2/18/2026
Post by Wednesday
Okay, we admit it:
We got lazy.
With a 3–3 board, we thought we could take a tiny breather. A moment. A sip of water. A single blink.
But of course, we should have known better.
Because everything Curt touches eventually starts to smell, and all you have to do is lean in a little to catch the whiff.
Last week, MLP already laid out the stench cloud drifting off Curt’s attempt to:
yank the board out of the harassment policy, and
expand the taxpayer-funded legal umbrella so board members could get district-paid defense not just for actual legal issues, but for possible ones.
Translation:
Curt wants to do whatever he wants, and if someone files a complaint, the district should foot the bill for his mess.
We’re not stepping on MLP’s post — they nailed it.
But thanks to a tip from a friend of Board Watchers, we found a new rotten potato rolling around the bottom of the agenda basket.
And oh, did it reek.
The Curious Case of Beck Law Group
Beck Law Group was tucked neatly into a bundle of other, perfectly reasonable attorneys — almost like someone hoped we wouldn’t look too closely. But we did. And the closer we got, the worse the smell became.
First clue:
Google says Beck Law Group is permanently closed.
Not exactly the confidence-inspiring start you want from someone vying to represent a school district.
Second clue:
We searched “Alec Beck” + “law” + “school district.”
Nothing.
Nada.
Not even a crumb.
Why would a lawyer supposedly seeking to represent a school district have zero public record of ever working with one?
Sometimes what you don’t find is the loudest part.
Our source confirmed the name — Alec Beck — after we sifted through a whole orchard of unrelated Becks (including a Kevin who honestly looked like a better fit). But once we locked onto Alec?
Oh, we found the rotten potato.
The Résumé No One Asked For
Here’s what turned up:
1. He’s a personal lawyer — not a school district lawyer
Nothing wrong with personal law, but it’s not exactly the lane you want for someone advising a public school system. Follow up for future us, has he ever personally represented anyone on the board.... hummmmm
2. He works with the United Parenting Coalition
A group pushing “school choice” and “parent rights.”
Now, we’re all for parent rights — truly.
But in this context, “parent rights” is code for attacking school policy, not defending it.
How does that align with our strategic plan?
Spoiler: it doesn’t.
3. His name pops up alongside the Upper Midwest Law Center
A group known for aggressively targeting school districts over DEI and equity policies.
So let’s recap:
He attacks school districts.
He challenges school policy.
He aligns with groups hostile to public education.
And Curt wants him representing our district?
Sure, Jan.
4. And then there’s the MyPillow moment
Yes, that MyPillow moment.
Alec Beck made headlines when he decided — apparently on his own initiative — to file one of the Dominion lawsuits on behalf of the MyPillow empire.
This little adventure resulted in a very abrupt “we’re done here” moment between him and Barnes & Thornburg, where he had been a partner.
A legal cowboy, riding off into the sunset with someone else’s liability.
Is that the energy we want advising our schools?
We can see why Curt likes him.
And by the transitive property of “can’t think for themselves,” we can see why Tessa and Mark like him too.
And maybe a few anti–public school folks in the district would enjoy the chaos.
But the rest of us?
We’re relieved the board voted NO last week.
Except… guess who put the rotten potato right back on this week’s agenda
Curt did.
Of course he did.
And this time, we’d really love to hear him explain — out loud, on the record — why he wants this guy so badly.
Because if there’s one thing we’ve learned, it’s this:
When Curt is determined to push something through, it’s never for the good of the district.
And it’s never odor-free.
Let’s make sure we don’t let this one slide.
2/7/2026
Post by Wednesday
The past few meetings are pretty much nothing burgers but we trust this board so little we still poke in to see what they are trying to backdoor. Let’s get one thing straight: the trust in this board disappeared over a year of bad decisions, power grabs, and a chair who treats public governance like his own personal fiefdom. We won't let our guard down just because they are in a 3:3 stall and pretty much doing nothing.
Doing nothing is still a problem, just not as headline-worthy. School boards exist to move the district forward, not sit frozen 3:3 while the community waits. The fact they can't choose a 7th member is something I believe we foresaw... (thats fancy for "I told you so)
Meanwhile, the board’s actual work?
Picture a sink full of dishes.
Now picture never doing them.
Ever.
At what point does it get disgusting?
At what point does someone walk in, take one whiff, and say, “Oh wow, something died in here”?
That’s basically our governance right now — a festering pile of deferred responsibilities, but still, better than Curt getting his way so we will be getting some paper plates and joining the standoff supporting the 3 board members who actually want to help students and teachers. If any of the others take their head out of Curt's ass long enough to see the damage this is doing, they can vote their conscience. Or maybe they just agree with Curt and aren't being led on a leash and we are just lucky enough to have 3 genuine maga people who all want to mess with public education. When you can find a spare billion to fund ICE to terrorize people with less than islandic skin tone it is not about 'saving money' or 'fiscal responsibility' when they want to cut budgets for education and cut diversity or equity.
And yet, even in this era of paralysis, Curt somehow found the energy to mess with public comment. Because of course he did. When you don’t want to listen, the next step is to start rewriting the rules so fewer people get to speak.
And the way they did it? By conveniently leaving out any mention that the public is allowed to address the board. That’s a sneaky attempt to silence people without admitting you’re silencing people.
Let’s not forget where this energy comes from.
Curt — the same Curt who drives around with a Confederate flag on his car — has made it abundantly clear he’s more interested in shutting down discussion than fostering it when he made a policy to remove speakers he disagreed with (found not legal and reversed). He’s the one pushing to weaken public comment, the one who wants to normalize hate symbols by taking them off a prohibited list, and the one who treats community input like an inconvenience instead of a responsibility.
And one more part that should make everyone sit up: They’re blocking the appointment of legal counsel. Blocking. Legal. Counsel.
What exactly is the plan here?
Hope the statutes magically interpret themselves?
Pretend liability doesn’t exist if you don’t ask about it?
Leaving the district legally unprotected is reckless.
And might cost the district - and in turn tax payers - a lot of money. Thought they were for fiscal conservativness and transparency?
Anyway — for those who want the straight, factual recap of the meeting, I’m sharing below a summary from someone who actually enjoys attending these things and writes a solid report. She gave me permission to repost.
But for everyone who comes here for the poo patty in the nothing‑burger, I hope you see what I see and will ask about it at the meeting this week using a green card while you still can.
Full summary of 1/22/26 school boar meeting:
Because of the extreme cold, many items were canceled, including all committee meetings and the expected superintendent‑search presentation.
Consent Agenda -The consent agenda, which included bills and personnel changes, was approved without discussion. (as it should be)
School Newspaper Designation -A compromise was reached to split district publishing between both newspapers. Member Rebelein drafted the motion but did not provide copies as previously agreed, so the administration supplied them. The discussion remained professional, and the compromise passed.
Para Short‑Call Substitute Policy - The board approved a policy allowing paraprofessionals to serve as short‑call substitutes in special education settings. This makes sense, as paras often know the students and their needs better than outside substitutes. The board was in agreement.
Appointment of Legal Counsel - This item is a semi-carryover from the previous meeting, an additional 4 lawyers (no firms) were submitted and approved. 1/8 meeting Member Rebelein had presented a shortened list of firms that did not provide full legal coverage for the district. The board initially rejected the list, leaving the district without legal representation, but later reopened the item and approved it with the understanding that additional firms would be added to fill the gaps. It remains unclear why the board did not simply approve the firms used in prior years.
Wyoming Bid & Permission to Bid - Both items were standard administrative requests. The approved bid went to companies with a long history of work in the district. No unusual discussion.
Appointment to the Vacant Board Seat
The board considered three candidates.
Courneya: All members spoke positively, but the vote split 3–3 along expected lines.
Pease: Discussion of the candidate was brief as the opinion was expressed that additional discussion appeared pointless; Member Antonsen expressed surprise by that observation, further saying she had already made her choice (semi-proving that discussion would be pointless), same 3:3 split.
VanBuren Hansen: vote occurred with nearly no discussion, basically proforma after the earlier two votes, no surprises; 3:3 same split.
There was no discussion about next steps or the broader process for filling the vacancy.
