Submitted by Cheri Arkell.
A citizen and political friend of Paul Wagemann told a big lie during the public comment time at the school board meeting on Monday, September 12th, 2022: “It is a well-known fact that Superintendent Banner filed a discrimination case based on false allegations against Director Wagemann …”
This claim is a bold face lie. To fabricate a story so easy to debunk stunned many in attendance. Had Paul Wagemann never shared the findings of the “Burton Report”, published this summer, with his closest political friends? If his friends never read this report, then how could they get up and make claims about what was in the report? Do they just make up lies hoping “We The People “are incapable of checking the validity of their claims? Or, is it possible they did read it and hope we didn’t?
In June of 2022, the Tacoma News Tribune published the findings of Ron Banner’s discrimination claims against Paul Wagemann. It is titled the “Burton Report” and it is attached to this letter. This report is a matter of public record. If you have not read it, please do; everyone should before ever making a comment concerning it.
The scope of the ethical and professional boundaries Paul Wagemann crossed as a school board director is jaw-dropping. You may not be personally troubled by some claims in this report, but that is your point-of-view and none of us were on the receiving end of this discrimination, intimidation and total lack of common sense. Superintendent Banner was clearly treated differently than previous superintendents. Director Wagemann’s censure was well-deserved based on the findings. The voters who elected him in 2019 never knew at the time of his issues with people of color, his inability to control his words and to reflect upon his own behavior. There is a history of this problem and it should not be trivialized or ignored.
The woman who shared the big lie during the public comment period was actually just the set-up for the conspiracy theory she was about to launch concerning the current redistricting issue facing the school board. She went on to say, “ …and now he’s (Ron Banner) once again pulling your (Directors Veliz, Jacobs and Pearson) puppet strings by recommending an option that puts Director Wagemann out of his district.” BINGO! “Lie About Banner” accomplished! Let’s keep track of how many conspiracies and attacks are made concerning Ron Banner and Directors Jacobs, Pearson and Veliz in the next few weeks concerning the redistricting issue and, who spreads them.
These ugly personal attacks on Superintendent Ron Banner and our three nonpartisan school board members began well-over a year ago .They mimic the examples of extremists attacking school boards across the country. Who is behind our local attacks and why did they escalate starting in January of 2022? In the Burton Report you will see references made to a political group called Lakewood Cares. Pay close attention to that information and start connecting the dots. To be continued…
Wow Cheri! Thank you for bringing attention to this and getting the information out to the public. I was at the board meeting and witnessed the community member telling those lies as well as several others personally attacking board members. You have to wonder if they are trying to make being a board member so onerous that no one will want to run against their candidates
Cheri, thank you for clearly pointing out that both Wagemann and Anderson are following the extremist script of taking over local school boards couched in the hysteria of Critical Race Theory. Far right wing hysteria is crumbling in on itself in the US. Even our local opportunist politician wannabes are crushed at the polls (here’s looking at the fork tongued Susanna Keilmann and inept Gabe Sachwitz as they lie their way through their campaigns for the 28th rep even after their pitiful showings in the primary.)
The data in the CPSD federally mandated redistricting proposal does not lie. Wagemann is “tag, you’re it” based on the data. I consider it cosmic Karma.
I look forward to your expose of Lakewood Cares.
I thought Ben Sclair wasn’t going to pist this subject
matter anymore.
He said he wouldn’t post campaign material. The CPSD school board has been beaten up regularly in the SubTimes by far right extremists. It’s refreshing to finally read evidence based push back.
Hi K.R. Not sure what you are referring to. Perhaps “No election, candidate, or ballot related content, of any kind, will be published on The Suburban Times.” I don’t see this submission as a violation. Ben Sclair, Publisher
Thanks for including Cheri Arkell’s comment, Ben. I was at the board meeting also and am glad someone took the time to publicly make the correction.
I am just sick of WOKE, the contributor, does everything have to be about race, students can’t read, write, 2+2 is 5 right?
What was “woke” in the Burton Report? Was it when Anderson and Wagemann tried to bribe a 3rd board member? I call that unethical.
