Fired River Ridge varsity girls basketball coach Veronica Zinkle is in a different court — one where she alleges the River Ridge School Board violated the Open Meetings Law when it decided not to renew her employment as coach.
According to a Nov. 26, 2025 story in the Prairie du Chien Courier Press:
In July, Zinkle filed a civil suit against board members and District Administrator Clay Koenig alleging the April 9 meeting where the closed session decision was made was not properly posted and that the board did not properly review results of a parental survey given to families of the 2024-25 basketball team. The board also failed to record a vote taken to not renew Zinkle’s contract.
A judicial conference earlier in November between the district and Zinkle’s attorney discussed scheduling depositions for those involved.
At issue: Whether the term “personnel discussion” was sufficient for the April 9 meeting discussing Zinkle.
According to the court filing, Zinkle alleged that in March she was told by Koenig the district was going to send the survey to the families of basketball team members. She also alleged Koenig and she would review the results of the survey but there was no review before the April 9 meeting.
Two days after the April 9 meeting, Zinkle was told the board voted not to renew her contract.
The district’s response, filed with the court, denied that a board vote was taken at that meeting.
The item was discussed as part of the two-item April 9 closed session, but only one item was acted upon after the conclusion of the closed session: To reduce a math portion from full-time to .5 full time equivalency.
An April 16 complaint filed with Grant County District Attorney Ryan Kieler was closed without a decision to prosecute.
Zinkle filed the civil suit this summer, alleging the meeting violation. She is seeking monetary damages and for the court to determine the district violated the Open Meetings Law in addition to attorney’s fees.
A 2007 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in the Buswell v. Tomah School District case found that the school district was vague in its agenda listing a negotiation of the collective bargaining agreement with the teacher’s union, according to the story.
