Several readers have brought to my attention a statement made on Facebook from School Board candidate Kamee Verdrager Leshner about the Nottingham Blog’s article, Interviews with the 2025 Candidates for School Board. The candidate says the article incorrectly states that she declined to respond. While at the time of publication it seemed to be correct to conclude that she had declined, newly provided information shows that the conclusion was incorrect. This article is an official retraction of that incorrect conclusion.
A reader posted this comment on the article, citing what Kamee Verdrager Leshner said in a Facebook group. I checked, and she had indeed said it.
I sent the request for an interview to both candidates on Sunday evening, March 2. In the message sent to Kamee Verdrager Leshner, the second paragraph said, “Could you please provide the following by the end of the day Thursday.”
Kamee Verdrager Leshner responded to this request with a question.
As the Nottingham Blog has published many candidate interviews in past elections, all of which are accessible online, it seemed to me that the most helpful answer to that question would be to point to these prior interviews as examples of how the Nottingham Blog presents information it receives from candidates. So, I replied, “It will be presented the same way prior candidate interviews have been presented.”
Kamee Verdrager Leshner said in her Facebook post that she considered this “a vague and non-responsive response.”
Everyone, especially public officials, often receive answers that they find vague. If the issue is important, they ask clarifying questions to address what they found vague.
I received no further response from Kamee Verdrager Leshner. As she had acknowledged my request for an interview by responding with concerns about how her response would be presented, and she missed the deadline for responding, it seemed to me to be reasonable to conclude from this that her failure to respond was intentional. It did not occur to me that the reason could be that she failed to understand that “Could you please provide the following by the end of the day Thursday” represented a deadline for an article about an election that was going to happen on Tuesday of the following week.
The Nottingham Blog regrets the error.
It should be noted that the Nottingham Blog is not a well-funded news organization with a staff of professional editors reviewing each article for possible misinterpretations. Just as with many of the town’s elected officials, I earn nothing from providing this service to the citizens of Nottingham. I strive to be as accurate as I can be, but there are many opportunities for misunderstandings.
Note: I am about to leave on a very long road trip to attend the funeral of a close family member. I will likely be unable to provide further coverage until several days after the election. My wife and I submitted our absentee ballots at the Town Clerk’s office on Friday morning. While we were there, I observed a gust of wind blow shingles off the roof of the community center. Here’s a photo.
My condolences to you for your loss.
Thank you for the invaluable service you provide through your blog. I think you are gracious to post this as I see the failure is on the part of the candidate. Blame shifting is not a characteristic I can endorse. It seems pretty clear to me she missed the opportunity to respond.
Thanks for your articles Doug. Sorry for your loss.