You call it perfectly fine because…why is that? Is it due to your shared political beliefs? I’m looking forward to those who defend the behavior or try to change the subject as you just did. It tells the story of how ethical boundaries are now so easily dismissed with a mindless “woke”. 2+2=4
What was “woke” in the Burton Report? Was it when Anderson and Wagemann tried to bribe a 3rd board member? I call that unethical.
You call it perfectly fine because…why is that? Is it due to your shared political beliefs? I’m looking forward to those who defend the behavior or try to change the subject as you just did. It tells the story of how ethical boundaries are now so easily dismissed with a mindless “woke”. 2+2=4
Race, Race, Race, Woke’s like you have turned education into a race war!
Anyone who does not follow the “woke” agenda is an extremist.
2+2= whatever is just.
“Justice” is arbitrary, and subject to shifting leftist ideology.
Children are the property of the leftist state.
If you are not woke, you must labor for those who are.
That is the lesson for today.
Class dismissed.
Be careful the truth is not acceptable, woke hate will attack!
The truth is what the “woke” left says it is.
That takes us back to the “justice” thing.
Thank you for posting this letter Cheri. Right wing extremist attacks on school boards, spouting Fox News talking points and lies, are a nationwide problem. These are just a small minority of citizens, but they make a lot of noise and are disruptive and disrespectful. It is time for the majority of citizens to become aware of these tactics and call them out (and also VOTE them out). As you can see in these comments, they attempt to disparage anyone who disagrees with them by calling them “woke”. I do not consider that an insult however. We all need to awaken and take back our schools from these extremists.
kangaroo court (noun): an unofficial court held by a group of people in order to try someone regarded, especially without good evidence, as guilty of a crime or misdemeanor.
When you base your case on a false premise, even using perfect logic, you will of necessity arrive at a false conclusion.
So it is with Superintendent Banner’s complaint against Director Wagemann. Banner charges Wagemann with making statements to which Banner ascribes racist. While a statement of fact (what Wagemann said or did) is permitted in a court of law, ascribing motives, thinking or intent on the part of the accused would be objected to and the objection sustained. Banner does not live in Wagemann’s head and thus cannot state as fact Wagemann’s intent; only Wagemann can do that.
Not content to only malign Wagemann, Banner also maligns an unnamed “…community group with an overtly racist agenda…”. Has Banner ever attended a meeting of this alleged “…community group with an overtly racist agenda…? I don’t think so, yet he makes the unfounded charge. Banner’s explanation of Wagemann’s intent says more about Banner’s state of mind and over sensitivity to anything he thinks might have racist intent. So who is the racist? Playing the race card is a form of racism.
Banner brings up the “crack the whip” comment made by Director Wagemann in regards to getting greater District effort in graduating students otherwise left behind academically. That comment, nearly a year prior to Banner’s December 2021 complaint, was fully vetted as having nothing to do with slavery or racism; yet it is among the first things mentioned by Banner. When he leads off with a lie everything thereafter in his complaint is suspect.
As if to buttress Banner’s accusations, Directors Pearson, Jacobs and past Board President Schaffer were brought in to give their personal testimony on Wagemann’s character. Directors Veliz and Anderson were not invited to testify, nor were other character witnesses in support of Wagemann. In what court of law are only prosecution witnesses permitted to testify with the exclusion of any witnesses for the defense? This was not so much an investigation as it was a kangaroo court in support of unfounded accusations.
Comments by these Board Directors can be summed up as characterizing Wagemann as “mean” (Jacobs), not holding prior more successful Superintendents to the same standard as Banner’s failure (Pearson), and opposing Critical Race Theory and its components: equity, diversity and inclusion (Schafer). Such subjective inferences without factual bases would never be accepted in a court of law. All three had a personal animus against Wagemann and were not unbiased witnesses.
So what’s really behind the complaint? The writing on the wall occurred when Anderson was elected to the Board in November 2021, unexpectedly defeating then President Schafer. Wagemann had been a thorn in the Board’s and Banner’s collective side and eliminating him would allow the status quo to continue. Prior to that election Board members Schafer, Pearson, Jacobs and Veliz, and Superintendent Banner, were able to enjoy the luxury of stonewalling Wagemann’s motions, which emphasized academic achievement, by refusing a second of those motions. Things went smoothly administratively with the Board serving as a rubber stamp without any of the “messy” obstruction, confrontation, discussion or real attention to the academic decline of the District. By the way, that’s the Board’s job; it is not the smooth running of the administration.
