KIRKWOOD — Two parents and a conservative public-interest law firm have sued the Kirkwood School District over an “abusive†handling of public records requests.
The suit centers around requests filed by two mothers who sought records related to a high school yearbook spread on “hookup culture,†district curriculum and technology used to prevent students from accessing “inappropriate†materials on their school devices.
The records were either never received, sent incomplete or delayed without the explanations required by law, the suit claims.
“I just want the district to be held accountable and to correct their behavior and the way they treat families,†Courtney Rawlins, one of the two plaintiffs, said in an interview on Tuesday.
Kirkwood School District denied wrongdoing.
People are also reading…
“While Kirkwood School District does not typically comment on pending litigation, we believe it is important for the community to know that the allegations in the lawsuit simply are not true,†the district said in a statement to the Post-Dispatch.
Similar issues have hit school districts across the region. Fights over explicit material, school curriculum or parents rights have roiled school board meetings and angered parents in the Wentzville, Francis Howell and Rockwood school districts.
The 62-page suit, filed late last month, details 14 records requests filed by two Kirkwood parents, Rawlins and Stacy Winters. Eight of the requests related to a controversial 2023 yearbook spread that received last year.
The spread discussed drugs, alcohol and hookup culture on two pages under the headline “Hooked(ish): Students share their opinions on hook-up culture, the concept of a casual sexual relationship without labels, and its benefits and consequences.â€
A student-led yearbook staff created the spread through a student survey, according to the suit. Winters requested a copy of the survey through Missouri’s open records law but was told the district was unable to locate the survey, according to the suit.
But Winters later requested the survey again, and, on March 11 — 10 months after Winters originally requested it — Kirkwood sent it, the suit states.
Rawlins, the other plaintiff, sought more records related to the survey. But Kirkwood, the suit says, repeatedly delayed sending the records, didn’t explain the delays, and provided incomplete records.
Rawlins, an appointed member of Kirkwood’s curriculum review committee, also claimed Superintendent David Ulrich imposed a “gag order†on her communications with district employees after she sought information about middle school electives.
After waiting weeks for specifics on the approval process for the curricula, Rawlins submitted a public comment at a Board of Education meeting. Then, the suit alleges, Ulrich told Rawlins in an email:
“They [district employees] have done their best to answer questions you have… You have received answers to your questions,†Ulrich wrote.
In another instance, Rawlins requested information about contracted technology services used by Kirkwood to prevent students from accessing “inappropriate†material on school devices. She specifically asked whether the district blocked students from searching “anal sex,†“oral sex,†“pornography,†and “masturbation,†among other searches.
Only part of Rawlins’ request was fulfilled, the suit alleges, and the district’s records custodian “ignored†her request for contracts and the specific searches.
Rawlins and Winters are represented by Thomas More Society, a right-leaning Chicago-based law firm that opposes abortion and advocates for religious freedom.
Mary Catherine Martin, senior counsel at Thomas More Society, said she believed Kirkwood “purposefully†violated Missouri’s open records law.
“They don’t think they’re going to be held responsible for not providing everything that’s asked for,†Martin said.
Kirkwood, in its statement to the Post-Dispatch, lamented the time and resources spent on the plaintiffs’ requests.
District employees responded to “dozens†of formal and informal requests for information over the past year and provided “thousands†of pages of documents responsive to the plaintiffs’ requests, according to the district.
“This lawsuit is particularly disappointing because the district has expended so much time and effort to comply with the Sunshine Act,†the statement reads.
Rawlins and Winters seek all the records they claim to have not received, attorney’s fees, and civil penalties for the alleged records law violations.