Policy 1206 – “Green Cards” (Public Comment on Agenda Items)
The board clarified that community members do not need to request a week in advance to speak on an agenda item; the advance notice applies only to requesting that an item be added to the agenda. However, the board did not clarify how green cards will be allowed or managed going forward. Given the frequency of last‑minute agenda changes over the past year, many community members remain concerned about transparency and the potential narrowing of opportunities for public comment. Without a clear policy allowing green cards, I worry it will be eliminated.
Very brief update on the superintendent search and then adjourn
Again she said it with grace I like to highlight the poop
Next meeting this week Thursday~
1/12/2026
Post by Wednesday
We are not super interested in recapping meetings, but, have heard from many readers that they appreciate the insights about what the Puck is going on because sometimes topics seem innocent or dull but there is a trap or a gotcha or just a deeper meaning that some people have a talant for laying out plainly. We hear you and are here to help!. MLP posted a good recap today and I saw the recap below on facebook and asked the author if it was ok for me to repost it. (I'll add some snark thoughts at the end~)
If anyone attended or watched the board meeting last Thursday, that contributed to my stress! Watching them dismiss long-time legal counsel for the district is troubling, and the refusal to name Forest Lake Times as the district paper seems punitive. At this time we don't officially have a designated paper for notices and that impacts the ability for some district business to happen. *to be fair* this board decision is *only* for district legal notices that you may or may not ever read (they are in tiny print and usually on the dull side after the news and before the sports). The Forest Lake Times reporting is totally independent of the board and hopefully they continue on with their work that has our own kids achievements and local topics of interest published regularly (why I personally subscribe)
I try not to use this space to be political; however, this is harmful to our schools and if you have time today, here are some topics you may want to email or call our school board regarding:
1. Designate the Forest Lake Times as the school paper - small newspapers need consistent income that business like this provides, and they are a constant in our community; we would hate to lose them.
2. Add back long-term law firms - the reason for their dismissal is murky at best; however, the board did agree to explore options to cover the district needs (currently only partially met by the list approved). Good time to weigh in as a community
3. Encourage the spirit of compromise and cooperation. Gail, Julie and Jill compromised and voted yes for the less-than-perfect legal list Curt created to make sure the district had any legal coverage at all. Then: Curt, Tessa and Mark snubbed the opportunity to return the spirit of compromise by refusing to support the times so currently we have NO PAPER - they would rather put the district in jeopardy than compromise.
4. Remind Member Kasel that he is VERY BEHIND on required training. He had a year to take the basic board training and has not managed yet. BTW, he was confirmed treasurer with no training over member Christenson, who has completed the training. Maybe also remind them they ran on fiscal responsibility and transparency...
5. Last but not least - the board also failed to assign committees, and, Curt absolutely disregarded the preferences of Jill, Julie, and Gail. This is not district stopping inaction but just petty. I expect better from grown adults and I hope you all do too. Remind Curt that the role of the chair is to facilitate not dictate or use his position to exert influence. Technically, he got the fewest votes of anyone at that table from the public, but his role as chair does not make his voice more important....
She said it with grace.
I’m going to say it like someone who’s run out of patience.
This board is cosplaying civility while actively manufacturing chaos, slapping a “leadership” sticker on it, and hoping the community’s too polite to call it out. Newsflash: we’re not.
Compromise isn’t a favor. It’s the bare minimum. Cooperation isn’t a personality quirk. It’s a job requirement.
And governance isn’t a dodgeball match.
So if you’re watching this circus and thinking, “Surely someone’s going to say something?” — congratulations, it’s you.
Write the letters. Send the emails. Make the calls.
Because if they’re going to treat public service like a game, it’s time the public reminded them who’s keeping score.
12/4/2025
Post by Wednesday
Well folks, MLP exceeded our word allotment, so I'm popping in with one short thing.
We would like to formally welcome the pod people who appear to have taken over the bodies of Tessa, Curt, and Mark. Honestly? We hope they stay. The calm and coherence of the last meeting were refreshing if eerie.
So whatever happens tonight in the next round of candidate voting, we hope actions and decisions are grounded in rational reality and not personal grievances or political theater.
But let’s be honest — we’re not holding our breath.
12/4/2025
Post by Wednesday
Another special school board meeting, another episode of “Forest Lake’s Got Drama.” This time, candidate interviews to replace Luke — the real entertainment came from the board itself and an arsenal of loaded questions but here are some quick highlights. We have to be brief since there is another meeting to tune into tonight to see the conclusion of this train wreck, but, this meeting was another reminder of why we keep showing up. These interviews weren’t just about candidates — they were about the board itself, revealing the habits, hang‑ups, and hostility that have become all too familiar. And that’s exactly why this blog exists: because when people in power try to reshape our schools in ways that strip away diversity, silence voices, or narrow what students can learn, someone has to call it out.
Tessa vs. The Blog
Tessa tried — bless her heart — to accuse one of the candidates of writing this very blog. The problem? She got so tangled in her own incoherent rambling about how angry she is that this blog exists, she never actually asked a question. Time ran out, and the accusation fizzled into thin air. Pro tip: if you’re going to throw shade, at least land the punch.
Curt vs. Free Speech
Curt, meanwhile, spent his prep time combing the internet for posts from candidates he doesn’t like. Yes, Curt, people continue to have free speech. And yes, some of them don’t like you. Glad you got that on the record though — nothing says “leadership” like trying to police opinions instead of policies.
Kasel vs. Luke’s Ghost
Luke may be gone, but Kasel apparently misses him dearly. Nearly every candidate was asked how they would be “like Luke.” Thank all that is good in the world, there is nobody like Luke. We don’t need a sequel to that performance.
The Blog in the Room?
We’re delighted that Tessa and Curt read this blog. They may ignore emails, but at least they know our thoughts from here. And just to dial up the heat: were the authors of this blog in the room? Were they candidates? Will they be the next board member? Who knows…
The Semi‑Valid Point
To be fair, Tessa’s half‑formed complaint about this site deserves a quick response. On our homepage, we’ve said:
“From dismantling Achievement and Integration (A&I) to targeting student club culture, pushing to allow* hate symbols like the Confederate flag and swastika, and aligning with partisan groups like the Minnesota Parents Alliance—this isn’t leadership; it’s a hostile takeover of Forest Lake public schools.”
We have other posts on this topic, but to clarify again: the board majority wants to remove the specific prohibitions on hate symbols and replace them with a vague “no disruption” clause. Our translation: kids can wear Confederate flags or swastikas until someone complains, harm is done, and only then can the administration act. That’s not protection — that’s permission.
And let’s not forget: Curt drives a car with a Confederate flag on it. If he thinks that’s fine, it’s no wonder he doesn’t see the problem.
Why We Fight
We wouldn’t be this involved if we didn’t love this district and think it’s been doing a fantastic job for years. We’re constantly dismissed as “minor,” but we know Tessa reads — and we’re pretty sure a couple thousand others do too.
And here’s the truth: we will continue to watch, and we will continue to call out poor behavior, especially from those who are seeking to change our schools in ways we fundamentally disagree with. If there are people who want no diversity, who want to strip away protections, who want to narrow what students can learn — they can go join the Minnesota Parents Alliance.
This site is for people who believe schools should be places where all kids belong. Where students can study all of history, read all the books, and be allowed to thrive. That’s the vision we’re defending, and we’re not backing down.
11/7/2025
Post by Wednesday
For a brief, shimmering moment, it looked like we might finally be done here. A 3–3 board, ideologically tied, meant no more unilateral power plays. No more policy whiplash. No more garbage forced on the district like we’ve seen since January.
And then—boom—the application for the vacant seat dropped. Fresh off the printer, no time for public input, and this time Curt didn’t even bother lawyering it up for his stroll on the First Amendment. We often question his brains and his ability to see the likely outcome of his actions, here is yet another example of opening the district up for legal issues. Or maybe he is that attention-starved child that loves to see his name in the public discourse, even if they are calling him an hall monitor with a megaphone.
Let's look at the loyalty oaths courtesy of Curt.
Tacked onto the application, without public discussion, were two new affirmations:
I am not directly or indirectly involved in any group that aims to overthrow the United States government.
I am not part of any groups that promote, directly or indirectly, hate or violence against elected officials and/or publicize dishonest information or deceitful propaganda about ISD #831.