So, were Wagemann’s concerns about academics racist in origin or a reflection of the fact of the District’s academic decline under Banner? In 2016 the District was basically in the middle of the pack (46%) of all State school districts academically. In 2022 it has dropped to nearly the lowest quarter (27%) of all State school districts. This downward spiral is a direct indictment of Banner and the inaction and inattention of Board Directors Pearson, Jacobs and Veliz on the primary role of any school district which is academic achievement. With Anderson’s election, motions by either Anderson or Wagemann saw the light of day with a second and forced Pearson, Jacobs and Veliz as well as Banner to deal with the issues they had ignored previously and put themselves on the record by their votes.
That appears to be the real reason behind Banner’s complaint.
Mr. Arbeeny, As you are one of the three governors (leaders) of the political nonprofit 501c4 called Lakewood Cares, please tell the public the follow in this thread.
1. Who are the two other governors listed on state records?
2. When did all three of you become governors?
3. Is Paul Wagemann a member of Lakewood Cares? Do you regulary share information with him?
4. Has Lakewood Cares ever invited Ron Banner and Directors Jacobs, Veliz and Pearson to your meetings as you create your school board talking points and policy suggestions?
I thank you in advance knowing that you have been outspoken about the need for complete transparency and would never make an excuse for not answering these simple questions.
Deflecting again and using Lakewood CARES as a boogie man to scare little children. Yet you haven’t once addressed any of the points made in my response…….because you can’t. You never do. CARES must live in your head rent free! What do you know about CARES? Absolutely nothing of value. An article on CARES will be shortly published to inform you and the rest of Lakewood of the facts without all the emotional drama that you bring to the debate. By the way: thanks for posting the “investigation” for the public to read. It was something that this Board did not do.
Mr. Arbeeny,
Well, once again you failed to answer basic questions about Lakewood Cares. How many times have people asked and you and your members never respond? Odd. You seem quite reluctant to let the citizens of Lakewood know information. Why? I am intrigued about how you will explain/spin the roles two of our school board members play in your political club and when they became involved. Thank goodness for public records!
After reading this report I now see why the stink was made about this guy. I never saw this report. If Wagemann was so innocent he would have been bragging about the results of this investigation. Banner has put up with this treatment? The only one Wagemann needs to blame for being censured is himself and his own mouth that blurts out statements without a clue of how offensive he is. The business world would call him a major liability and be rid of the risk. Does he even understand that? He has no business serving on a school board with this lack of judgement. Does the school district/taxpayers have to pay for this guy if a lawsuit is filed? Better not.
Some of these commenters seem to be more upset with the author for revealing the racist discrimination found in the Burton Report than they are that it happened. The report reveals that one of our own community members, that works on a schoolboard no less, has been censored twice for racial harassment and your response is “woke”? It’s sad that your response isn’t outrage. Something like ‘this is not who we are’ or ‘this won’t be tolerated’ or ‘our kids deserve better’. If “woke” means calling out hateful actions and behaviors in our community, count me in. To do otherwise diminishes us all.
And as for the well-being of and preparation of the school children?
Crickets…………
They will soon be on the list of tuition bailout qualifiers with useless degrees, while the school administration
and micro-group of “concerned citizens” wastes their opportunity to become self-reliant and productive citizens.
Sad. Very sad.
Brian, Can you please explain Lakewood Cares to our citizens? Based on your comments you seem to be a good match for this political organization and Mr. Arbeeny refuses to share information. He has been asked for months and he deflects and changes the subject. When did School Board Director David Anderson become the governor along with John Arbeeny? Thank you.
Mx Arkell,
I have no affiliation with or direct knowledge of “Lakewood Cares”.
I have never met John Arbeeny.
I met Mr Wageman once when he was campaigning door to door.
I am a self-made businessman who has firsthand experience on what works and what fails in the teal world.
I’ve been a farmer and a soldier as well.
I have not had the luxury of social experimentation with public money.
I take the raising of a child seriously, in this age of cyber social warriors, crying for attention.
