Olathe school candidate, who sued after being kicked out of board meeting, wins lawsuit
Days before the Nov. 7 election, a jury has ruled in favor of Olathe school board candidate Jennifer Gilmore in her lawsuit over being removed from a board meeting where she accused a former opponent of “buying” her seat.
After this week’s four-day trial, a jury found that Gilmore was prevented from speaking during the meeting last year because then-board president Joe Beveridge did not like her views. Gilmore — a conservative candidate who unsuccessfully ran for school board in a tight race in 2021 — filed the federal lawsuit last year against Beveridge, as well as Brent Kiger, the district’s director of safety services, and Jim McMullen, assistant superintendent of operations.
Gilmore is running again this year for an at-large seat against newcomer Will Babbit, who earned by far the most votes in the August primary. Both candidates advanced to Tuesday’s election, with Babbit earning 7,652 votes, followed by Gilmore’s 4,225.
Her lawsuit, including the dollar amount the Olathe school district spent on it, has been a talking point leading up to the Nov. 7 election.
“The Board majority sought to cover up Beveridge’s wrongdoing by spending over $300,000 and counting of the taxpayer’s dollars in this lawsuit,” Gilmore’s attorney, Linus Baker, said in a statement. “In the end the board majority spent $300,000 to avoid paying Ms. Gilmore one dollar.”
The jury did not find that punitive damages should be assessed against Beveridge. In order to find that Beveridge should pay damages to Gilmore, the jury would have needed to agree there was proof he acted with evil motive or intent, or reckless indifference to Gilmore’s rights, according to court documents.
The judge previously denied Gilmore’s request to pursue damages against the district and school board, meaning that her win in court does not come with a monetary award. The jury awarded her $1 in nominal damages, designed to acknowledge that she was deprived of a federal right.
Beveridge declined to comment on the verdict.
In a statement, district spokeswoman Erin Schulte said, “Our school district and Board of Education have always been and will continue to be focused on doing what is best for our students, staff and the greater Olathe Public Schools community.”
This summer, U.S. District Court Judge Holly Teeter threw out most claims brought by Gilmore. But the judge sided with Gilmore on her primary claim, saying that a jury could reasonably conclude her First Amendment rights were violated because she was blocked from speaking because of the views she expressed — which is what happened on Thursday.
What happened at the meeting that spurred the lawsuit
In the fall of 2021, Gilmore campaigned against mask mandates and critical race theory as part of a slate of conservative candidates. She lost in a close race that was called days after election night. Board member Julie Steele ultimately won by 65 votes. Gilmore questioned the integrity of the election in social media posts but did not request a recount.
As new board members were sworn in at a January meeting, Gilmore spoke during public comments. She started: “Good evening. I didn’t buy my board seat, but I’m still here because I care about this district.“
Mid-sentence, Beveridge, who was board president at the time and tasked with maintaining order during meetings, interjected, “You know what,” but let her continue.
“Don’t interrupt me, please,” Gilmore said. “We were told prior to enrollment that masks would be optional. We’re doing the same thing year after year. I agree that liars lie, but the only liar that lied in this election was Jim Randall.”
Randall, a former Olathe City Council member, is Steele’s father. He is also Beveridge’s father-in-law.
Beveridge cut her off again and said, “OK, you’re done. You’re done. Uh, Dr. McMullen, remove her.”
He told Gilmore that she was done talking, and said that she “mentioned a person.”
“Your father-in-law … that spent $37,000 for her (Steele’s) board seat?” Gilmore replied to Beveridge. Steele raised nearly double the amount that Gilmore did leading up to the 2021 election, reporting about $60,000 in contributions, more than half coming from loans Steele made to her own campaign.
The school board’s public comment rules at the time stated that the board will not hear “personal attacks, or rude or defamatory remarks of any kind about any employee or student of the School District or any person connected with the School District.”
The policy also allowed the board president to interrupt statements that were disruptive or “not germane to the business activities of the board.”
The board’s new policy, adopted in April 2022, months after Gilmore filed her suit, still includes a requirement that topics be “germane to the business of the board.” But board rules no longer include the provision about personal attacks or defamatory remarks.
After the exchange, Beveridge called for a break. McMullen then told Gilmore that Beveridge had asked him and Kiger to remove her from the building, according to the lawsuit.
Gilmore argued that school officials violated her rights by restricting her speech during the meeting. School officials countered that Gilmore’s speech fell outside the parameters allowed by board policy.
In his statement, Baker argued “this kind of discrimination is what happens when a board allows family members to serve simultaneously which is a recipe for this kind of disaster.”
Both parties, as well as the court, agreed that the public comment portion of the school board meetings is a limited public forum, where the government can put reasonable restrictions on speech, as long as they are not prohibiting viewpoints from being expressed. The jury found that Beveridge engaged in viewpoint discrimination by targeting Gilmore’s speech due to the opinions she was stating.
The judge, Teeter, previously said in court documents that a reasonable jury could conclude that Beveridge “acted in anger” and silenced Gilmore because of her criticism of his father-in-law, rather than because of board policy.
This story was originally published November 3, 2023 at 9:58 AM.