Let’s be clear: no one wants (more) insurrectionists or hate groups running the district. But these statements aren’t about safety—they’re about silencing. They’re vague, subjective, and ripe for abuse. Who decides what counts as “dishonest information” or “deceitful propaganda”? Is quoting a public meeting dishonest if it makes someone look bad? Is criticism of board decisions propaganda?
And while we’re at it—if someone has a Confederate flag on their car, does that count as supporting a group that once tried to overthrow the U.S. government? Can every current board member honestly say they meet the standard they’ve now imposed on applicants?
Some of us might have a libertarian streak. Others just believe in free speech, transparency, and calling things what they are. If that makes us unfit to serve, maybe the problem isn’t with us—it’s with a board that fears honesty more than extremism.
The real kicker? We’re flattered. Truly. Because if these new filters are meant to weed out people who’ve spoken unflattering truths about Curt and company, then maybe we’ve made more of an impact than we realized. If calling out procedural power grabs, policy overreach, and the erosion of public trust makes us suspect—well, that says more about the board’s insecurities than our intentions.
This isn’t about vetting for safety. It’s about looking for the next cronie. It’s about drawing a line around who gets to participate in public service—and who gets disqualified for being too vocal, too critical, or too unwilling to play along.
Free speech doesn’t end where Tessa and Curt’s discomfort begins. And if the board wants to rebuild trust, it might start by respecting the public’s right to speak truth—even when it’s inconvenient.
We’ll keep showing up. We’ll keep asking questions. And if that makes us unappointable, so be it. We’re not here for titles—we’re here for transparency.
10/26/2025
Post by Wednesday
As usual, a lot was happening this past two weeks — MLP and I were working elsewhere to hold the line on this board, so apologies for the lack of posting here. Reminder: I have a full-time job, a full-time life, and don't even the bandwidth to binge good TV, much less the slow-burn soap opera that is our local school board. However, I (we) care deeply enough to keep an eye on things and share my slightly sassy thoughts when the stakes are high—and friends, they were sky-high on October 24.
Let’s start with the good news:
Luke has stepped down from the board. Honestly, this item on the agenda Monday made my week. Let’s be real: his tenure was marked by condescension, obstruction, and a general vibe of “I’m just here to spoil the party.” and his frequent failure to reply was somehow less grating than the condescending ones he did occassionally offer. That said, I don’t wish ill on any fellow human or their family—because that’s not the kind of community we’re building. But I will say this: leadership is about service, not sabotage. And with Luke stepping down, we finally have a chance to move forward.
More good news; Despite their best efforts, the board failed to appoint a new crony. And that’s not because they suddenly found their moral compass—it’s because we showed up. We tracked the maneuvering, we saw it coming, and we got the right people fired up. We brought in lawyers, we made noise, and we reminded them that the community is watching. Because of that diligence, the meeting ended with Luke stepping down and a 3–3 split on the board moving forward until they vote on a replacement candidate that, thanks to Jill, Gail, Julie, and (gasp) Mark, will be after a real process, not an annointment. That’s a win for transparency, and it’s a win for all of us who believe public seats deserve public process.
Now, a few spicy notes we can't resist commenting on:
Curt—oh, Curt. He failed to maintain order when a speaker launched into a full-on ramble about Title 19, which wasn’t even on the agenda. We all remember his tantrums when the topic wasn’t to his liking, so what gives? Is he growing soft, or was he just so thrilled to finally have three of his “hundreds” of supporters in the room that he practically wet himself with excitement and forgot the basic public comment rules he says every darn time?
And let’s talk about Curt’s soapbox moment later in the meeting. He waxed poetic about how he always engages everyone with positive intent and an open mind. Cute. But I continue to question his ability to distinguish truth from fiction—and maybe, just maybe, we’re dealing with a personality disorder of extreme ego. Case in point: last meeting, he referred to his personal lawyer. What he probably meant was that the Parents Alliance distributed a letter written by their lawyer—one that the MHL received carbon copies of from various other MAGA-controlled boards. Or maybe Curt is the Parents Alliance? Occam’s razor: the simplest answer is usually correct. Curt likes us to think he’s important and smart. In reality, he follows orders, can’t see outcomes, and operates with the strategic foresight of a toddler with a hand in the cookie jar.
So yes, I’m tired. Yes, I’d rather be watching something with better writing and fewer plot holes. But I care too much about our schools, our students, and our shared future to let this slide.
We’re growing. We’re watching. And we’re not going anywhere, but hopefully, soon we will be back to our regularly scheduled boring Thursday night.
10/5/2025
Post by Wednesday
We sat down to write about this week’s school board meeting and—honestly? We couldn’t decide where to start. Was it the Jerry Springer energy? The surprise drop of yet another controversial item with zero public input? Or the gut-punch announcement that our brilliant, compassionate, Superintendent of the Year nominee is calling it quits?
Let’s start with the letter. You know, the one introduced out of nowhere, not on the agenda, not vetted by the public, drafted by a 'personal attorney'—just a big ol’ “we speak for the district” moment from Curt and his echo chamber. The topic? Trans students. The tone? Exclusion and phobia dressed up as protection. The process? Amateur hour in anti-transparency. If you blinked, you missed it—because that’s how fast they moved to make sure no one could weigh in.
And while we were still reeling from that, the superintendent—young, smart, deeply capable, and beloved—announced his retirement. Not next year. This year. Let’s be real: working with this board is a slow-motion burnout machine. Mental health matters, and we respect his decision. But woe to the rest of us, because now we’re facing a search led by the clowns that are driving the bus off the cliff. Will we get a MAGA puppet who parrots talking points and signs off on surveillance policies for girls’ bodies and lets the Confederate flag back in the building? Or someone brave enough to take on a board that seems more interested in political theater than student well-being?
We thought we’d seen everything. But this week? This week was extra extra. A surprise anti-trans letter claiming to protect girls while ignoring the actual girls in our district. A superintendent pushed to the brink. And a board that seems determined to govern by ambush.
We’ll be here, watching, organizing, and refusing to let chaos become the norm. Because our kids deserve better—and we’re not done fighting for them
9/27/2025
Post by Wednesday
At the latest school board meeting, in the first 5 minutes, the chair pulled out his favorite trick: sneaking politics onto the stage while pretending it was neutral and businesslike. This time, he decided to compare the moment of silence a year after the murder of George Floyd, to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, with a side order of shade on the administration by leaving out key details regarding the moment of silence, but hey, everyone has a style - half-truth, hyperbole, and false equivalency are having a hayday in this era and Curt is on board with that.
Let’s be blunt: both acts of violence are wrong. Both deserve outrage. Petending they carry the same historical or systemic weight? That’s a textbook false equivalency.
George Floyd’s murder came quickly to mean more than one man—it was a flashpoint after centuries of systemic racism, the kind Governor Walz acknowledged when he called for a statewide moment of silence “for every person whose life has been cut short due to systems of racism and discrimination in Minnesota.” It was rooted in justice and acknowledgment of work to be done, not a knee-jerk reaction for a single individual.
Kirk’s assassination was horrific; nobody should be killed for their words, but it was not the result of a centuries-old system designed to deny him housing, healthcare, voting rights, or safety under the law. Equating the two is political spin.
What’s even more telling? The board has never scrambled to issue public statements for other assassinated leaders or for the children killed by bullets in Minnesota schools. But this particular pairing was singled out—because it was useful to the chair’s personal narrative.
And then there’s the excuse: this statement was read because “so many” people asked. Really? How many is “so many”? Five? Ten? A petition? Or is this just selective listening, where only certain voices magically qualify as “significant”? Asking for a community that keeps getting tuned out.
Oh, and the kicker: standing by the door was a certain failed school board candidate, more focused on Curt’s every scripted word than the meeting itself. If you’re wondering who’s feeding him lines, the body language might gave it away. She’s a puppetmaster; he’s the useful idiot, and she left before any school business was even done, showing her focus was never on the school.