I’ve employed over 200 people over a long and diversified business journey.
I’ve paid millions of hard-earned dollars to a thankless and expectant government which siphoned most for their own existence.
You Mx Arkell are devoid of original thought, instead peddling secondhand information from intellectuals – exclusively left.
You are a very busy microcosm that appears outsized.
Since you saw fit to make assumptions of me, let me ask you a couple questions.
Trustfund baby or ward of the state?
Brian, Congratulations on your business success. I do admire that. I encourage you to actually go talk with the Superintendent because your assumptions of this good man and our school district seems to be formed by a lot of intentional misinformation. I apologize for assuming you belonged to Lakewood Cares. As for all the assumptions you made about me, you were beyond rude and it explains a lot. Peace to you.
John Arbeeny, you are using the same (lack of) logic and language that detractors from the J6 hearings are using. “Kangaroo court”, misleading comments about a third party investigation not being a “court of law” and pushing back on the findings of the investigation. I have read letter after letter that you have written in SubTimes and it’s about time you get some push back based on evidence. Your refusal to answer Cheri’s questions speaks volumes about gaslighting.
The constant comments about “woke” with absolutely no grounding in the evidence lined out in the report are all immature cries from the back of the room.
Deflection again. Stick to the topic at hand: Banner’s complaint investigation. What has Lakewood CARES, its members, governors, history or J6 hearings have to do with Banner’s complaint investigation? Nothing at all yet that’s what you harp upon. A veritable “one note samba” because that’s all you have. Don’t like the message, then attack the messenger. Yet another logical fallacy.
Mr. Arbeeny,
The topic IS related to Lakewood Cares. Your name IS actually mentioned in the investigation and Lakewood Cares IS also mentioned several times. Why? Would you like to explain that to the public? There seems to be a link between Lakewood Cares and the behavior of Director Wagemann. Are you denying this?
The fact you seem to run like a scared rabbit away from answering Lakewood Cares questions makes one believe you are deliberately hiding something from the public. If any of our school board directors are involved in an attempt to insert their politics into our schools, then the citizens should know. All candidates campaigned knowing the school board position was to remain nonpartisan. I believe we have three school board members who respect that ethical expectation.
Do you know anyone on our school board who meets regularly with Lakewood Cares members and lleadership to discuss Clover Park School District business and policy? It is a simple question. Try answering it. You believe in being transparent, do you not?
By the way, no one made you participte in this discussion. You decided to insert yourself. Now, you are so uncomfortable being asked simple questions you try to find fault with others. It is a pattern. You really do not want the public to know how Lakewood Cares operates and who is involved. We get it. We know.
Perhaps for you the topic is related to Lakewood CARES (it always has been…that’s all you’ve got) but that’s not the focus of Banner’s complaint or the investigation or my response. If CARES was so central to the investigation why didn’t the investigator at least contact CARES (or John Arbeeny) and invite its members to testify on Wagemann’s behalf? Answer: because what CARES members would have to say about Wagemann wouldn’t have fit the narrative of Banner’s complaint, the investigation or findings. This is by definition a kangaroo court.
You are attacking the messenger, John. The investigation stands on its own merits I read it and I believe it.
And, the term “kangaroo court” is one of the far right extremists favorite phrases. In fact, just today Alex Jones brayed and raged in the Sandy Hook trial that he was in a kangaroo court. Just like the deflectors of J6 findings.
Your friend was found out. And you deflect.
No, I am attacking the validity of the complaint and conduct of the investigation. That is attacking the message, not the messenger. You keep bringing up “right extremists” “J6” and now “Sandy Hook”. What have any of them to do with my critique of the complaint or investigation? Nothing.
You are spinning, John. You are a member of Lakewood Cares and you are clearly the front man for Paul and David. You use the same tactics and language that far right extremists use. You can critique the investigation all you want and that doesn’t take away its legitimacy.
This is what cancel culture does.
It identifies people according to their personal affiliations and beliefs, then lumps them together calling them “extremists”.
Finally the attacking mob calls on their supporters to ignore any and everything that group of citizens stands for.
Every totalitarian regime uses this same tactic to marginalize opposition.
Again, this always comes from peddlers of second-hand information – devoid of original thought – regurgitated from some leftist intellectual.
