Six members of the East Porter County School Corporation Board censured fellow board member Natalie Bowersock at their monthly meeting Monday evening, citing a slew of alleged violations by Bowersock of their code of ethics, which she says was just adopted last month.
Bowersock is in her first term on the board, having been elected last November. She did not attend the meeting Monday and is suing the board, the school corporation and Superintendent Aaron Case for the lifting of a no-trespass warning against her at her children’s school, Washington Township Middle School. Bowersock had also filed a tort claim involving the injury of her son by another student at the school in the spring that required emergency surgery.
She filed a formal complaint last winter with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding what she believes to have been sexist treatment on the board. A corporation employee has also filed a formal complaint of harassment against her.
After the conclusion of the regular business portion of the meeting, the censure was added to the agenda and read aloud by Board President Richard McSparin.
The censure resolution cites eight complaints against Bowersock. The first states she “has overstepped her role as a board member on numerous occasions and attempted to act in an administrative, not policy-making capacity.”
Bowersock was also accused of: refusing to recognize her ethical duties as a board member by claiming such duties are not required by law; making various unsubstantiated allegations against school personnel and administration though refusing to cooperate with investigation of said allegations; visiting school property on numerous occasions without coordinating with school administrators and acting inconsistently with policy while in attendance; her actions leading to internal complaints by school corporation employees and administrative staff; discussing school board matters in various public settings and social media posts, undermining community confidence in the corporation and its processes; and making personal attacks on school administrators and personnel in public settings, including social media posts and emails.
The Indiana School Board Association Code of Ethics was cited and three board members spoke.
“Recent actions by a fellow board member have not only disrupted the collaborative spirit that we must maintain, but have also diverted critical resources and time away from serving our students and supporting our dedicated staff,” read board member Audrey Starr, also in her first term on the board, from a prepared statement. She went on to say the repeated lawsuits and complaints against the district by Bowersock have consumed valuable resources and created unnecessary strain. “The morale of our teachers and administrators has been impacted,” she added.
Board member Vanessa Moore, also in her first term, took exception to statements previously reported in the Post-Tribune by Bowersock that she is the only board member asking questions. Moore said all board members have multiple opportunities to share their opinions and provide feedback, including during public work sessions or communicating individually with Superintendent Aaron Case.
“When Mrs. Bowersock states that she is the only person asking questions, that is not true,” Moore said. “How can she possibly know what questions I am asking? She isn’t on the phone with me, and half the time she isn’t at the meetings.
“The statement that any of our voices are silenced is simply not true,” she added.
Board member Bob Martin added that in his 35 years on the board, he’s never felt the body wasn’t in collaboration until recent months. He said EPCSC schools enjoy a “high pedigree” in relation to school performance that “starts with the board. I don’t know how many times censuring has been used in the state of Indiana. It’s never been used in the 35 years that I’ve been here. I feel that it’s necessary.”
Bowersock said she didn’t attend the meeting because she didn’t have a good feeling and would have been ambushed by the censure as it was added to the agenda at the moment, but clearly planned if at least one board member had prepared a statement. She found out about it the next day.
When she watched the video, she said she was struck by the irony of Starr necessitating the board operate with transparency. “They wanted me to be ambushed. I think that was very intentional, so if we’re talking about transparency, why wouldn’t they have let me know so I could prepare a statement?”
“It’s all very vague in everything that’s stated,” she said of the accusations. “All of these allegations they’ve signed their names to, they haven’t even heard my side of it,” she added, saying that her fellow board members have been advised by Case not to speak with her. “Where’s my due process?”
She acknowledged her spotty meeting attendance. “Our family household has had three surgeries this year. That’s not a normal year for us. Bob Martin missed a lot of meetings due to his health and nobody said anything about it.”
As far as coming onto school property without coordinating with administrators, Bowersock said she attended her daughter’s Valentine’s Day party and an awards ceremony, both as a parent and with her 3-year-old in tow. She admits using her board member badge to get into the school, but said that’s been common practice for staff members for years, including when she taught there.
“When I was given the badge, I was not given any parameters,” she said. “What was I supposed to do? Go up to the podium and announce, ‘Hey, I’m here as a parent?’”
She also acknowledges she did make statements on social media that were removed after a brief duration. She said she waited until the no-trespass order had been in place over a month. In retrospect, she wouldn’t do it again, but said everyone was talking about it.
“I was just so desperate to clear my name. At this point, what do I have to lose?” Bowersock remembers asking herself. “They’ve already ruined my reputation. My kids have been negatively affected by this.
“I am just so tired of being accused of these things. Intimidation is an illegal act. You can’t just throw that term around,” Bowersock added.
The district, through communication of its attorney Nicholas Otis of the LaPorte firm Newby Lewis Kaminski & Jones, declined to comment. Bowersock’s lawsuit seeking a restraining order, preliminary injunction, and declaratory relief against the no-trespass warning has bounced around the Porter County court system.
After initially being assigned to the bench of Porter Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Clymer, it was assigned to Porter Circuit Court Judge Rebecca Buitendorp when Clymer recused himself. Court documents dated Sept. 10 show that Buitendorp also declined to hear the matter and it was assigned to Porter Superior Court Judge Christopher Buckley, subject to his acceptance.
Shelley Jones is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.