So yes—we noticed. We noticed the politics, the performance, and the deliberate erasure of systemic racism under the cover of “balance.” And no, we’re not buying it
9/15/2025
Post by Wednesday
Well folks, the curtain rose on another episode of The Board That Cried Transparency, and wouldn’t you know it—
Act I opened with Luke—who apparently strapped on the big passive-aggressive boots (they make him taller) with a monologue directed at a community member who dared to express discomfort about police presence at the last meeting. Apparently, they should have “paid more attention to the agenda,” because the officer wasn’t there for us, heavens no—just a “specific item.” Nothing to see here. Turn up the gas. The light isn’t bright enough.
Except… it is. And we saw it.
Because while the board insists the officer was just a prop for a single agenda item, the reality is that police presence has become a recurring character in this drama. It’s about optics. Viral optics. The kind that makes a board look “tough” while silencing dissent with a badge in the background.... So a twist for those of us watching from home; the person he was scolding from the board table was literally in the room. Yes, she spoke again. Yes, she had the audacity to exist. And yes, there was an officer in line of sight again. I usually stick to cartoons, but the irony here practically draws itself.
Act II: The Faux Purpose
Then came the next line in the script: a wooden exchange between Luke and Curt, spoken with approximately 19 'umms and uhhaa', Luke lobs a softball—“Can you remind people of the purpose of the school board?”—and Curt, with a robotic tone replies, he just happens to have the answer pulled up on his screen. Because nothing says authentic leadership like reading state policy from a teleprompter.
Let’s be clear: if you need to read off a screen to remember why you’re on a school board, you shouldn’t be on one. The purpose isn’t a script—it’s a conviction. It’s about supporting schools, securing resources, and creating a framework that district staff can actually use. Full stop.
Curt’s screen-read moment wasn’t just awkward—it was revealing. It showed us the core issue: this board isn’t driven by heart, it’s driven by politics, power, and optics. And Curt? He’s the kind of robot who tries to simulate emotion but keeps glitching when empathy is required.
Enter Act III: a chaotic romp through Roberts Rules that felt less like governance and more like a maze inside a labyrinth inside a fever dream. Allegedly, they were creating policy. In reality, it was an hour-long farce, and Curt, as usual, was clinging to his process binky of making sure Roberts rules are followed. For something intended to make things easier and clear, Curt must be doing it wrong..... Anyway.... here is a recap
Policy committee? What’s that? Some on the board think policy should be at least reviewed by the policy committee. Luke strongly disagrees—and said the quiet part out loud. Big Boots Luke is just trying to save us all time, you see. He never plans on listening to the committee, so why bother pretending they matter?
Tessa, confused as ever, does want the committee to review it… she just can’t quite articulate why. Possibly because she’s getting puppeted by a group that wants opt-out policies for classes and testing—so conservative parents can shield their kids from the liberal cabal of social-emotional learning, diversity and inclusion, evolution, the study of Africa or slavery, world religions… the list goes on.
And while she’s constantly talking about increasing academic test scores, even her little brain knows that opting out might tank those numbers. But: parent rights! But: accountability! But: smoke… brain fail… system reboot.
Meanwhile, the policy committee has a mountain of work and zero assurance that any of it will matter. Because this board does what it wants, when it wants, and one of the few consequences is us writing about it.
Oh! Speaking of that—shoutout to Curt for the call-out. We’re flattered. Glad you read. Wish you listened.
Let’s be clear: we shine a light on your problems because we believe this district is worth saving. We’re a watchdog site, not a PR arm. If we didn’t think there was something worth protecting, we wouldn’t be working this hard to stop you from ruining it.
So next time you try to gaslight the community, remember: we brought matches
Next time; A dive into MCA scores and how the MAGA 4 finally caught up to what we’ve been saying for years—data doesn’t care about your narrative. Unless there is something too special to skip in this weeks meeting....
Sept 4
Aug 7
9/6/2025
Post by Wednesday
We’re a few weeks late posting this recap, but unlike certain board members, we have jobs, families, and functioning moral compasses. Also, we’ve accepted that no amount of public shaming will change people who think “accountability” is a four-letter word. So this is here for the record—for future reference, gallows humor, and the inevitable “told you so” when the next plot twist drops.
Let’s rewind to July 17, when board member Luke Hagglund, with performance quality reminiscent of a The Human Teleprompter Glitch (complete with “ummms” and “uhhhs”), delivered a thinly veiled threat: maybe the board should “review who the school does business with,” since so many local business owners had the audacity to speak against the policy gutting protections against hate symbols for students. You know, the one they tried to sell as “avoiding redundancy.”
Fast forward to August 21. The payoff: a 30-minute “vendor review” meeting that felt less like governance and more like a vanity production in a bad community theater—no script, no climax, no point. If they were going for intimidation, they forgot the Viagra; it was limp, dull, and transparently petty, probably because they were mad they couldn't really punish people because of that pesky 1st Amendment. The board’s sane members reminded everyone what this really was: cover up for when they tried on government reprisal for free speech.
Meanwhile, Luke, Curt, and Mark—the Gaslighting Grandpas—insisted this was all very routine. Nothing unusual here. Just a random “review” scheduled the week before school starts, when the agenda is normally packed with staffing updates and logistical prep. But sure, the cover-up of the attempted witch hunt disguised as a spreadsheet was clearly the top priority.
And then there was Tessa. Lost as always, blinking through the confusion like an understudy who wandered onstage mid-scene. Don’t worry, sweetie—this wasn’t a real vendor review. Just nod, smile, and move on to the next thing you don’t understand.
They pretended so hard this was normal it was almost impressive. Either they think we’re not paying attention, or they think we’re too dumb to connect the dots. Spoiler: we’re not.
And while the review itself was a waste of 30 minutes, the messages we heard are:
Speak out, and risk the board will retaliate in whatever petty way they can dream up,
Our collective voices matter, and something worked, because they staged this cover-up story after we called out Hagglund’s threat. Thank you to all who wrote letters, spoke, and a special thanks to the Forest Lake Times for the great coverage (and more timely, hey, you get paid)
Honestly, I hope a lawyer weighed in, because this was textbook government retaliation against protected speech. A simple “my bad” would have sufficed, but instead we got another shoddy episode of What We Meant to Say.
To the businesses of Forest Lake: we see you. We know you spoke up for kids, not for political clout. And we know this community is bigger than four racists with board seats and a vendetta.
To everyone outside Forest Lake who hears where we’re from and asks, “Oh… are you racist?”—we get it. The reputation damage is real. But please don’t judge us by the loudest few hundred angry people out of 50,000. They may claim “thousands,” but unless those thousands are imaginary friends, the math isn’t mathing.
Stay tuned for the next episode of What We Meant to Say. Same bad acting, same tired script, same petty plot twists.
9/1/2025
Post by Wednesday
Last post we wrote that Curt Rebeline Jr. had quietly reversed his punitive public comment policy. We basically called it spineless—a silent retreat from a document so dripping with vengeance, authoritarian overreach, and speech suppression that we half expected a lawsuit to already be in motion, but we were glad they saw sense, a rare thing, and we celebrate any show of common sense.
Turns out… we were wrong.
The policy isn’t gone—it’s just in a little nap, waiting for the policy committee to pick it up next month. And Curt? He took the opportunity to spin to the Forest lake Times that what he really meant was that the resolution was for audience members who disrupt the board’s work, not speakers during open forum who don’t follow comment guidelines.
So, just to clarify:
NOT the person he had removed by police for calling his car racist. That was apparently something else. Curt doesn’t say what—just that the individual “wasn’t subject to the resolution because it wasn’t a meeting disruption as Nelson had the floor at that time as a speaker during public comment.”
We’re left wondering:
Was the policy actually for the people who clap in meetings? Because Curt hates clapping. Maybe he’s jealous no one claps for him when he speaks. Maybe he just prefers the sound of silence—especially when it comes to dissent.
And just to keep things spicy, Curt also planted another vague threat (that we’re sure he’ll spin later) in the article that pressing disorderly conduct charges might be the better route. Charming.
We’re not sure how many times we need to say this, but here goes:
Good policy isn’t written in a vacuum.
It’s not crafted solo in a fit of rage. It’s built by teams, informed by experts, and shaped by public input. But hey—we’re not elected. We just have a blog.
So here’s what we can say:
Curt is really bad at writing policy.
So bad he should stop doing it.
