Metea Valley Counselor Tammy Kurth shared concerns about the district failing to address her workplace harassment complaint at the Board of Education meeting on May 4.

“It is deeply concerning that after repeatedly raising issues I am now left to bring them directly to the board because they remain unresolved and continue on unchecked,” Kurth said in her public comment.

Kurth, a counselor with more than 20 years in the district, is currently on medical leave recovering from a traumatic brain injury.

In her public comment, Kurth said she has experienced intimidation, exclusion and retaliation from a building administrator since November 2024.

According to Section 5 Article 20 of the IPSD 204 School Board policy, “The School District expects the workplace environment to be productive, respectful, and free of unlawful discrimination, including harassment.”

In her public comment, Kurth did not name the administrator whom she alleges harassed her. The allegations in this story have not been independently verified by The Stampede.

“I reported my concerns to my direct supervisor, building principal, union president, and the assistant superintendent of high schools,” Kurth said in her public comment.

Union President Katherine Popp and Kurth’s direct supervisor, Counseling Director Darcy Hutzler, declined to be interviewed for this story.

In her public comment, Kurth said she reported her concerns again in late January 2025, and was assured Principal Daniel DeBruycker had been informed, but nearly a month later, in February, DeBruycker told her those concerns had never been communicated to him.

DeBruycker said he became aware of Kurth’s concerns around second semester of last school year, but the chain of communication does not always flow directly to him.

“She would work with either a department chair [or] an assistant principal, whoever works with them specifically,” DeBruycker said. “Any concern would go to them first, and then they would involve me if it was necessary.”

Despite those communication channels, Kurth said in her public comment that her concerns went unresolved and she filed a formal complaint with the district’s human resources department.

“In December, at the encouragement of district administration and union leadership, I filed a harassment complaint with HR,” Kurth said in her comment. “After three and a half months, the complaint was closed as unfounded.”

When contacted by The Stampede regarding details about Kurth’s HR complaint and request to transfer, Executive Director of Communication Services Lisa Barry said the district could not discuss personnel matters.

In an email, Assistant Superintendent of High Schools Nicole Howard said the district takes harassment concerns seriously regardless of how they are raised. She said the process begins with a fact-finding meeting between the employee and an administrator.

“The administrator reviews the details in light of Board Policy 5:20 to determine whether the incidents may qualify as harassment as defined by the policy,” Howard said. “If applicable, the investigation will proceed, including interviews with witnesses, the accused, and a review of any relevant evidence.”

Kurth said at the meeting that she has serious concerns about the process and its findings. To her knowledge, key witnesses she identified were not contacted.

“The complaint process at both the building and district levels has failed to provide the support and accountability I have a right to expect,” Kurth said at the meeting.

Howard said witnesses are contacted if corroboration is needed, referring to the district’s standard process.

“Any witness who can offer evidence, eyewitness account, or context to the harassment claim may be interviewed,” Howard said.

If a complainant disputes the outcome, Howard said they may appeal the findings to the complaint manager.

Kurth said at the meeting that her direct supervisor, Hutzler, and her overseeing administrator, Assistant Principal Laura James-Schrader, reassigned her caseload, which she cited as an example of what she believes is retaliation.

James-Schrader declined the request to be interviewed for this story.

At the meeting, Kurth also said two supervisors attended a professional community event during her medical leave and greeted other staff members, but did not acknowledge her. This behavior, she said, reflects the same pattern of exclusion she first reported.

DeBruycker said that staff goes through training about workplace environment and harassment.

“There [are] ways to interact with each other, treat each other, how we communicate, how we email, how we collaborate face to face, and just general respect for each other,” DeBruycker said.

In her public comment, Kurth said she requested to transfer to another building. She said the high school superintendent, Howard, verbally assured her, in December, the transfer would be granted, but was denied in March, despite two open counseling positions at other schools for the following school year.

According to Article 11, Section 3 of the Indian Prairie Education Association and District 204 Collective Bargaining Agreement, teachers requesting a transfer must apply in writing to the superintendent or designee, and all requests for the following school year must be submitted by March 1. The final decision to grant or deny a transfer rests solely with administration and is not subject to the grievance procedure, though teachers may request a conference with the Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources to appeal a denial.

According to Howard, assistant superintendents work with school administration to facilitate transfer decisions. Beyond the criteria in the collective bargaining agreement, Howard said administration looks for the best candidate to meet the needs of students.

“Internal applicants who have relationships with the students and families in the building may be given priority over a transfer who does not,” Howard said, referring to the district’s standard process.

Despite these measures, Kurth said, she has lost confidence in the district’s ability to ensure a professional work environment for her.

“Instead of addressing the administrator’s repeated patterns, the response has been to focus on me rather than the issue at hand,” Kurth said in her comment. “The district has left me assigned to the same environment I reported with the same unresolved conditions.”

Howard said that whenever the district finds allegations that are substantiated, the district acts accordingly.

“The district will implement remedial and corrective actions to address unlawful workplace harassment,” Howard said.

If claims do not meet that threshold, Howard said the complaint manager may propose restorative options or other measures to help resolve the issues between the parties involved.

Kurth told the board that her concerns are not isolated, referring to what she called a broader failure of accountability across multiple levels of leadership.

“They reflect issues raised over time by staff in the same building regarding similar conduct by the same administrator,” Kurth said in her public comment.

The Stampede has not independently verified whether other staff members have raised similar concerns.

DeBruycker said the district utilized every resource available to work through the complaint, including human resources and the district office, but acknowledged that outcomes do not always satisfy everyone involved.

“Both parties aren’t satisfied with the resolution, unfortunately,” DeBruycker said. “But we hope that people can resolve those relationships and continue to collaborate and work together in a healthy environment.”