lives Matter, but I DO NOT agree with the coercive measures to get the point across,” Riley wrote on Facebook.
“While I want to get behind BLM, I do not think people should be made to feel they have to choose black race over human race,” Riley wrote, adding, “Just because I don’t walk around with a BLM sign should not mean I am a racist.”
The post was widely circulated in the school community with some calling for the board to take action.
The next day, Riley posted a follow-up comment on Facebook, that she was “self reflecting, researching, learning, and trying to make myself more aware of the struggles of the BLM Movement.”
“I understand the struggle of the black lives community and stand with them in the fight against racism,” Riley wrote. “Prejudice, discrimination and racism has no place in the world.”
The school board voted unanimously to place Riley on paid leave. Superintendent David Baker sent Riley an email on June 12, saying the board had “no confidence” in her continued leadership at the school.
“They want me to enter into negotiations with you about a suitable severance package and a resignation from you,” Baker wrote. “They see no path forward for your leadership at the school given your recent post on Facebook and subsequent reaction to that post.”
Baker also directed Riley not to have contact with students or staff in the Windsor Southeast Supervisory Union.
Riley, who lives in Reading, had been principal since 2015.
Two months before the controversy emerged, the board had entered a new two-year contract with Riley on April 3, which included a salary increase from $110,000 to $113,000 for the 2020-2021 academic year and another salary increase to $116,500 for the 2021-2022 academic year.
Riley files lawsuit
Riley sued on Monday, alleging the board made defamatory remarks about her and violated her free speech and due process rights.
Riley’s lawsuit claims the board dismissed her “without seeking any input or explanation” from her or considering her past performance. The complaint says the remarks have “damaged her” and “created reasonable expectations” that she won’t be able to find another job in the area. The lawsuit specifically mentions Baker’s remarks in a Valley News article, where he called Riley’s Facebook post “outright racist.”
In an email to VTDigger, the superintendent emphasized Riley was placed on leave, not terminated.
“It is pretty difficult to file a wrongful termination suit when someone hasn’t been terminated,” Baker wrote. “I will leave that up to the lawyers to figure that out.”
Riley’s attorney, Bill Meub, said it was clear Riley’s employment with the district had ended.
“We believe they terminated her and dismissed her under the law as we see it,” Meub said. “At this point, the school board sees things slightly differently than we do.”
Meub said they were hopeful for a peaceful resolution.
“It’s really up to the school board whether they want to look at things differently than terminating her,” Meub said.
Lawyers not involved in the case said employment law and constitutional issues are at play.
Jared Carter, an assistant professor at Vermont Law School and a constitutional law scholar, said private speech is protected, but those rights may be diminished in Riley’s role as principal.
“Political speech is some of the most protected speech there is,” Carter said. “It gets murky if indeed she did this in some way that’s connected to her role as the principal.”
Riley’s initial Facebook post was made on a Wednesday, just before the last day of school. It’s unclear if the Facebook post was made during working hours and if it was made using a school computer.
Riley, who was not part of the rally, has since removed the comments from her Facebook page.
Jay Nichols, the executive director of the Vermont Principals Association, who said he’s seen hundreds of legal cases, also said school organizations can restrict the speech of employees if it is counter to the mission of the organization.
“If your speech is political in nature but doesn’t go against the mission of the school district, usually you’re OK,” Nichols said.
Under law, principals can’t be dismissed from positions unless they’re notified by the board by Feb. 1 that the district doesn’t intend to renew their contracts or unless they’re given just cause, including a hearing before the school board.
Stephen Ellis, an attorney in Burlington who specializes in employment law, said the board may honor Riley’s new two-year contract by paying her $229,500 before dismissing her.
“If the board doesn’t intend to return you to your employment, it’s pretty clear your employment has ended,” Ellis said. “The board may argue that she hasn’t been fired, she’s been relieved from her duties.”
The School Board met in executive session for an hour and a half the night before the rally but took no action.
“We plan to meet with her next week to gather more information; after that, we will decide how best to proceed,” the board said in a statement.
The issue concerning Riley has garnered national attention. The board had received up to 200 emails a day, Baker said.
Superintendent Baker and School Board Chair Elizabeth Burrows both declined to comment on the rally.
Graffiti on town property
The Black Lives Matter movement has sparked discussion both in the school and in the town.
On Tuesday, the Windsor Selectboard held a five-hour special meeting with about 80 people on a Zoom call after Black Lives Matter graffiti was painted on town property. The board discussed no longer saying the Pledge of Allegiance before meetings, reviewing police force tactics and renaming Jacob Street, which honors Judge Stephen Jacob who was a slave owner.
Windsor Selectboard member Paul Belaski, who attended the rally on Thursday carrying a Black Lives Matter sign, said the needs of Black people should be recognized.
“When people say, ‘all lives matter’ or ‘blue lives matter,’ I think that tends to diminish the importance of Black Lives Matter at this time,” said Belaski, a former state representative.
Though the half dozen people at the rally called for Riley to be reinstated, some parents and teachers said in phone interviews that they would be uncomfortable under Riley’s continued leadership.
Parent Michael Metivier said Riley’s comments were “alarming.”
He would have “serious concerns” for the well-being of students of color if Riley were reinstated.
“I thought it showed a profound misunderstanding of what racism is and what the Black Lives Matter movement is about,” Metivier said. Her comments showed “poor judgment,” he said.
Rachel Bogart, a paraprofessional in the school district, said many teachers had a “wonderful” working relationship with Riley, but she said the school needs a leader who will focus on defending marginalized groups.
“I’d feel pretty uncomfortable returning to the school if Riley were to be reinstated,” Bogart said. “I would not feel comfortable working for the district.”
