Imagine your local school district spending a fortune – a cool $250,000 – on a training program. Sounds great, right? Investing in educators is always a plus. But what if that program is run by the superintendent's wife? Suddenly, things get a little… complicated. That's exactly what's happening in Rochester, and it's stirring up a major debate about ethics and potential conflicts of interest.
An investigation by 5 INVESTIGATES has revealed that Rochester Public Schools shelled out over a quarter of a million dollars to send more than 50 employees to the Minnesota Principals Academy since 2022. This academy, a professional development program at the University of Minnesota, is headed by Dr. Katie Pekel. And here's where it gets controversial: Dr. Katie Pekel's husband, Dr. Kent Pekel, has been the superintendent of Rochester Public Schools since 2021.
So, is this a legitimate investment in the district's staff, or a questionable use of taxpayer money?
Initially, Dr. Pekel declined an interview. However, 5 INVESTIGATES approached him after a recent school board meeting, where he firmly stated, "Our family gets no direct benefit at all. She earns a salary that has nothing to do with the number of participants in the program or from Rochester." He insists he's been upfront about his wife's position and that there's no conflict of interest.
But two ethics experts strongly disagree, and this is the part most people miss: even if there's no direct financial gain, the appearance of impropriety can be just as damaging.
Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer, didn't mince words. Speaking in his personal capacity, he told 5 INVESTIGATES that this kind of spending presents a clear conflict of interest. "One cannot, in a government position, make decisions about a contract with your spouse’s employer," Painter said. "That’s a fundamental conflict of interest." Think of it like this: even if the superintendent believes wholeheartedly in the program, his position of power could unduly influence the district's decision to participate.
Mitchell Hamline Law Professor David Schultz echoed this sentiment, stating there’s “no question about it.” He elaborated, “Using his position that encourages people to then use public dollars to go help pay for his wife’s salary, of which he benefits from, that’s the conflict of interest.”
5 INVESTIGATES presented these concerns to Dr. Pekel. He responded, "Neither my wife nor I get a dime from the participation of some Rochester principals in the academy. She earns a salary that has nothing to do with the number of participants in the program or from Rochester. And so, no, absolutely not. There is no throughline.” The Superintendent is asserting that the program's funding is independent of his influence, and his wife's salary is not impacted by Rochester School's participation.
The University of Minnesota defends the program, highlighting its long history and positive impact. Alex Evanson, the program’s spokesperson, noted that the Minnesota Principals Academy has been running for nearly two decades, with 786 people enrolled from at least 163 school districts throughout the state. "Principals who participate in the Minnesota Principals Academy provide overwhelmingly positive feedback about their experiences, reporting that they are better equipped to identify and implement evidence-based best practices in their schools," Evanson said.
So, the program itself seems valuable. But does that excuse the potential conflict of interest?
According to Dr. Pekel, he's been transparent about his wife’s involvement, and participation isn't mandatory. Data obtained by 5 INVESTIGATES shows that only two other districts sent more principals to the academy than Rochester Schools.
School Board Chair Cathy Nathan, in an email to 5 INVESTIGATES, stated that the superintendent shared his intention to have Rochester principals participate in the academy and disclosed Dr. Katie Pekel’s role back in 2022. Nathan's email went on to say that “the chair and vice chair concluded that there was no conflict of interest because neither the superintendent nor his wife would receive any financial or career benefit.” However, Nathan declined an interview and walked away when approached by 5 INVESTIGATES at a recent board meeting, which doesn't exactly scream transparency.
The ethics experts emphasize that even if Rochester principals could benefit from the program, Dr. Pekel should have recused himself from any related discussions or decisions. "It doesn’t matter how good the program is," Schultz said. "The first thing that should occur is that he should not be in the game of making this kind of referral.”
Ultimately, this situation boils down to perception and the importance of maintaining public trust. Did the Rochester School Board make the right call? Should Dr. Pekel have stepped aside? Even if the program is beneficial, was it worth the controversy? What do you think? Is this a case of much ado about nothing, or a serious ethical breach that demands further scrutiny? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
