I recently wrote a story about allegations of child abuse at a Park City school. This was based upon a Salt Lake Tribune story which summarized

The gloves are off.

It’s time for the Utah Legislature to understand that their decision to support reckless development like Dakota Pacific has a cost. Dakota Pacific isn’t about making our community better. It isn’t about affordable housing. It is about making a developer rich(er).

For so long, the Summit County Council has said that we should strive for a seat at the table.. Therefore, they acquiesce to the State of Utah. It is also true that you generally don’t want to mess with the Legislature. They are the folks that brought you property tax equalization, so your taxes go to other school districts. The Legislature generally argues that this is for the benefit of the state as a whole. Yet, this seems different.

The Legislature seems to be supporting land developers. Yet, what I think the Legislature doesn’t understand this time is that it’s different. Thousand of people have shown up at public meetings to stop Dakota Pacific. The Legislature’s folly needs to have consequence.

It’s an interesting time for Park City schools. The November election seriously rebuked the current path of the school district. Meredith Reed and Nick Hill, who both won over incumbents, represent the public’s need for something different from our school board. Our school enrollment dropped. Nine, of twelve, Park City grades dropped in enrollment. Of the four grades that didn’t drop, two remained unchanged and two grew — first-grade increased by four students and eighth-grade by thirty-nine across the district.

I was hoping to be done posting about the Park City School Board election, but Mandy Pomeroy’s Campaign Finance Disclosures need to be discussed. It isn’t accurate. It portends that she has more support than she has. It also may not include all costs associated with her campaign.

Why does it matter? If someone can’t account for campaign expenses and understand how to report them, how do you trust that person to get the more complicated issues right? Does the candidate know the difference between a debit and a credit? Many of us may not… but your school representative should. That’s the issue.

So Ms. Pomeroy claimed contributions of $5500-ish to her campaign. However, she included both donations and expenses in the contribution number. The actual amount of campaign contributions was $1,800. She was off by $3,700. She couldn’t figure out how to accurately document her contributions versus expenses. It’s not simple but something we would expect of a school board member.

Because she didn’t get this simple thing right, I started to look more deeply at her campaign finance disclosure.

We learned, again, from KPCW that the Park City School District has lied, lies, and continues to lie. Before, we were talking about building permits. Now we are talking about toxic lead dust potentially infecting five-year-olds, students, and teachers at McPolin Elementary and Treasure Mountain Junior High.

This is the worst. Period. Park City School District Administration. Period. That we have ever had. Period. In Park City. Period.

If you haven’t been following the most recent scandal, the construction at McPolin and Treasure Mountain appears to be spreading toxic lead (I’d number the scandal but I can’t count past five). PCSD started by saying that the state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) had reviewed their plans before construction began. However the DEQ said the school district didn’t contact them until after dirst was moved.

The school district had also said that no work took place when students were there because it began in July; however, it took place in June when Treasure Mountain had Summer School.

In fact the DEQ didn’t learn about this until Septmber. Now DEQ is trying to mop up the mess from the school district. The problem is that you can’t remove lead from peoples’ lungs. You my ask whether the soil around McPolin and Treasure is toxic. A study was done at Treasure Mountain Junior High in Septmber and 2/3 of the samples (4 out of 6) were found to have too much lead.

Park City School District also appears to have assured the DEQ that they were working with Park City Municipal beforenhand to follow ordinances. However a Park City Municipal spokeperson said they hadn’t talked with PCSD until dirt was moved.

When looking at politics, people seem to focus on national issues. However, I firmly believe local politics are both more important on a day-to-day basis and something we can all impact. With that in mind, I turn my attention to the Park City Board of Education. In Jeremy Ranch, I have the choice between incumbent Mandy Pomeroy and Meredith Reed. If you live in the Parley’s Park area, you get to choose between incumbent Erin Grady and Nick Hill.

My vote in Jeremy is for Meredith Reed, and if I lived around Parley’s Park, I would vote for Nick Hill. Why?

