Philomath School Board member Erin Gudge stepped down as chair of the school district’s governing body Tuesday evening during a hearing scheduled to listen to complaints about comments she published through a social media post last month about the death of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.
“Because there isn’t a policy in place that allows my fellow board members to remove me as chair of the board, in a good faith effort to restore public trust, I will be voluntarily stepping down as chair of this board effective immediately,” Gudge said during a portion of the meeting when she was given time to respond to the complaints
Gudge remains on the board to continue serving her second four-year term, which started July 1. The School Board presumably will choose a new board chair and vice chair at its next meeting, which is scheduled for 7 p.m. Thursday.
“I remain committed to serving on the board with honesty, respect and dedication in support of all students and staff in the district,” Gudge said.
School board members in Oregon can be removed from their seats only through a voter recall. The board members ultimately voted to issue a formal statement of censure.
“It’s basically a public hand slap to put it very simply … It just says you shouldn’t have done this, shame on you, think better next time and we as a board condemn it and are disappointed,” said Tom Klipfel, vice chair who was leading the hearing and was explaining the meaning of a censure to another board member.
Klipfel read into the record the full censure statement, which included, “The board of directors has determined that Erin Gudge, an elected member of the Philomath School Board of Directors, acted in a manner inconsistent with the values and policies of this board … and the district by posting on her Facebook account inappropriate and harmful statements regarding the death of Charlie Kirk” in violation of two board policies.
Klipfel said that the censure “is a tool used to separate the liability of the entire board, the governing body, from the actions of individual board members.”
Besides the censure, the board also had the option of simply condemning the post, requesting her to step down as chair or ask her to resign from the board entirely. The board also had the option of taking no action at all.
Since Gudge had already resigned the chair position during her earlier comments, that option was eliminated. And asking her to resign wasn’t discussed with the conversation ultimately coming down to whether there would be a motion to formally condemn the post or issue a statement of censure.
Board member Sandi Hering made a motion to adopt the censure statement, seconded by Ryan Cheeke, and it passed on a 4-0-1 vote (Gudge abstained).
Prior to the censure vote, the board first passed a motion on a 3-1-1 vote (Erin McMullen nay, Gudge abstains) that she violated specific sections of two policies in the district’s board member standards of conduct — “Use social media, websites, or other electronic communication judiciously, respectfully …” and “When posting online or to social media, board members will treat and refer to … the public with respect …”
Gudge’s post on Kirk’s death
The controversy started Sept. 11 when Gudge posted via Facebook: “I will not mourn someone who spewed hatred in the face of grieving mothers the day their children were murdered. I will not mourn someone who would have preferred my own child not exist. I will not mourn someone who was teaching young people that empathy is weak and that civil rights should not be afforded to all. I feel deeply sad for his children. I do not mourn him.”
Gudge’s comment was in response to another post that she shared from an individual who had included an image of magnetic letters on a whiteboard that stated, “Some men improve the world only by leaving it,” which was attributed to Oscar Wilde, a 19th century author, poet and playwright.
Gudge made the comments on a personal social media page but they became accessible to a wider audience beyond her Facebook friends after it had been shared. Gudge said she deleted the post but screenshots had been captured and were apparently widely circulated on various platforms.
Community members speak out
Gudge’s resignation as board chair and the censure vote followed a 45-minute stretch of complainants sharing their strong disapproval of her actions. Eight formal complaints had been submitted and accepted by the board with four in attendance and testifying.
A sampling of comments from those at the hearing:
- Shelley Niemann: “As a community member and former Philomath School Board chair, I find it unacceptable that an individual in such a prominent leadership role would share such hateful rhetoric. Posts such as this send a dangerous message to our students, families and educators — one that undermines the principles of respect, empathy and unity that our school district has strived so hard to instill and overcome.”
- Christie Vaughan: “Demonizing people, weaponizing differences of opinion and condoning violence is not the answer. … Leaders and educators should be held to a higher standard considering the minds they are helping shape in this divisive and chaotic atmosphere we live in. … For me and many others, this highlights your current inability to make wise choices and carry out this position respectfully.”