After you have thrown down the gauntlet, it’s a bit late to be calling your opposition “rude”.
You have picked a fight with busy parents Mx Arkell, who just want their kids to be instructed on what it takes to lead productive lives, not living in the basement until we die and leave them the house.
Our kids are not dependent pets.
They are the next generation who will have to be able to run more than their mouths.
I’m sure Superintendent Banner is a “good man”. I’m positive, after twenty years of knowing Director Wagemann, that he is a “good man”. However, the issue is concern over the type and quality of our children’s education. The fact that the CPSD state-wide academic rating has dropped from the lower half to nearly the lowest quarter of Washington State school districts is of major concern. The bottom line is that after six years of Mr. Banner’s leadership it is evident that while he is a good man something has to change. The majority of three on the School Board (Anderson-Pearson, Jacobs and Veliz) want to continue conducting business like is has always been done. Mr. Wagemann has suggested new procedures during his many years of service on the Board, but the majority of three have a record of voting against his suggestions, often preceded by eyeball rolling, smirks and snarky remarks. The situation reminds one of the adage, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Both the superintendent and the School Board need to implement more effective procedures in order to accomplish improved academic results. Replace defensiveness with open-mindedness. All, including the public, cease petty name calling when different opinions and facts are presented. The Board does Mr. Banner and our students no favor by rubber stamping administration procedures. The Board’s purpose is to provide active thoughtful direction with consideration for public opinion. Mr. Wagemann has championed this approach. He is not a perfect man, nor are any of us, but together we stand; divided we fall.
Six years and the CPSD is worse off than when Mr. Banner took over. Failure rests with both his leadership and a compliant board majority. My question is why was his contract renewed?
I agree 100% with you Richard! Why indeed?
Superintendent Banner clearly has a frail sense of personal self esteem being of Black ethnicity, to feel so threatened in a highly culturally diverse school. Only 13% of students are Black, while 22% are Hispanic, 9% mixed ethnics, 6% Asian, 3% Islander, 1% Native American, while White represents less than half at 46%. All people should be treated equally regardless of color and I think Mr. Banner feels a serious need to pull the favorite Race card to get his way around the school board’s directions. If he is that frightened of being targeted for his race, I suggest he try a different line of work that doesn’t involve Whites so he doesn’t feel so terribly threatened by them (which I feel is 100% fake). This letter totally reeks of self pity, lack of self esteem and whining with a great deal of exaggerated parallel of word(s) meanings and a thought process that clearly has no place in the mind of a Superintendent in a high school where most likely use of street politically incorrect language during non class periods in halls, cafeteria or out doors persist. Teens typically like to bolster their bad word vocabulary to see who they can ruffle up. I would think Mr. Banner would shudder to hear the general student conversations where ever other word is “N”, “F” of “MF” in their daily chatter like skipping rocks in a pond.
Good luck Mr. Banner, I highly suggest you might seek therapy for you self esteem. Maybe a Bi Ethnic Superintendent would fit in more appropriately. The strength of a Superintendent’s high moral level will rub off with the entire school, has anyone taken a study of what the students take of their current Superintendent’s moral has been to determine if he is helping or holding these students back from what they could obtain at the highest level possible during their school years? So far I haven’t heard anyone discussing the students point at all.
Only a person that doesn’t know much about Superintendent Banner would come up with something like this. Get a Bi- ethnic Superintendent??? Maybe take the time and learn more about him and not constantly criticize him.
All these crazy politics have no place here.
This is not supposed to be political, we should all be able to work together and come up with solutions for our future generations.
No wonder kids are in a constant state of confusion , adults are setting a great example.
Put your egos to the side and work together all this bickering is out of control.
We need to move forward, there is so much work to be done, so let’s work together and not against each other.
I had a feeling that politics is really at the heart of all of this. How sad for everyone.
It isn’t about politics or even race. It’s about performance. What have many on this thread held out as the “solutions”? Let the status quo, pre-2022 continue (Director Anderson’s election to the Board) and blame concerned citizens who want a change to that downward academic trajectory. Those “solutions” do nothing to solve the downward spiral of the District academically towards the lowest 25% in the State. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting things to change is the definition of insanity.