The Aug. 23 brawl involving three Everett School Board members came after a long-running debate over how things are supposed to operate at the school district.

It may be weeks before a decision is reached on whether anyo

ne will face charges out of the fracas. In the lull in the action, let’s review how the school district with more than 18,500 students got here:

August 2008: Then Superintendent Carol Whitehead retires early after several bruising months that saw her staff first deny, then admit, installing a hidden surveillance camera in a Cascade High School teacher’s classroom. Revelations about the investigation (aimed to rein in a teacher helping students publish an underground newspaper) and the more than $200,000 in public funds spent in its pursuit spark controversy and raise questions about the honesty of school district leaders.

March 2009: Gary Cohn is hired as Whitehead’s replacement. The teacher’s union and others criticize the school board for bringing Cohn in without involving the community.

November 2009: Jessica Olson wins a six-year term on the school board, running on a promise to bring more open and transparent leadership. Her opponent, incumbent board member Karen Madsen, had been a staunch Whitehead supporter and a defender of the hidden-camera investigation. “The situation is always more complex than can be conveyed in a sound bite or even a newspaper article,” she said at the time. “Often times information can’t be conveyed at all.”

January 2010: Olson urges televised broadcasts of school board meetings, or in the alternative, taping the meetings and posting them on YouTube. Staff investigate and determine developing such a system could cost about $24,000 in startup costs, plus a monthly $1,100 fee for a camera operator.

April 2010: Olson is presented the Key Award from the Washington Coalition for Open Government honoring her for work on government transparency.

July 2010: Olson questions whether the school board is following open meetings laws after Cohn takes the board behind closed doors for a briefing on student achievement test results. The executive session’s purpose had been advertised as a review of an employee’s performance — in this case the superintendent. Cohn later makes the test results public.

September 2010: A school district spokeswoman dissembles when The Herald follows up on an anonymous letter that claims a principal is under investigation. She says that no investigation is underway but doesn’t acknowledge that one had been conducted, and that the principal had been cleared. The failed attempt at misdirection becomes the focus of news coverage and a school board discussion.

October 2010: Board President Ed Petersen says he wishes the school district would have handled questions about the investigation differently. He also suggests The Herald and others “have still been living in the past and have continued to perceive secrecy and deception and harbor animosities toward” the school district.

Before the month is out, the board adopts protocol to limit the ability of a lone board member to publicly raise questions about some items being brought to the board for votes.

November 2010: The other four board members say they can’t work with Olson and threaten her with a censure vote. They allege she’s been “bullying” Cohn and other staff and making improper demands for records and information.

December 2010: Cohn releases a $14,500 review of the school district. Without naming Olson, the 65-page document blames her for discord among leaders. “It is imperative that this be addressed as it is distracting and damaging to the entire school system and the community,” says the report from the Washington Association of School Administrators.

February 2011: The board votes to censure Olson. The action follows Olson being in the news over a land deal involving the school district and plans for a Washington State University branch campus in Everett. Olson posted comments about the proposal on her Facebook page. The censure resolution claims she’s been a bully. It also asserts — falsely — that Olson was responsible for The Herald learning months before about the district’s investigation of the principal. Olson provides a 59-page rebuttal to the censure resolution.

Petersen is disappointed. “The weight of concern about (Olson’s) behavior is so significant that it’s hard to believe there is no ability to recognize any of this as valid,” he said at the time.

June 2011: After being accused of bullying behaviors, Olson takes to making videotaped records of her interactions with school district staff and other leaders. On June 24 she videotapes while reviewing unredacted attorney billings at district headquarters. The board unanimously had approved the review, but prohibited her from making copies or removing records. When it becomes clear Olson won’t be able to read all the records in the allotted time, she takes them with her. The camera records it all.

July 5, 2011: Board members complain in open session about Olson’s decision to remove the attorney billings. They also seek legal advice on whether she can make video recordings of school board meetings and appointments with staff.

Petersen accuses Olson of engaging in multiple violations of board decisions. Board member Jeff Russell chides Olson for playing the role of “freelance private investigator.”

Olson responded that the real issue is whether a school board member should have meaningful access to the information she feels is important to accomplishing the work voters elected her to do.