Let’s start with the contest between Erin Grady and Nick Hill. First, I have to say that I have met both Erin and Nick on multiple occasions. I personally like them both. Erin is friendly, and she has been in Park City for a long time. If you had a conversation with her over dinner, you’d enjoy it. Likewise, Nick is of a British background and is down to earth. He is practical and organized. If this were a high-school student council election, it would be a toss-up.

Yet, it’s not a popularity contest. It’s more nuanced than that, and those nuances shift my opinion toward Nick Hill. That opinion is based on the actions of PCSD while Erin has been part of the board and the actions of Nick Hill.

While I like Erin, it is undeniable that the school district has faced its darkest time in recent memory. There have been a number of problems:

• Teachers with children in their own schools faced enrollment challenges and teachers left.
• Mask mandates were not followed at Parley’s Park.
• Child abuse occurred without proper reporting.
• PCSD couldn’t be troubled with getting the right building permits (that many of us know are required), and that will likely cost us time and money.
• PCSD had the chance to lower our taxes but Erin (and every other board member) voted to keep our taxes higher than they needed to be.
• After all of that, they gave the Superintendent a raise and extended her contract.
• Overarching all of that, I don’t feel like I am a part of the entire discussion over decisions being made. I feel like decisions by the school board are made somewhere else and then presented to the public. The problem is that I, as a citizen, don’t understand how the decisions are made. If that’s true, it’s also not legal.

So, while I like Erin, I don’t believe the school board is on the right path. Therefore, I wouldn’t encourage voting for Erin Grady and keeping us on that same, flawed path. Instead, I would vote for Nick Hill.

So, you can’t just run away from someone. You should run toward someone. So, why Nick Hill? Nick rose to prominence when he pointed out that Parley’s Park wasn’t following mask orders during the original Covid time frame. Since that time, he has emerged as someone who has experience managing complex projects. He seems to be someone who thinks critically and isn’t afraid of standing up for what he believes. I also have hope that his background as a project manager will serve the board well — perhaps in areas such as building permits.

If Erin hadn’t been part of a board with so many failures, then perhaps I would think differently. However, that’s not the case. Therefore, I would vote for Nick Hill, given his willingness to speak out, back that up by taking action and running for the school board, and his experience managing complex projects.

Now let’s shift to Meredith Reed versus Mandy Pomeroy in the Jeremy Ranch school board election. This is a race I am familiar with since I lost to Mandy and Meredith in the Primary Election. I’d like to give you the politically correct answer and tell you why both are good choices, but I just don’t think that’s true.

Meredith is THE clear choice from my perspective. If you don’t believe me, I would ask you to listen to Mandy’s KPCW interview from October 19th. It’s a train wreck. Mandy is asked what her major accomplishments on the board were. Mandy says she has made big changes and tough decisions. Then Mandy is asked for specifics. She stumbles and then says “Big choices were made in the budget and areas where we saw great needs and really valuing the input of the community and the people who come and speak at our meetings and listen and teachers and all of the needs I think we have put a lot of the money in the right places.” Having both listened to the interviews and also the PCSD meetings, I am not sure she has made any big changes or tough decisions. If she has, they appear to be behind closed doors and not something I have heard in public.

Then KPCW host Michelle Deininger asks about restoring trust and that Mandy has said, “KPCW hasn’t been honest in their coverage of the district.” It appears that Mandy has fallen into the PCSD is being persecuted by the news tripe. She then recommends that the school district start a podcast. My fundamental problem with this entire concept pushed by Mandy is that good news asks hard questions. Mandy seems to be advocating for propaganda. It’s not public-friendly.

Ms. Deininger then points out a text from Mandy’s campaign (pushing Mandy’s candidacy to the public) that looks like it is officially from the Park City School District. That is not OK.

Then the topic of Mandy being non-partisan came up. Mandy has allegedly made a campaign issue out of the fact that Meredith is being supported by Democrats. Ms. Deininger said, “The parade was an awkward thing to cover as a news entity because when I reached out to you to ask “this is not a partisan race, why is your campaign in the Republican Party float, you [Mandy] said that your campaign didn’t know they were with the Republicans it was probably a mixup. Then I called the Republican Party and they said that is not true; we planned this with Mandy. So you did represent your involvement in the float.”