If this is how badly he assembles a document—no input, no clarity, no collaboration—it’s no wonder he can’t hold down a job. If my IT security guy were this myopic, this allergic to teamwork, and this unclear in his communication, I wouldn’t let him near my systems either.
Curt, if you want applause, try writing something worth clapping for.
Until then, we’ll keep calling out the nonsense when we see it.
P.S. We still owe you a post on the farce of a vendor review—another thing Curt felt the need to spin in the paper this week. We’re currently mulling the best way to unpack that tragic temper tantrum. Stay tuned.
8/23/2025
Post by Wednesday
Remember that absurd resolution banning individuals from speaking at school board meetings if they’d ever been told to leave for “disruptive behavior”? The one that tried to sidestep the First Amendment with all the subtlety of a toddler hiding behind a curtain?
It’s gone.
Not with a bang. Not with an apology. Not even with a whisper of accountability. Just quietly reversed this week, tucked into the consent agenda like a moldy sandwich no one wanted to acknowledge.
Let’s be clear: this wasn’t a principled course correction. It was a legal faceplant. The kind of policy that probably made every attorney in the district wince and mutter, “You can’t actually do that.” And instead of owning the mistake, Curt and Luke buried it—hoping no one would notice the retreat from his own authoritarian fantasy.
The original resolution was idiotic. Full stop. It weaponized vague accusations of “disruption” to silence critics, punish dissent, and chill public participation. It was legally indefensible, ethically bankrupt, and strategically laughable. And now, it’s been reversed with all the courage of a kid quietly erasing graffiti before mom gets home.
And just when you thought the gaslighting couldn’t get more transparent, the board swapped out its authoritarian muzzle for a “tuned preamble” urging speakers to “avoid" making comments directed towards or about any individual board member.” Cute. A little less fascist, a little more PR-friendly—but still a desperate attempt to sanitize dissent and protect fragile egos from public accountability.
So here’s the call to action:
Use your public comment time. Use it loudly. Use it unapologetically. Curt may have tried to silence you, but the reversal proves he can’t. Call him out—for the cowardice, the concealment, the contempt for community voice. And if you’ve got thoughts about his car and what it represents, let him know. Because when leadership fails this spectacularly, silence is complicity.
We’ll cover the soup sandwich of a “vendor review” next time—and yes, the conspiracy carousel is still spinning, fueled by Tess’s unwavering belief in the CRT boogeyman. Honestly, the only reason Curt doesn’t look like a complete fool is because Tess’s grasp on reality makes his look close to sane by comparison.
Stay tuned. The circus isn’t over. It’s just changing acts
8/20/2025
Post by Wednesday
Welcome back, Forest Lake families. As students prep to return to classrooms and staff for another year of learning, let’s take a moment to recap the 2025-season drama—because while the textbooks stayed shelved, the school board was busy rewriting the plot.
New Board, New Priorities
The newly seated majority wasted no time. First on the chopping block? Achievement and Integration (A&I)—a program designed to promote equity and close opportunity gaps. Apparently, supporting all students was just too controversial.
Club Policy Gets a Makeover
Next came the club policy. Since banning LGBTQ+ and racial affinity groups outright would violate Minnesota law, the board opted for a more creative approach: rewrite the rules to make it nearly impossible for these groups to operate. Bureaucratic sabotage dressed up as “neutral policy.”
Symbols of Hate: Now Up for Debate
Then came the proposal to eliminate the district’s list of prohibited hate symbols. Yes, that list—the one banning Confederate flags, swastikas, and KKK imagery. Because nothing says “welcoming school environment” like a reactive policy. Would the boiler plate ban on 'disruptive symbols' even work if the first test is our board chair in his General Lee pulling up to the highschool?
The Community Responds
Students didn’t wait for permission to push back. Walkouts, protests, petitions, and packed board meetings made it clear: they were paying attention.
Parents, staff, and community members followed suit—letters to the editor, car parades, protests at the door, and the launch of this very website. Turns out empathy isn’t “woke”—it’s just what decent people do.
Meet the Cast creating this chaos
Curt Rebelein Jr. and Luke Hagglund, elected in 2023, spent their first year as minority members walking out of meetings, stalling votes, and railing against anything that resembled inclusion. Their disdain for equity was loud, proud, and often disruptive.
Then came the MAGA-backed reinforcements in 2025, turning the minority into a majority. Funded and endorsed by extreme conservative groups, they brought a new level of ideological zeal to a nonpartisan role. Spoiler: it wasn’t subtle.
This Season: Stay Engaged
As we head into the new school year, let’s remember what’s at stake. Public education should be about learning, not legislating identity. Keep showing up, speaking out, and supporting students who deserve better than political theater and personal agendas of hate.
Welcome back. Let’s make this season one of truth, transparency, and tenacity - Join us in checking them at every turn.
8/10/2025
Post by Wednesday
If gaslighting were an Olympic sport, Curt would take gold, — and then give a press conference insisting he didn’t really compete. Maybe if he thought like an actual human instead of a Minnesota Parents Alliance–programmed robot — or, wild idea, maybe tried listening — he could skip the endless “what I meant to say” routine. We’re also tired of the ever-present “numerous threats of violence” poor-me saga, now permanently bolted onto the start of every public comment like a bad theme song.
This month’s meeting wasn’t live-streamed, so we had to watch the replay — and here’s a gem from Curt’s view of the listening session:
“We did had have an individual call out uh board member specifically myself on integrity… we are open to having our comments challenged… if we do make mistakes, please point those out to us…”
For a fleeting moment, we thought: Wow, maybe he’s maturing. Expiration time: 7 minutes. That’s when Curt kicked out someone for commentary he didn’t like. So much for “open to being challenged.” and we realized he was cooking with 'gas' this meeting.
Gaslighting highlight of the week: when Haugglund threatened local businesses that disagreed with lifting hate speech prohibitions last meeting, Curt “clarified,” this meeitng with What we meant was… we love businesses that agree with us! Oh, well, that’s totally fine then. "Nailed It"
Runner-up gaslight: Curt still can’t wrap his head around the fact that adding a major punitive policy to the meeting agenda in real time is not the same as quietly tucking a minor employment item into the consent agenda. One is like torching the rulebook; the other is like buying more printer paper. Spot the difference, Curt. We have a low opinion of your intelligence already, but don't actually think you are that dumb.
And then there’s his favorite fantasy that was repeated yet again: the “many” (imaginary) supporters he swears are out there. In reality, we see the same three people, who rarely speak, quietly holding down his cheer section. Maybe someday the rest of these totally real fans will materialize and actually go on the record. Until then, it’s ghost applause and self-quoted compliments.
So here’s to Curt — may he spend more time learning empathy and less time manufacturing problems. Then again, we also hope for a million dollars… and we’re pretty sure which is more likely.
(P.S., Curt — because we know you’re reading this — integrity means doing the right thing and being truthful, fair, and ethical in all actions . We understand definitions can be tricky.)
7/24/2025
Post by Wednesday
We have more to say about the July 17 Forest Lake School Board meeting. As our friends in the south say, there was an unignorable "bless their hearts" moment we have thoughts about staring none other than Curt Rebiline Jr. and Luke Hagglund. They practically clutched their pearls over so-called “threats” to spin up a whole production about fear, danger, and needing more power (convenient!). When they first mentioned it back on June 26th , we felt bad and even said so in our post —because hey, no one should feel unsafe. But at this point we feel Curt Rebiline Jr. and Luke Hagglund are making a meal out of a moment, turning up the drama, and serving it with a side of “give us more power.” because thanks to the Forest Lake Times article, we got the scoop on these threats.
If you haven't read it, in a nutshell; there were exactly two threats reported:
One from a remorseful child who apologized.
One currently under investigation.
That’s it. That’s the big, bad heard of boogeymen they’re parading around like it’s a Netflix true crime special.
And just when you think the melodrama couldn’t peak any higher, Curt had the gall to compare himself to the actual victims of the Minnesota legislature shootings. You heard that right—he said, “I received death threats that day too.”
Excuse us?
Are you not reporting them? According to the July 3 edition of the Forest Lake Times, the only reported threats were on May 13 and June 29. Nothing on June 14, the day of the legislative shooting. So unless they are thugging it out and keeping the info to themselves (except for using it in board meetings), this feels like the world’s most tone-deaf “me too”—a shameless tag-on to a horrifying event for political clout.
