A school board director for St. Francis has ignored requests by community members to resign after publishing a plagiarized article in the September edition of the district’s newspaper, The Courier.

Background
Director Matthew Rustad submitted an article for the School Board Perspective column which was printed in the September 2012 issue. After community members called to alert the district office, it was discovered the piece had been plagiarized almost in its entirety from an article on ISTE.org. The board called a private meeting following the public School Board meeting on 9/10/12.

Censure
The decision was made to censure Rustad at the 9/24/12 school board meeting. A censure is basically a public slap on the wrist. The censure occurred as planned, with the meeting packet stating that Rustad was censured for “conduct unbecoming of a School Board Member.” When the floor was opened for discussion, school board members did not hold back from sharing what was on their minds.

“When something like this happens, I think it’s a slap in the face to our public, and I think it’s a slap in the face to our students, and I think we have to step up. I’m not sure what the censure consists of, the severity of it, but falling short of resignation I’m not happy with the censure,” said Director Harry Grams.

Rustad’s only comment during the first meeting was admittance of a mistake and that he had learned from his mistake.
Following an inquiry by Kelly, it was stated by Human Resources Director David Lindberg that there is a mechanism to remove a board member.

The meeting was adjourned following a motion by all school board members, including Rustad to proceed with the censure.

Request for Resignation
In the weeks since the censure, articles have been published in The Star Tribune and ABC Newspapers. There have been several letters to the school board, and a some phone calls. An online petition was started by Robert Anderson, resident of Oak Grove and St. Francis alumni. The petition requested that Rustad resign, and states “While we can forgive Mr. Rustad and respect his action of self-censureship, it is in the best interest of the students for Mr. Rustad to truly take ownership of his egregious error of judgment and resign.”

Per a response from the community, discussion about taking further action pertaining to Rustad’s censure occurred at the 10/8/12 meeting. Director David Anderson initially requested that the resolution for the resignation of Rustad be placed on the agenda for the next school board meeting on 10/22/12. After an inquiry was made as to the process of removing a school board member, Lindberg explained that the removal of a school board member by the board wouldn’t involve attorneys, and that a resolution to remove a school board member would involve four members voting in favor against the minority on a specified date and time, with the location and object of the meeting made known to the school board member being removed. After learning this information, Anderson revised his request saying “I would change my wording to the removal of Mr. Rustad.”

Further Investigation
Further investigation into the matter led to Chairwoman Marsha Van Denburgh requesting that legal counsel look into the matter further. Van Denburgh stated that she was not aware of anyone being removed from council in the past, and expressed her hesitation in proceeding in such a manner.
After much deliberation, the board decided to postpone placing the item on the agenda for the 10/22/12 meeting.

Resolution for Action
However, at the 10/22/12 meeting, the topic of Rustad’s removal was still a hot topic. During consideration of the audience, one community member expressed his interest in having Rustad resign, while another came to his defense advising him to sue the school board for harassment. The incident then remained to be dealt with until the end of the agenda for the evening. Included in the meeting packet was a document titled “Resolution Proposing Action Against a School Board Member.”

In summary, the resolution explained that due to Rustad’s plagiarized article, a motion to censure himself, Rustad providing inaccurate information to district administration, and a request from the school board for Rustad’s removal, “be it resolved” that a hearing would be arranged with an Independent Hearing Officer to provide Rustad with an opportunity to be heard and allow for further investigation into the matter. In short, voting in favor of the resolution would allow for a private hearing with Rustad and an Independent 3rd party officer who would share their opinions and any information with the school board. After a vote with one vote withheld (Rustad withheld his vote per advice from Lindberg), the resolution passed.