Mandy says, she did not misrepresent anything. She says she had walkers In the parade that were both Republicans and Democrats.

We further go down the rabbit hole where Ms. Deininger says, “So the Vice-chair of the Republican Party was not honest with me when she told me that she planned that with you?” Mandy responded, “She planned the float. She planned the parade.” One must ask, if Mandy was not involved at all, how does she know the Vice-chair planned the float and parade?

Then it gets even worse. Ms. Deininger says Mandy has made an issue out of Meredith being a Democrat and then asks about Mandy’s party affiliation. Mandy says that she has been unaffiliated as long as she can remember and especially since she moved here. Ms. Deininger then cites information that she has received which shows that is not true. Ms. Deininger says this is about “telling the truth versus not telling the truth.” Ms. Deininger asks if Mandy will share her registration from earlier this year. Mandy says, “This is becoming something that doesn’t need to be what it is.” Ms. Deininger concludes with the comment, “I think that lots of people are less concerned with party affiliation than with trusting someone they vote for. I will share with voters that you were registered Republican as early as 2018 and as recently as this year. I believe you made a change, very recently, and now you are unaffiliated. And have seen that in writing.”

Mandy responded that KPCW is making this something more than it needs to be. Ms. Deininger responded that campaigning as an unaffiliated voter for six months, while actually being a Republican, is dishonest. Mandy responded that her registration has nothing to do with her abilities to perform her duties on the school board. Ms. Deininger responded, “but what about honesty versus hiding?

Mandy’s responses on this issue highlight much of what is wrong with the current school board. It is about messaging versus helping our kids. It is about being truthful. If we can’t trust what a board member says, how do we look at the board as a whole? In this case, there seems to be a complete inability, to tell the truth coming from Mandy’s campaign.

So, that is the interview that tells me that I won’t want someone who appears to play fast and loose with the truth in charge of my kid’s education.

Then we get into the concept of Mandy using pictures of Meredith’s children in campaign flyers. The issue here is that Mandy put a picture of Meredith and her children on a flyer, insinuating that the closest Meredith ever gets to her kids’ school is the bus stop. Meredith had included the picture in some of her campaign material, and then Mandy repurposed it.

When questioned by KPCW about the Cease and Desist letter Meredith filed against Mandy for using her kids images, Mandy said, “I will bring that up with Meredith.” I don’t know whether this is actually illegal or not. However, I do worry that if I opposed a decision Mandy made, would she use any pictures of my children that happen to be on social media against me? Maybe that’s fair but the general rule is that you leave kids and their pictures out of things.

Is there ever one thing that disqualified a candidate from office? Probably not. However, the pattern I’ve witnessed would make me vote against Mandy every time. Then I couple that with Meredith’s military background, her willingness to ask tough questions, her backbone to stand up in the face of challenges and that’s where my vote will go.

When Meredith and I were running against each other, we didn’t agree 100% on all issues. However, her honesty and judgment seem to far outpace her opponent, and therefore, I will be voting for Meredith Reed.

If everyone is on one side of a trade, expect the other outcome. That’s a key component of Michael Lewis’s book The Big Short. Where are we with Park City?

I believe most of us would say that we can’t imagine a world where Park City isn’t the center of the universe.

More. More. More.

Even during Covid, Park City rose. Our home values have tripled over the last 4 years. Visitors have come in droves. Ski resorts have been packed.

Yet, it makes one wonder whether that is sustainable.

Most recently, the land developers have doubled down. The development at Mayflower, the resort that will be downslope from Deer Valley, is moving along at a brisk pace. Dakota Pacific is reigniting development at the Tech Center. The schools are adding square feet even more quickly than they realize they need building permits — even though student populations drop each year.

Grow. Grow. Grow.

Yet, is it sustainable? Are we at the top — at least for now? It has that feel.

I’ve come up with a theory. If the Park City School District Administration is involved in something important, they’ll likely get it wrong.

