Year Ends Without Resolution to LAS Lawsuit

As we prepare to turn the page on a new year, there is unfinished business – from new water and sewer agreements to the final approval of a highly anticipated store – that will carry over into 2025. For Lowell Area Schools, that unfinished business includes the resolution to a lawsuit filed by a parent this past summer.

The suit alleges the district violated one parent’s constitutional and civil rights, but the district argues that the accusations are unfounded. Here’s a look at what the lawsuit says and where it currently stands. Both LAS and the plaintiff declined interviews on the matter.

Contentious History Between Parties

The plaintiff in this case is Stefanie Boone. A resident of Ada, Boone lives in the Forest Hills Public Schools district but has children attending Lowell Area Schools via the Schools of Choice program. Schools of Choice is a voluntary program which gives parents the option to send their children to schools outside of the district in which they reside.

Boone has been a vocal critic of LAS since at least 2021 and has, at various times, expressed concerns on topics including the district’s masking policy during the COVID-19 pandemic, universal preschool, critical race theory, diversity equity and inclusion programs, books shelved in district libraries, “safe space” stickers displayed in some classrooms and Board of Education transparency.

In addition to maintaining a “public figure” page on Facebook, Boone is an admin for a private Facebook group called Lowell Kids 1st which has 975 members. She spearheaded efforts to recall members of both the LAS and Forest Hills Boards of Education in 2021, although neither garnered enough petition signatures to be put to a vote. Boone has also posted on social media encouraging people to run against incumbent board members.

At times, Boone has shared photos of LAS staff members in the Lowell Kids 1st group and on her public figure page as well as on a now-defunct Facebook page for her unsuccessful run for Kent County Commissioner. One post about a specific teacher included the Bible verse Matthew 18:6 which states:

“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea”

In January 2024, Boone received a letter from Lowell High School Principal Steve Gough requesting that she “cease and desist from any reference to any Lowell Area Schools employee on social media and/or other public communications platforms.” The letter also stated that Boone was not to contact LAS staff without prior approval from a building principal or the superintendent. The aforementioned post with the Bible verse appears to have been what prompted the letter.

Boone vs. Lowell Area Schools et al

On June 4, 2024, Boone filed a lawsuit against LAS and several administrators, alleging a “claim of civil rights violation and violation of Title IX.” Boone is represented by Matthew DePerno who ran unsuccessfully for the office of Michigan Attorney General in 2022 and was later charged with four felonies related to the undue possession and willful damage to a voting machine. Those charges stem from DePerno’s actions while disputing the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

The suit against LAS specifically names the following parties, although it lists incorrect titles for some people in the court filing:

• Lowell Area Schools
• Superintendent Nate Fowler
• Director of Curriculum Dan VanderMeulen
• Lowell High School Principal Steve Gough
• Former Lowell High School Administrator Jacob Strotheide
• Lowell Middle School Principal Abby Wiseman
• Lowell Middle School Assistant Principal Ron Acheson
• Director of Library Media Services Christine Beachler

The defendants are represented by attorneys from the firm McGraw Morris in Grand Rapids.

For each person listed above, Boone’s complaint uses identical language to say that each staff member acted in their official capacity to implement district policy to:

1. “Groom” children through the use of initiatives such as diversity equity inclusion and social emotional learning and by giving them access to books that are not age appropriate
2. Prohibit Boone from making social media posts that reference LAS staff
3. Prohibit Boone from having contact with staff members without prior approval of a building principal or superintendent

The complaint goes on to list eight counts in which Boone asks the court provide her with relief of not less than $30,000 per count “plus additional damages as may be proven to compensate her for losses and damages…plus compensatory, incidental, noneconomic, exemplary and punitive damages, together with interest, costs and actual attorney’s fees.”

The eight counts listed in the suit are as follows:

1. Violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution for “banning parent’s speech”
2. Violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution for “prior restraint of speech”
3. Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution for “void-for-vagueness”
4. Violation of Title IX, based on the assertation that district policy regarding “DEI, SEL, social justice issues, and alternate sex and gender ideologies through sexually explicit books and lifestyles creates a sexually harassing hostile environment”
5. Negligent Breach of Fiduciary Duty, based on the assertation that the defendants “breached that duty on more than one occasion when they violated (Boone’s) constitutional rights to freedom of speech.”
6. Reckless Breach of Fiduciary Duty based on the same language as above
7. Intentional Breach of Fiduciary Duty based on the same language as above
8. Declaratory Relief based on the counts listed above

The full complaint can be read here.

Exhibits Rely Heavily on Social Media Posts

The lawsuit includes 37 exhibits to back up its claims. Those are largely social media posts from Facebook, and the exhibits break down as follows:

• 22 social media posts
• 6 correspondence to Boone
• 4 LAS policy documents
• 2 articles profiling LAS staff
• 2 photos
• 1 Michigan Code of Educational Ethics

The social media exhibits were posts from Boone’s Facebook pages as well as from the Lowell Kids 1st group. For instance, a post by Jessica Duhr Musser with a photo of “safe space” and “celebrating diversity” stickers was submitted as evidence of “grooming efforts within the School District.”

Another exhibit includes several posts made by Boone, including excerpts from the books Looking for Alaska and Out of Darkness as evidence that the district ignored her attempts to raise awareness about “books many parents deemed inappropriate for children.”

