Without honor

The Weston County School District No. 1 Board of Trustees was faced with an unenviable task on March 11. Confronted with declining enrollment and a projected $1 million budget shortfall, they made the difficult, but apparently necessary, decision to reduce staffing levels. It was the kind of decision that requires resolve, discipline and a willingness to lead in the face of inevitable criticism.

For that, they deserve credit.

As trustee Paul Bau put it during the meeting, “Just because we don’t like it doesn’t mean we don’t have to do it. Math is math and numbers are numbers.” He was right. Aligning staffing with enrollment is not just fiscally responsible — it is essential to the long-term sustainability of the district.

That reality becomes even more significant when viewed alongside the looming leadership transition ahead. Superintendent Brad LaCroix’s contract expires at the end of the 2026–27 school year, and replacing a steady hand who has guided the district since 2004 — after years as a principal, vice principal and athletic director — will be no small task. The institutional knowledge that will leave with him is immense. The board’s willingness to make hard decisions now suggests an understanding of the kind of leadership the district will need in the years ahead.

But leadership is not measured solely by the decisions you make. It is measured by how you make them.

And here, the board failed.

In carrying out this reduction in force — which affected seven positions across the district, including five certified staff — the trustees, with the guidance of their attorney, Abbi Forwood, chose secrecy over transparency. They refused to identify the positions and employees affected in open session, and they declined to engage in meaningful public discussion about their action. In doing so, they dishonored their staff, their voters and the law that governs their conduct.

Most troubling, they denied basic dignity to the very employees whose livelihoods
were affected.

Earlier in the same meeting, resigning employees were recognized and thanked by name for their service, and staff members whose contracts were renewed were recognized and congratulated by name. That simple act of acknowledgment was not extended to those who were let go. 

The board expressed regret, but their insistence on anonymity stripped those words of meaning. Years of service to this community were erased from the public record in the moment they mattered most, and the board’s failure to provide an accurate account of their action victimized those employees again by leaving them at the mercy of the rumor mill and social media.

That is not leadership. That is avoidance.

The justification appears to be a desire to shield either the employees or themselves from discomfort. But public service is not about avoiding discomfort. It is about accepting responsibility — especially when the decisions are hard.

And the secrecy is not only unnecessary, it is illogical.

The district is required to publish the names and positions of all employees annually. The identities of those affected will become public. The only question is why the board chose to delay that reality and, in the process, deprive the community of an honest understanding of what occurred.

This was a reduction in force, not a
disciplinary action. No allegations of wrongdoing were involved. There was no legal risk in naming those affected — a point underscored by the lack of any known successful lawsuit in Wyoming arising from
such disclosure.

What the board has done instead is obscure the human cost of its decision, and it is impossible for voters to know if they agree with the cuts because they don’t actually know what cuts were made.

We name those lost in war. We name those lost on our highways. We name victims of tragedy because names matter. They remind us that decisions have consequences for real people. By withholding those names, the board sanitized the impact of its action and denied both the public and legislators a clear understanding of the human element involved in the choices that are made.

That matters — especially when board members themselves pointed to legislative decisions as contributing factors in this situation. If legislators are to make informed decisions about education funding, they must be able to see the full consequences of those decisions. Concealing those consequences serves no one.

It also continues a troubling pattern.

This board already spends an extraordinary amount of time in executive session — roughly half of its meeting time in 2025. Now, in what several trustees described as the most difficult decision of their tenure, they have chosen to share virtually none of the details in open session. That signals not caution, but a culture of secrecy.

Even more concerning, board leadership publicly expressed disagreement with portions of the reduction — while refusing to explain what those disagreements were. That is not accountability. That is abdication.

If elected officials are unwilling to explain their votes, then voters are left to guess. And when voters are left to guess, trust erodes — and trust in public education is already under strain in Wyoming. Rising numbers of families are choosing home-schooling, and lawsuits over funding and school choice continue. In that environment, transparency is not optional — it is essential.

There are also serious legal questions.

Wyoming’s Open Meetings Act requires that action be taken in a meeting open to the public in a way that clearly informs the public of what action was taken. The
motions used on March 11 — which referenced recommendations presented in executive session without detailing the specific positions eliminated — fall short of
that standard.

That should concern every voter.

If challenged successfully, the board could be required to redo the vote — this time properly and in public. Worse, if a court determines the original action was invalid, the district could face financial liability for lost wages and benefits. What was intended as a cost-saving measure could become a costly mistake.

That outcome would serve no one, but there is still time to correct course.

If the board believes its decision was necessary then it should have the courage to stand behind it publicly. That means naming the positions affected, explaining the rationale, and taking a clear, lawful vote that leaves no ambiguity about what was done.

Last week marked Sunshine Week, a national reminder of the importance of open government. Weston County School District No. 1 missed that moment, but the opportunity is not gone.

The board can still step out of the darkness. It can still choose transparency. It can still do the honorable thing.