Public Service Should not Require Body Armor

School board service is public service, often thankless and under intense scrutiny. In communities like Montrose and Olathe, Colorado, School Board members face serious questions about whether online harassment escalates into real-world threats including stalking, and defamation. These issues demand open discussion, not silence.

Social media platforms amplify voices, but can also fuel bullying. Persistent, targeted campaigns against individuals raise concerns: Do they cross into behavior that places reasonable people in fear for their safety or that of their families?

Colorado law defines stalking under C.R.S. 18-3-602 as knowingly making a credible threat combined with repeated following, approaching, contacting, or surveillance—or repeated conduct causing serious emotional distress to a reasonable person. [https://tinyurl.com/2kkyt8dh]

Pointed questions arise from reported incidents:

• Did Phoebe Benzinger start this when she threatened the Board, saying, “I am watching you” at the beginning of the year?

• Did Alice Murphy and Ellen Angeles’s son stalk a board member's place of work? If so, what message does that send about boundaries in public disputes? Is this appropriate for a former second grade teacher and a Board Director?

• If this is true, what kind of parent would allegedly encourage or allow a child to engage in such actions as "dirty work"? Is this appropriate behavior for Ms. Angeles, who professes to be a Catholic and former teacher? Is this acceptable adult behavior, or does it model poor conflict resolution for the next generation?

• Is an intense focus on specific board members breeding unfounded conspiracy theories, rather than constructive dialogue about school policies?

These are not abstract issues. Online adult bullying—questioning character, spreading distortions, and soliciting damaging claims—deserves scrutiny. Reports mention what looks like an alias (fake Facebook account)  “Claire Johnston” has regularly shared altered AI-generated images depicting board members with exaggerated features like long noses, alongside portrayals of legal counsel as a "marionette puppet master." Concerns have been raised: Is Joelle Recalde, a Northside Elementary mom, who is on the Parent Advisory Committee (PAC), “Claire Johnston?” Is she involved in coordinating or encouraging such content? Recently, she was  confronted of her being the alias “Claire Johnston” at line dancing at Corner Taps. Did this lead to her absence the following week? Is avoiding in-person accountability how adults handle disagreement? What happened to civil, face-to-face conversations where people can agree to disagree respectfully?

School board members have reportedly received significant online threats via Facebook and other platforms. Is intimidation the goal of these campaigns? Does it aim to deter qualified people from serving or to pressure decisions outside proper channels?

Meanwhile, what has the school board actually been doing? In the Montrose County School District, they have pursued investigations into significant incidents at Olathe Elementary School. They have followed standard practices by placing involved administrators on non-punitive paid leave. Why? To protect the administrator, staff, complainants, and students while ensuring complaints are heard seriously and people are safeguarded. This reflects responsible governance amid difficult situations—not the conspiracies some allege.

Public officials are not above criticism. Robust debate strengthens democracy, however, when criticism veers into falsehoods that damage reputations, repeated targeting that causes fear, or explicit threats, it raises legal and ethical red flags.

Relevant Colorado Laws on Defamation, Stalking, and Threats:

• Defamation: False statements of fact published to third parties that harm reputation. Public officials must generally prove "actual malice" (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth) under U.S. Supreme Court standards. Colorado follows these principles, with civil claims requiring proof of falsity, publication, fault, and damages. Truth is a strong defense.

• Stalking (C.R.S. 18-3-602, Vonnie’s Law): Felony offense involving credible threats plus repeated conduct, or repeated actions causing serious emotional distress. First offense is typically a class 5 felony; repeats escalate to class 4. This applies to in-person and digital behavior.

• Harassment (C.R.S. 18-9-111): Misdemeanor for repeated unwanted communications, insults, or conduct intended to harass, annoy, or alarm, especially via electronic means. True threats require recklessness as to their threatening nature per U.S. Supreme Court guidance in Counterman v. Colorado. [https://tinyurl.com/46ywnspa]

School board members, as public servants, deserve the ability to do their jobs without fear of personal reprisal. Parents and community members have every right to voice concerns at meetings, through proper channels, or in public forums. But crossing into harassment, stalking, defamation, or threats harms everyone—especially students who need stable, focused leadership in districts like Montrose County, serving areas including Olathe.

Communities thrive on civil discourse. Let's demand better: evidence-based criticism, in-person engagement where possible, and respect for the rule of law. If patterns of bullying and threats persist, authorities should investigate fully. Public service shouldn't require body armor—metaphorical or otherwise. What steps will our community take to ensure disagreements stay productive rather than destructive?

Sincerely,

Leah Vandersluis

Concerned Citizen, Montrose, CO