At least one exhibit did not have an obvious link to LAS. That exhibit was a social media post of the 2023 Lowell Pride event schedule. In referencing this exhibit, the complaint says:

“On June 3, 2023, Plaintiff posted on social media, ‘Groomers are out in full force. Not even trying to hide the sickness.’ [Exhibit 19]. DEI, SEL, social justice issues, alternate sex and gender ideologies, and other liberal political ideology, and”

However, the text cuts off in midsentence with no further context to indicate why it was included in the lawsuit. The schedule of events in the post does not include any reference to LAS.

The correspondence entered as exhibits include emails to Boone regarding how members of the LAS Reproductive Health Committee were chosen, how parents became members of an advisory group to the superintendent, the inclusion of The Handmaid’s Tale in the AP Literature and Composition course, the cease and desist letter from Gough and an email from Fowler stating that Boone had been blocked from LAS social media accounts for violating the district’s code of conduct but noting her access would be restored.

Some allegations in the complaint did not include any supporting documentation. For instance, the complaint alleges:

“Defendants have attempted to and have gained trust with children through gifts, attention, sharing “secrets” and other means to make them feel that they have a caring relationship and to train them to keep the relationship secret and not inform parents.”

However, none of the exhibits seem related to this claim.

All the exhibits can be viewed here.

District Response to Allegations

In August, attorneys for LAS and the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case, stating that Boone’s complaint fails as a matter of law. Among its arguments, the motion assets:

• Federal courts have determined that “the right of parents to control the education of their children is not without limits.”
• Boone does not have a First Amendment right to speak to LAS staff “on her terms.”
• While Boone’s complaint seems to imply that she has been prohibited from speaking at Board of Education meetings, that is not the case and she has made public comments at most meetings since the start of the year.
• The lawsuit is “devoid of factual allegations” against Fowler, VanderMeulen, Strotheide, Wiseman, Acheson and Beachler.
• No Title IX claim exists because Boone “was not discriminated against on the basis on her sex.”
• There is no established fiduciary relationship between Boone and the defendants.

The motion also argues that Boone has engaged “in a years-long pattern of harassing, doxxing, and defaming employees of Lowell Area Schools.” For evidence, LAS points to some of the same social media posts that Boone used as exhibits in her complaint.

For instance, Boone posted on social media a collection of personal photos of a LAS staff member and included that as an exhibit to show “her clothing that violates the school policy.” However, none of the photos – which show the staff member in rainbow colored clothing and shirts with LGBTQ+ messaging – appear to have been taken on school grounds or in a professional setting.

The motion to dismiss uses this same social media post as evidence that Boone “became harassing and targeted individual employees of Lowell Area Schools.”

The full motion to dismiss can be read here.

Current Status of Case

After the motion to dismiss was filed, Boone filed a response reiterating her position and as further proof of her claim, noted she had been declined as a substitute teacher for LAS.

LAS filed a reply to that response in November, and that was the final action taken on the case this year.

It is unclear when the judge will decide on LAS’s motion to dismiss. If it is not granted, Boone has requested a jury trial for the lawsuit. Lowell’s First Look will continue to follow this case to provide an update on its resolution.

Other Legal Action Threatened

Lowell Area Schools isn’t the only district facing legal action by Boone. In September, DePerno sent a “Litigation Hold Notice” to both Forest Hills Public Schools and Edustaff on behalf of Boone.

Edustaff is a private substitute staffing company. It hires substitute teachers and contracts with school districts to provide substitutes as needed. Local Edustaff employees can find and claim substitute teaching assignments through an app. Boone was hired by Edustaff sometime this year.

On September 13, 2024, Boone was scheduled through the app for a substitute teaching assignment at Lowell High School, but the district cancelled that assignment before the start of the school day. On September 17, she claimed an assignment at Forest Hills Public Schools but was called out of the classroom at the start of the day and told she would not be allowed to teach there.

Boone later shared on her Facebook page a transcript of what she says was the conversation between herself and a FHPS administrator on that day. It is not known how the transcript was acquired, and Lowell’s First Look has not verified its authenticity.

In it, the administrator states that the district will pay Boone for any substitute teaching days she currently has scheduled for the district. However, she goes on to say that Boone will not be allowed to teach in the district because of “at least two occasions when you have treated our students inappropriately.”

Boone subsequently shared on Facebook a video from a FHPS Board of Education meeting in which she speaks about harassing and threatening phone calls she received from an FHPS graduate. While Boone said online that the video showed the comments that led to her dismissal as a substitute teacher, that video doesn’t seem to match the description of the incident stated in the transcript. According to the transcript, the administrator described the incident in question as follows:

“(W)e had a student who spoke (at a board meeting), and then you went and spoke after him. (Y)ou were very critical of him and made him feel very uncomfortable…I think that interaction between an adult and a student caused concern for a lot of people, in the way that you treated him as a student.”

The administrator also said that Boone had taken a photo of a student and posted it online, a claim that Boone disputed.

Boone also received an email from her employer, Edustaff, on September 17 which said it had “received several reports stating concern of your recent hire with our organization.” It went on to quote the company’s social media policy which says employees “shall refrain from posting information regarding an educational institution’s specific employees or policies or its students.”

On September 21, DePerno sent a letter to FHPS stating, “We intend to file a lawsuit in federal court for deprivation of civil rights…” A nearly identical letter was sent to Edustaff.

A search of court records indicates that these lawsuits have not been filed yet. Lowell’s First Look will continue to monitor for new developments.