So now we have questions.
Are Curt and Luke actually scared? Or are they just enjoying being victims for the cameras? Is this projection? Or is it just leverage it to grab more control. (Because, that’s exactly what they’re doing with these new proposals to silence dissent and ban people from meetings.)
Are they desperate for attention? Or just itching for an excuse to act out their authoritarian fantasies in a school board setting? Either way, it’s giving “small man, big gavel” energy.
Let’s be clear: making a meal out of minor, possibly isolated incidents to justify sweeping, punitive policies is not leadership. This is not about safety. This is about control.
We see it. We name it. And we’re not letting it slide.
7/19/2025
Post by Wednesday
You’d think a school board meeting with nothing on the agenda would be a short, uneventful night. But instead, the board took a hard detour into authoritarian improv, tossing out surprise policy proposals aimed at punishing community members who dare to speak up.
First up, Luke Hagglund casually suggested the district should stop doing business with anyone who’s publicly disagreed with board decisions. Yes, really. Criticize a policy, and you could find yourself blacklisted from district contracts. That’s not public service—it’s petty, small, and a little bit scary (and probably illegal, more on that below).
Then came Curt Rebelein Jr's newest hack attempt at policy: a fully written proposal (which, of course, Curt “forgot” to bring copies of... plan, or incompetence?), so everyone had to just sit and listen to the thing read out loud, then try to react on the spot. Spoiler: this isn’t how transparent governance works. Agendas exist for a reason but let’s be real—Curt didn’t put this on the agenda because he didn’t want the public to see it coming, because he is afraid of us. That’s not strategy, that is cowardice wearing tie.
And frankly, Curt should stop writing policy altogether. It’s not his thing. Leadership? No. Understanding people? Definitely not. What he does seem to cling to is Robert’s Rules of Order—not as a skill, but more like a pacifier. It’s not about good governance, it’s about having something rigid and comforting to hide behind. When in doubt, retreat into procedure and hope no one notices the actual ideas are bad.
The original proposal? A mess:
A one-year suspension from all district committees for being “disruptive” to the point of removal - something Curt personally controls
A full district-wide trespass notice if it happens again. -NO access to any district buildings, nice
An appeal process the board can freely ignore.
Retroactive enforcement back to June 1, 2025.
Let’s be clear—this isn’t just a bad look. It’s unconstitutional. School boards are government bodies, and under the First Amendment, they cannot punish people for expressing dissent. Speaking at meetings, writing letters, even posting online—that’s protected speech. Retaliating with bans, suspensions, or threats is a civil rights violation in the making. What Rebelein proposed is called retaliation, and it’s exactly what the courts have consistently ruled as unconstitutional. You cannot ban people from district activities or properties just because they said something you didn’t like. That’s not “maintaining order”—that’s punishing dissent. There is a narrow
Thankfully, Jill and Julie, our two hero board members, stepped in. They battled the suspension to six months and even his cronies agreed they should scrap the retroactive clause. A rare and refreshing win for common sense and sad for Curt when his ideas are so flawed even his flunkies can't see the sense of them. Of course, all this happened while the third pro-community board member was conveniently absent, in a mid month meeting, with nothing on the agenda. Curious timing, huh?
Then, finally, came the actual business of the meeting: a dire financial report. Population is down, so enrollment is down, and funding is tied directly to it. So maybe now isn’t the moment to alienate families, threaten volunteers, or dismantle beloved programs over personal grudges because the community isn't actually full of people who agree with you. And those 'thousads' who do, don't care enough to ever show up (and we doubt they exist, just like we doubt anything Curt says at this point)
If your response to community input is to punish the community, you’re not protecting schools—you’re protecting your own power. Our schools belong to everyone, not just to the ones who treat policy like a game of “gotcha.”
Thanks again to Jill and Julie for showing what real leadership looks like. The rest of us are still here, still watching—and still speaking up.
Because they were hoping we wouldn’t notice.
We noticed.
ps. legal footnote; If someone disrupts a meeting in a way that prevents it from functioning, some limits (like removal from that meeting) may be allowed—but even then, any ongoing punishment must be narrowly tailored and not punitive in nature
7/8/2025
Post by Wednesday
Mark your calendars, folks—next week 7/17 brings us a school board work session and an “anti-hate car parade.”
Yes, you read that right. Anti-hate car parade. And no, it’s not about protesting some new vehicle called the “HateCar.” This is a real, actual community event aimed squarely at one particular car—and everything it represents.
Specifically, the General Lee.
Yes, that General Lee. The orange Dodge Charger with the Confederate flag on top, straight out of a 1980s TV show, glorifying the “good old boys” who never meant no harm—unless you count the glorification of white supremacy. A car that absolutely belongs in a museum or on a movie set, not parked proudly outside your child’s school board meeting.
Which would be bad enough... except in our case, it's being driven by the actual chair of our school board. You know, the person currently leading the charge to weaken district policy around hate symbols. Who has cut funding to any inclusive program that whispers it might have something to do with race, identity, or any of that liberal humans are human ideology.
And let’s talk about that Confederate flag for a second. Because if you’re still clinging to the whole “southern heritage” excuse—let’s be really clear about what that “heritage” includes. That flag represents an armed rebellion to preserve the right to own human beings. Romancing an era where people were property doesn’t say “rural charm”—it says “I’m fine with racism if it comes with a good paint job.”
“Heritage not hate?” Look harder. The heritage is hate. That’s the whole point.
So next week, while the board privately tinkers with how much intolerance is the right amount of intolerance, there will be a rolling protest—cars making laps in support of students, inclusion, and basic decency. A car parade against hate, and against hate-symbols-on-wheels (or in any other place in our school).
We’re not the organizers of the parade—but we’re here for it. And we’re amplifying it. Because if the board chair can roll up in the General Lee, the rest of us can show up too—with better taste and better values. Lets make a fleet of Subarus and minivans and circle the block like it's Mario Kart for social justice.
We can't wait to see which moves faster—actual change or the Camry with the rainbow bumper sticker.
Spoiler alert: It’s probably the car.
PS: A lot of folks are waking up. Groups are forming. People are organizing. The board’s behavior is not okay—and people are done pretending it is.
We’ve asked few questions about who’s organizing this before we posted here—and honestly? We still don’t know.
The Facebook account promoting it feels like an alias. And honestly, we can’t blame them. Our name isn’t really Wednesday either. It’s a scary world out there when you’re organizing against people who include those who think cosplaying as police officers and shooting elected officials is just "a good start'.
Sure, we know—that was one extremist. We get it. But here’s the thing: every post we see from that side of the aisle has just enough of a wink toward violence to keep the threat simmering. It’s not subtle. And it’s not safe. We are NOT against the routine conservative who wants logic and reason, heck, most of us are with you on that - we are against the center shifting toward the extremes.
So yeah, anonymity makes sense.
But we’ll say this clearly: whoever’s running it, we see you. And we’ve got your back
6/27/2025
Post by Wednesday
Well. The 6/26 meeting ended with more exhaustion than clarity, and enough audience participation to make Curt visibly sweat. He threatened to shut it all down multiple times over clapping — bless his heart — though we imagine it was the booing and the packed room and lobby that really rattled him.
First the subtle drama you might have missed: Little Power himself, Luke, got fully sidelined. His handful of hot takes and amendments just didn’t make it, one not even past the "can I get a second?" stage. Not one. Maybe he didn't want to talk to the group because he was too busy looking up stats about flags of countries that had slavery. Hey, we all have hobbies. Meanwhile, Tessa and Mark stepped into the spotlight with some bold (and deeply questionable yet expected) amendments and by doing so, they earned the dubious honor of conservative glory — bravely standing up for the "silent majority" of fellow extreme conservatives who are, according to them, totally real despite not writing in, showing up, or doing much of anything besides being vague justifications.