This week’s unfortunate example is tennis coach Lani Wilcox. Evidentally a 16-year-old female tennis player was demoted from varsity to JV. Then, according to charges against Ms. Wilcox, the player became angry, slapped Ms. Wilcox, Ms. Wilcox put her in a headlock, they fell to the ground, and Ms. Wilcox took away the student’s cellphone.

Ms. Wilcox has been charged with felony child abuse for her actions. Ms. Wilcox was then suspended by the Park City School District.

You may say, “Thank god, PCSD is finally taking child abuse seriously.” And I assume that’s what Jill Gildea, the Park City Superintendent, was thinking when she suspended the coach. The only problem is that those who were THERE tell a different story.

The people in attendance say that the student was demoted to JV so the student could concentrate on an upcoming match.

(Note: The following is based on reports that the Park Rag has received. We only have reports and have no proof. That said, the details are pretty specific.)

Because the student acted out verbally, the player was asked to leave. The player left for an hour and then came back, dropping F-BOMBS and charging at Ms. Wilcox. They say that the student hit Ms. Wilcox, and they fell to the ground. Ms. Wilcox hit her own head on the ground and may have a concussion. After that, the student got up and kicked a male coach in the groin.

Now Ms. Wilcox has been suspended from coaching and has been charged with a felony by the Summit County Attorney. She could face jail time. Her name has been dragged through the mud, and it will be difficult for her to coach again.

Here’s the rub. This happened at the PC MARC. They have it all on video. According to unnamed sources, multiple school administrators, after watching the video, recommended that Ms. Wilcox be reinstated to teach tennis at Park City High School. School Superintendent Jill Gildea would not reinstate Ms. Wilcox. Then the County Attorney, Margaret Olson, filed FELONY charges against MS. Wilcox.

It’s as if they were trying to both act tough because they didn’t act effectually before. Previously, child abuse actions were settled between Summit County and the Park City School District. Neither party disclosed the conditions of the settlement. However, we don’t believe anyone was held accountable for the accusations. Is everyone trying to act TOUGH at the expense of destroying a coach? It appears the answer is yes.

This is how it will probably work out. Lani Wilcox’s reputation has been destroyed by PCSD and Summit County. The video of what actually happened will be used in court. Because school district employees allegedly saw the video and recommended that Ms. Wilcox be reinstated, but wasn’t, there will be a lawsuit against PCSD. An additional lawsuit could be filed against Summit County. The only question is whether the total of the lawsuits will be six figures or seven.

Tax payers wil pay it.

Back to PCSD schools. As I stated above, multiple administrators allegedly saw the video. They thought Ms. Wilcox should be reinstated. That likely means that it wasn’t the coach’s fault.

Allegedly the Supeintendent disagreed. Either she thought this issue was real or she just didn’t want to deal with another issue. Unfortunetely, it seems like the latter.

In Tuesday’s Park City School Board meeting, the school board approved changes to Policy 10080 – Student Search Policy without any discussion. The changes are generally about e-cigarettes, metal detectors, and who can perform a search. However, it presents a good opportunity to discuss whether the policy is valid.

Unfortunately, the school board had no discussion.

One of the interesting things you’ll find as you follow local cities, counties, and school is they are always governed by a higher power. In the case of our schools, that higher power is the Utah State Board of Education (USBOE). While the Park City School District has a policy on searching students, the USBOE has a policy that defines what local schools should do. The differences between PCSD’s policy and the USBOE are concerning — especially when it comes to a topic like students’ privacy.

Let’s talk about some of the important pieces two policies. In the Park City policy it says:

• Students have the right to be free from unreasonable searches
• School district Administrators or their designees have the right to search students, their property, their vehicles, and their locker
• They can perform a search when there is “reasonable suspicion” of violation of policy, law, etc.
• They then say “Reasonable suspicion requires school personnel to be able to articulate the facts and inferences that led them to believe that a student had violated the law or school policy.”
• When a search is performed, a school administrator must be present.
• Immediately after a search, parents must be notified.
• Student cellphones and devices can be searched.

