Custer County School Board Prioritizes
Supporting Staff and Community

by Laura Vass
At the end of the February 11 Regular School Board meeting, The Custer County School Board went into executive session to discuss Superintendent Thom Peck’s annual performance evaluation, typically performed this time of year. The agenda item was, “The Board will vote to convene in executive session pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(f)(I) to consider a personnel matter, specifically to conduct the superintendent’s performance review.”
(We anticipated that the written review/appraisal would be more thorough than the last board’s short summary of the previous superintendent (Jackie Crabtree) in 2022 which did not appear to meet state requirements. The Superintendent’s 2025 evaluation for Thom Peck indicated areas of improvement needed on follow-through, policy adherence and improving academic performance. Though not a glowing evaluation, it left room for growth and stated clearly what remaining annual goals he should work on for the school as a whole. It’s available to the public on the school’s website.)
The following day, February 12th, school board members learned that information from the executive session was being shared by Mr. Peck with staff and members of the community. In doing so, the breach caused a major disruption and created discord in both the school and community, forcing the Board to take immediate action. For the Board to discuss Mr. Peck’s breach of executive session and resulting discord an emergency public meeting had to be held. Based on the full board’s availability and urgency of the matter, the best available date chosen was Thursday, February 13th. The agenda listed a public comment section and “DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS:
A: Superintendent Employment
B: Interim or Acting
Superintendent.”
School Board President Reggie Foster’s opening statement included, “Colorado’s Open Meeting Law has confidentiality protections around executive sessions. As the Superintendent of Schools, implicit in Thom’s participation in executive sessions with the Board is his obligation to maintain the confidentiality of those communications. Pieces of that confidential and protected conversation were inappropriately shared, but not in full context, with select members of the staff and public. I am sorry that any of you were put in that position.” Foster continued, “Such behavior is unprofessional and undermines the working relationship between the Board and the Superintendent.”
More than 70 people attended, including parents, community members, and staff. (This came on the heels of Facebook posts on February 11th, both complaining about and supporting Superintendent Thom Peck and the school’s bussing schedule. Apparently, those posts had little or nothing to do with the issues at hand but based on audience questions and comments contributed to the high meeting attendance.)
Board President Foster told the panicked crowd at the meeting that she wrote the agenda items “in a specific way because I did not know what was going to transpire today. We have really hard decisions to make. We pride ourselves on taking [in] all the information before we make a decision. And we are the only ones with all of the information.”
The Board did not comment much during the special meeting. (This is typical since meetings are held “in the public” but not “of the public”. All of those who wanted to speak were given two minutes to voice their concerns.) Note that the Board cannot discuss personnel matters outside of executive session so answers to questions were limited.
Responding to accusations of secrecy, hiding information and blindsiding the staff Foster said, “When a board, of any kind, is doing its job and upholding its oath, then personnel matters are maintained in confidence.”
True to Foster’s earlier professions of considering all information, the Board’s inactions demonstrated that they heard and were contemplating the messages of those who spoke in support of Superintendent Peck. Stories of Mr. Peck’s hallway interactions, outreach to the homeschool community and knowing the names of students appeared to resonate some importance with the members of the Board.
In what was a clear show of Board support for the staff and community and a possible willingness to put aside Mr. Peck’s breach of executive session, the meeting closed without utilizing the latter agenda items. In the end, it appears that the Board has set aside its business focused priorities of performance in favor of the staff’s pleas for stability.
Peck, who came aboard in 2024, currently has a salary of $123,000 per year. If the Board does make a future decision to terminate him, they would have to pay a portion of his remaining salary per his contract. The District would then have to determine an interim and possibly pay an interim’s salary. There would be no cost for another Superintendent search per the District’s contract with search firm McPherson and Jacobsen.
Mr. Peck, viewed by the hiring committee as the best candidate for the position last spring, was removed as a high school principal in Big Fork, Montana and faced a non-renewal of his contract in 2024 with Lewiston Public School Board, with no details available.