And let’s not forget Curt’s tragic tale of procedural victimhood. He spent a chunk of the meeting explaining how this was all very hard for him, and how people have been so very mean. We do feel bad that someone decided to send a violent threat, that wasn't us, we stick to truth, witty writing, and cartoons - thanks for the shout out! We also feel bad that there might be some cognitive decline or perhaps an injury, because Curt seemed very confused about where some of the policy lines came from. First - He was the one who chose to rewrite the original policies and he himself inserted most of the objectionable language, deviating from the model policy because — surprise — he thought he knew better. Now that the backlash has arrived, he’s so confused about why people are upset that after months (years!) of targeting minorities and the LGBTQ+ community that nobody believes this was an innocent "just trying to adopt model policy". Wasn't he generous by spreading the stink around by letting Tessa and Mark carry the bag? Classic. Hey Luke, maybe you got lucky being kicked out of the inner circle.
Motion by Tessa Antonsen: Remove limited open forum (student interest) groups from middle school, and
Motion Mark Kasel ; Strike the language banning 3 specific hate symbols.
Yep. That’s where we are. Proactively protecting kids from identity-based hate is too redundant, and the board said middle schoolers are too "immature" for student interest groups but mature enough to navigate school without support from advisors or affinity clubs? Totally fine. But if we are redundant with anything, it should be protecting kids.
Next, we’d like to gift Mark a dictionary, because he kept talking about “micromanagement” regarding the 3 specfic hate symbols while somehow missing the dozens of actual micromanaging rules baked into the new activities policy — like bullet pointed lists of things required from clubs and administration, and, a mandate to not stray from the topic of a club (I think that might be the most micromanagy) And not a peep about micromangment proposal #49; take miniutes, and turn them in the next day.... And in 515 there is a detailed description of allowable hoodie depth (the new hemline) But the three called out hate symbols in 515? That’s where he sees micromanagement. Got it.
Honestly, we’re still piecing it all together because in general it was a procedural Bylaw Burrito (stuffed with nonsense and wrapped in confusion) But here’s what we think happened:
Open forum clubs for grades 8–12 are back on the menu (after an hour where it sounded like they weren’t).
Those clubs don’t have to reform yearly, don’t need to keep minutes, and definitely don’t have to turn them in the next morning. (small victory!)
The revised 515 policy wasn’t passed or rejected — it was punted back to committee with a vague request for an “exhaustive list.” Translation: the current policy still stands.
So, to recap: Middle schoolers are definately not losing clubs (according to Curt, email him when that isn't true, he loves email as much as he loves double talk and cartoons about himself) Hate symbols almost got a pass. “micromanage” has officially lost all meaning and Curt would very much like you to know this was hard for him.
Stay tuned — we’ll keep watching, clapping, and keep the cartoons coming
ps. We made 2 cartoons since you like them so much
6/24/2025
Post by Wednesday
Apparently, a quiet week is just too much for Curt to handle. With no public outrage to soak in and no cameras pointed at him, he did what all bored chaos agents do: he stirred the pot. Word on the street — or more accurately, word via the Forest Lake City Council livestream — is that Curt marched himself over to the City Council to whisper about his totally-not-a-surprise plans to amend the dress code during its next reading and, wait for it… bring back hate symbols. Because nothing screams “educational leadership” like peddling divisive nonsense in the middle of summer while most people are trying to touch grass or just enjoy June without having to attend a board meeting.
Yes, really.
Not because anyone asked. Not because there’s a groundswell of public support. But because he wasn’t getting enough attention, and he’s got to do something to make sure he stays the main character.
Meanwhile, the Forest Lake City Council is apparently irritated that when you Google “Forest Lake,” all that comes up is this garbage. (Sorry City Council, take it up with the guy across the street tossing lit matches into a pile of school policy binders.) So, while this delightful little leak didn’t come from Curt himself (he tends to prefer surprise attacks). — this came from the Forest Lake City Council’s livestream, where the mayor seemed less than thrilled that when you Google “Forest Lake,” all the top results are... well, let’s just say not tourism tips or fishing guides.
Now, we don’t personally know the Mayor who dropped this little breadcrumb on the livestream — but sir, if you’re reading this: respect. And thanks for the tip-off and your plan to come over to Curt's meeting and tell him to his face.
So, heads up, folks. This is how they do it: summer, late-month, odd timing, meeting when no one’s looking. The policy looked ok at first reading... Suddenly, boom — motion to change - and the policy changes and we’re all left gasping.
Let’s not let them sneak this one past us. Whether you speak or just sit there stone-faced, show up. Because when elected officials start trying to normalize hate under the radar, the very least we can do is flip the lights on. Forest Lake has better things to be known for than this circus and the school board has better things to be doing for kids. And hate symbols? Still not welcome.
Curt — if attention is what you’re after, congratulations. You’ve got it. Again.
6/9/2025
Post by Wednesday
Ah, the 6/9 Forest Lake School Board meeting. A night to remember — or, more accurately, a night to remember what not to do when you're an elected official.
First this Forest Lake School Board meeting — held at a totally normal time, like a random Monday late afternoon. Nothing says “we want transparency” quite like changing the schedule when enough protesters come to all your meetings. Wonder why?
Let’s talk about what went down. The board finally voted on paying club advisors — you know, the people who’ve been doing work for months without compensation because the board kept magically moving it off the agenda. If that sounds petty and obstructive, that’s because it is. If you’re thinking that sounds like wage theft, you’re not wrong. But don’t worry — a majority of the board did the right thing. They actually voted to not partake in that little ethical disaster.
And then there were the performances by Chair and Vice Chair
Let’s start with the Chair. Now, he didn’t vote — bold move for someone in charge of guiding decisions. But don’t worry, he did speak. And wow, did he speak. When the vote to pay the last two club advisors (finally!) came up, he launched into a speech that somehow managed to squeeze in enough discomfort with LGBTQ+ topics to make anyone within earshot wince. His big stance? That he "personally opposes using taxpayer money to support certain groups due to the nature of the topic." Translation: if your club promotes equity or inclusivity, he’d rather not chip in. If you squint hard enough, you can almost see the homophobia and transphobia trying to wear a respectable hat.
The Vice Chair took the “no comment” approach, abstaining without explanation. Silence is still a choice — and in this case, one that reeks of political calculation. Or cowardice. Or both. Silence really is golden — especially when it's covering up political bias. He abstained without comment, but when paired with previous behavior and votes, the message was loud and clear: same agenda, just quieter.
In the end, the vote passed — thanks to the board members who chose students, fairness, and basic legality over backroom games and personal hang-ups. But let’s not forget: leadership means showing up, speaking up, and doing your job. And from the Chair and Vice Chair? We got none of that. Just a lot of dodging, deflecting, and phobia wrapped in procedural nonsense.
This wasn't just a meeting. It was a reminder that some board members are more committed to communicating personal bias than student well-being. Leadership? Not so much. But at least we got a live performance of political theater—phobia—flavored and heavy on the drama.
5/31/2025
Post by Wednesday
Let’s talk about the May 29 Forest Lake Area School Board meeting — a sprawling five-hour epic of procedural gamesmanship, bureaucratic fan fiction, and performative debate dressed up as thoughtful governance.
And yes, we watched the whole thing. Some of us live, some of us later, from the safety of our couches with YouTube and snacks. Because if we’re going to be ignored, we might as well be comfortable.
The evening kicked off with a surprise: one of the few board members who consistently shows care and competence motioned to move the two hot-topic student policy proposals to the top of the agenda instead of the end of the meeting as the Chair had designed. Finally — a glimmer of responsiveness. The motion passed, so we actually got to see the vote on clubs and the Confederate flag before the descent into policy madness began and our ear-holes started to bleed.
Our hero board member did try to table a particularly problematic policy removal — one that would leave the district without a backup plan if the controversial Policy 1801 fails. But don’t worry. The chair already knows it won’t fail. It’s all just theater. That motion failed~
That said, the debate on these two policies was… pure performance. Even with overwhelming community support — petitions, more public comments, more people pleading for the board to just leave student clubs alone — the discussion dragged through a familiar dance of concern-posturing and faux neutrality before ending almost exactly where they started.
Because it was never about new information. It was about optics. About appearing balanced and thoughtful, while the outcome had already been written behind the scenes. The upside is Policies 515 and 1801, which were only up for first readings, actually did include the community-demanded changes. So for the moment, the pressure seems to have worked. But let’s not get too comfortable. If there’s one thing we’ve learned, it’s that the board chair only seems to acknowledge reality when it’s delivered through overwhelming, sustained public pressure — preferably with receipts, petitions, and multiple news reports.