The USBOE policy states:

• To be reasonable, the USBOE says a search must be justified at its inception. In other words, to begin the search a school official must have reasonable grounds for expecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated the law or rules of the school.
• USBOE defines who should search a student. They say, “An appropriate school official should search a student depending upon type and circumstances of search. For instance, if a more intrusive search of a student is anticipated, a higher level school official should search the student. A younger student should be searched by a familiar school employee. Generally, male employees should search male students and female employees should search female students. Typically, a single school official should not search a student. It is preferable to have two school officials or employees involved with search. Too many employees could be seen as intimidation.”
• USBOE further delineates searches performed by school resource officers and other law enforcement agents. If a resource officer is involved, the student must read their Miranda Rights before conducting a search. If a resource officer is involved the reason for the search is not only “reasonable suspicion” but also includes “probable cause”. They note “probable cause is more than a bare suspicion, but less than evidence that would justify a conviction.” It is the legal definition that all law enforcement has to follow and has more requirements than “reasonable suspicion”
• USBOE states that “A request to search is not a search. No justification is needed for a school person to ask a student for permission to search student’s property–so long as the person recognizes she is free to refuse to consent.” This means that a student can refuse a request to search but if they consent, then there is no contemplation of a student’s 4th Amendment rights.
• USBOE says, “School officials have no obligation to contact parents before detaining and questioning students. “

On Thursday, Jeremy Ranch held its annual Fun Run fundraiser. This is an event where kids run around the field behind the school as many times as they can. It’s simple, and it’s loved by the children.

As part of the event, school board candidate Mandy Pomeroy attended the run. She posted pictures of her high-fiving a student on Facebook. Her Facebook post said:

“Continuing my focus on volunteerism this week, let me tell you about the fun run at Jeremy
Ranch today! I had the best time helping out and making sure these kids had the times of their
lives! But, this isn’t just this week. It’s EVERY week! Just another reason you should elect me
to the District 4 seat. I actually step foot in our schools and I see what’s going on.”

Here is the image. I have blurred out the individuals’ faces and name tag. All faces and the main child’s name tag were visible in the original on Facebook. That’s where the legal violations appear to start.

The main problem with that is that you can’t volunteer at a school and take pictures of children, according to a Park City School District video on volunteering. PCSD says this violates the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act — or FERPA. FERPA was designed to protect the rights of children in our educational environments. We know the school district considers pictures to be considered private information because their information video says, “School staff and volunteers are obligated to abide by the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act, commonly known as FERPA — which restricts individuals from taking images.”

You may be thinking, “Josh, wow, you really have it out for Mandy. You are describing an obscure law. Everyone takes pictures of kids. What is the possible harm?” First, it’s not an obscure law, since the school district made a point to make a video about it. Second, Mandy is a school board member. So, she should know the details. As for “every one takes pictures of kids” that likely needs to stop based upon current laws.

Finally, what’s the possible harm? This is why I wrote this article. For some people, this isn’t a game. When I first started filming Summit County meetings a woman approached me and told me that I couldn’t film her or she would sue me. Being full of bravado, I told her that this was a public space and she had no expectation of privacy. She then explained the situation to me.

She was a victim of domestic violence. She and her children had escaped a relationship and the abuser had no idea where they were. By filming her, and posting it online, I could endanger her and her family. After hearing that, I never posted her face online. It was the human thing to do.

Laws like FERPA are in place for a reason. They are there to protect our most vulnerable. Did Ms. Pomeroy mean to harm someone? Of course not. I believe she was there to watch her kids run and then saw it as a campaign opportunity. Perhaps she received permission ahead of time from Jeremy Ranch to film. However, I doubt that’s the case.

Instead, it shows a lack of judgement. It shows a lack of understanding of current directives. Along the way, she may have endangered children and their families

We all have the opportunity to grow. Hopefully Ms. Pomeroy learns from this. I think what makes this worse than someone randomly taking a pic at a school is that it seems to be more of a political ad than a random picture. I’m not sure what violating a federal law or school policy means for a sitting board member. Probably nothing — given the current environment. I guess we’ll see.

Most importantly, I hope the picture hasn’t caused harm to anyone or their family members.