- Sherri Kramer: “Leadership in public education carries both privilege and heavy responsibility. School Board members are entrusted with shaping policies that affect our students, vetting the values of our schools and representing our community with professionalism and integrity. … To then see a leader in our school system not only publicly rationalize and dismiss this tragedy, but to celebrate it is sickening and dangerous to all of us.”
- Michelle Reeves: In reference to the post that Gudge shared, “As a School Board chair elected to represent the people of this community, this is a morally reprehensible statement. … If Ms. Gudge thinks Charlie Kirk improved the world by dying, does she think other people who teach and agree with his views should die to improve the world? Is this how she represents the people of this community?”
Also, here is sampling of comments from those who did not testify but had submitted formal complaints:
- Amanda Lindsey: On the post that Gudge shared, “This is an alarming, harmful and a wholly intolerant statement and one that a person in her position should NEVER make in private or public. This is not the type of sentiment that we need the young impressionable minds in our school district believing.”
- Jessie Brown: “By publishing a statement dismissing the death of a public figure in inflammatory terms, Ms. Gudge has failed to act in a manner that demonstrates respect toward members of the public who hold differing viewpoints. This conduct erodes trust, inflames division, and reflects poorly on the integrity of our school district’s leadership.”
- Ronnie Ogg: “I firmly believe that Ms. Gudge should not be placed in any role that allows her to influence or guide students. Children in Philomath deserve to learn and grow in an environment that is safe, respectful, and inclusive. Ms. Gudge’s public statements, which openly express hateful views, raise serious concerns about her ability to foster such an environment.”
- Davin Silverman: In reference to the sharing of a post along with her own words, “This sequence, timed immediately after the killing, appears to dismiss or celebrate a violent death based on political disagreement, violating leadership standards and potentially fostering a hostile environment for students.”
Gudge’s response, apology
Gudge was given the opportunity to respond to the complaints and she opened with apologies to district staff, educators, students, community and fellow board members, saying she regrets the divisiveness that has risen. She affirmed that violence is never acceptable, all people deserve dignity and respect, and children deserve safety.
“I have the right to speak personally and I have the responsibility to consider how my words may affect public trust. In the eyes of some, I have failed to do that,” Gudge said. However, she noted receiving dozens of messages supporting her free speech rights and advocacy for underserved community members.
Gudge said some now think she stands for hate and tolerates violence, “which is heartbreaking because I don’t.” She explained her experience of Kirk differed from others’, knowing him only as a pundit whose views didn’t align with her faith, and that she wasn’t aware “he was idolized.”
Gudge described how a screenshot of her post caught the attention of “an organized extremist far right account,” attracting nearly 1 million views and leading to harassment including death and rape threats, stalking and doxxing. Her mother even received a message hoping “she would have to hear the sound of my neck snapping.”
“I repeat, I don’t celebrate Mr. Kirk’s death and I feel absolutely terrible for his children to have lost their father in such a public and brutal way,” Gudge said.
Gudge’s description of the harassment she experienced went beyond the scope of what was addressed in the formal complaints.
“We absolutely wish no harm on you,” Vaughan said during her comments. “We hope you grow and learn to see the world and all its differences as people work toward genuine tolerance and love. Hate is never the solution.”
Free speech debate
The evening opened with a hearing to respond to two citizens that objected to the board’s acceptance of the complaints against Gudge, citing that she has free speech protections.
“Speech is a fundamental right as long as the speech breaks no law, is not threatening, is on personal social media, it is not school business,” Toni Hoyman said. “Harassment of this type should not be allowed to waste the board’s time and resources.”
Jay Sexton echoed Hoyman’s comments about protecting free speech rights.
“Stepping forward to offer public service in an elected position should not require a person to hide their life,” Jay Sexton said. “I believe the School Board has an opportunity to demonstrate to the community and students of our schools that people can tolerate different opinions and work together for our common good.”
Both Hoyman and Sexton talked about the recall election process as the only option to remove a School Board member.
During deliberations, Klipfel noted that School Board members are held to a higher standard when they take the oath of office and referred to a legal opinion that had been provided
The board voted 5-0 to dismiss those two complaints as unsubstantiated. The meeting then moved on to hear the complaints against Gudge and actions by the board.