Moving on...
Minnesota High School League MNHSL - Usually, this kind of membership is routine — filed under “consent agenda,” click, vote, done. But not this time.
The vice chair took this softball and swung for the bleachers of bias, using the opportunity to monologue about his “concern” with “boys playing in girls’ sports.” (Transphobia, but make it folksy.) Then he casually dropped his hope that the state loses a lawsuit defending the current inclusive policy — so, and we quote, “we don’t have to handle it here in the district.” Let’s repeat that: a sitting board officer publicly hoped the state loses in court so the district can opt out of civil rights protections. He literally said the quiet part out loud.
Cool. So if the Minnesota Human Rights Act or state constitution upholds something he doesn’t personally agree with, he’s planning to deviate from it? Great to know that personal belief will be the new legal standard in Forest Lake.
And then… the real slog began.
Enter The Great Board Policy Dump of 2025™ — twelve board policies, each more bloated or unnecessary than the last. Here are just a few of the lowlights:
Policy 1208 now makes it crystal clear: the policy committee is just there to make it look like there's a process. The board can ignore it entirely. So why even have it? Oh right, optics.
Policy 1101 (Legal Status and Name) got stretched from half a page to four pages for the noble purpose of saying: let’s all use the district name the same way. Compelling stuff, really.
Policy 1201 swapped out clear rules like quorum language for vague phrases like “deemed appropriate.” Always comforting when legal standards start sounding like vibes.
Policy 1202 helpfully removed the clear guidance that the clerk takes over when the chair and vice chair are absent. Who leads then? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ But hey, if the clerk doesn’t do something the board votes for, they can be booted. Good to know we’re preparing for coups.
Policy 1203 gave the board chair exactly what he wanted — full debating rights under Robert’s Rules. Small catch: that’s not how Robert’s Rules work. But if you rewrite the rules about rules using the rules, maybe you win on a technicality?
Policy 1205 added a provision requiring the Pledge of Allegiance… which is funny, since the board already said the pledge at every meeting without needing a policy. Guess we just needed to make the performance official.
Policy 1209, the new “Code of Ethics,”. It’s vague, it treads dangerously close to First Amendment rights for speech, and it still reads like a loyalty oath written in a hurry.
Policy 1210, conflict of interest, bars board members from participating in sealed bids. Now, this is just a guess — but maybe it’s aimed at a former board member (who didn't run again) known to be in a professional building trade? Can’t say for sure, but … interesting.
Policy 1211 now includes three paragraphs making sure the board can get legal defense funded by the district — but only if they were acting within the “scope of their delegated authority.” So if you’ve been wondering why so many of these policies quietly expand that authority, now you know.
Policy 1214 tackles the burning issue of… out-of-state board travel. Can’t recall a single board member flying anywhere in the past decade, but sure — let’s make it policy just in case someone tries to rack up those frequent flyer miles on the district dime.
Oh yeah — I almost forgot - the board also fully approved a massive boundary change. You’d think something that affects where hundreds of students go to school would be the headline, but in this drama-packed six months, it was practically an afterthought. Why? Because it was done right — with early planning, community input, actual transparency, and a thoughtful, well-executed process. Turns out when you don’t wedge ideology or chaos into the mix, you can just... do your job well. Imagine that.
By the time the clock ticked past midnight, the room was weary, the policies were passed, and the actual issues — students, equity, transparency — were buried under piles of freshly worded nonsense or on the cutting room floor. You know, flood the zone playbook or scripted drama, you pick your metaphor.
But we’re still watching. Whether in person or online, or here, reading the not-so-brief recap because if the only way the board chair will see reason is extreme, relentless, public pressure, then we’ve got time and unlimited YouTube. And yes — we know. This post is long. But if the board’s going to run a meeting longer than a Peter Jackson film, you’d better believe we’re going to give it the director’s cut in blog form. If you made it to the end of this post, congratulations, more to come because we owe it to our district.
5/18/2025
Post by Wednesday
May 15 was one of those rare Forest Lake school board nights where the actual board meeting was short, but the drama — as always — had already clocked in early over at the Policy Committee.
An overflow crowd showed up, hoping to finally hear what Board Chair (and apparent amateur constitutional scholar) Curt Rebelein, Jr. had to say about the long-disputed student activities policy. However, the audience got a bonus act: Curt dramatically unveiled his personal rewrite of Policy 515, also known as the Dress Code. What did he do, you ask?
Oh, just casually remove explicit bans on the Confederate Flag, swastikas, and KKK symbols, citing “freedom of expression.” That’s right: in Curt’s world, the hate symbols that sparked literal wars and genocides are fair game in a public school, until they cause a disruption - reactive instead of proactive policy? Sure, why not. Meanwhile, he rambles on in defense of the policy that your pride pin or BLM shirt - as he said - is offensive to some - why not add them to the list. Because yes, he also claimed Black Lives Matter to be a hate group, and the Pride flag is controversial. Let’s be honest — when your policy updates sound like a the FL community facebook dumpster fire comments section come to life, maybe it’s time to pass the mic.
And what came next? A verbal explosion of half-formed thoughts, off-script speculation, and an apparent attempt to confuse everyone in the room about his rational for the rewrite. The result? Students, staff, and parents left with rumors flying, confusion spreading, and growing tension in school buildings. Which is wild, considering Curt is also the one pushing a policy against “disruptions to learning.” You can't make this up.
This bold defense of “expression” might feel slightly less academic coming from a guy who literally drives around town in a replica of the General Lee — yes, the car with the Confederate Flag on top. Maybe Curt thinks if he rewrites policy fast enough, he can park his car in the high school lot as a teaching tool. Spoiler: that flag doesn’t mean what he thinks it means. And in a public school, it shouldn’t be policy.
To make matters worse, this was all crammed into a one-hour committee meeting where multiple policies were rushed through like a bad speed dating session. None got more than ten minutes of airtime, including 1801, which the protesters were there to see. Speaking of 1801 - his intel on what 'certain clubs' really do comes from a middle school kid who didn't even go to a meeting. So that’s the level of research informing your kids’ educational environment. I personally expect more, but… well, you know. No drama, no Curt.
At least the actual meeting was short. The damage? Not so much. Oh yeah — speaking of things no one discussed aloud: buried deep in the consent agenda was this cryptic little gem —
“6.4 Designation of the School Board Chair or Vice Chair with the Authority to Select and Retain an Individual to Conduct an Investigation of a Pending Employee Complaint on Behalf of the School District.”
Excuse us… what? Who? What complaint? No explanation. No discussion. But sure, just rubber-stamp that one and move along, nothing to see here, right?
At least the Board meeting was short, not quite as sort as the list of people Curt listens to before rewriting policy, but we got home in time for dinner. Who knows what damage this all will cause - we will be WATCHING to see what comes next.
Post by Wednesday
We didn’t set out to start a blog. Truly. We have jobs, families, group chats, hobbies, and a burning desire to not spend our free time decoding school board chaos like it’s a full-time job. But eventually, the absurdity reached a point where we either had to start writing it down… or risk a collective brain explosion.
So here we are.
This blog, and site, exists because some things are too important — and too unbelievable — to let slip by. We’ll be documenting what’s happening in and around Forest Lake Area Schools, with a focus on the meetings, policies, and power plays that are shaping what happens in our classrooms, board rooms, and community. You might have missed some of it (some of it was meant to be missed), but we’re going to do our best to fill in the gaps.
There will be a few of us writing here — different voices, same goal: transparency and accountability. We’re figuring this out as we go, including the tech side. We don’t have a comment section (yet?), so if you want to reach out, email us. We’d love to hear from you — especially if you’ve got info, questions, or need help connecting the dots.
We genuinely wish this site weren’t necessary. But since we can’t all be everywhere at once — and since the public should know what’s going on in public schools — here we are, squishing a near full-time job into stolen hours and late-night screen time.
Because our schools belong to us. And we’re paying attention now.
** We will be working on reposting some of what we had in chats, emails, and facebook posts so the order might get screwy as we repost here to make a collective record**