NEW ULM - Parents of New Ulm High School students on Wednesday voiced frustration over what they perceived as inadequate communication with the school district, over penalties imposed on students.

The parent-requested meeting, while not officially announced, drew about 40 parents, according to a Journal count.

The district was represented by Superintendent Harold Remme, High School Principal Mark Bergmann and school board members Patricia Hoffman and Bill Day.

About 40 students are facing penalties following what game officials deemed inappropriate behavior at a High School League-sponsored volleyball contest last Thursday.

The "disrespectful" behavior resulted in the ejection of an entire spectator section from the game. According to a letter sent to parents, it also continued near a door of the gym and in the parking lot after the students were asked to leave. Law enforcement officers were contacted to help remove students.

"During this process, student behavior persisted to the level of profanity towards law enforcement," the letter stated.

The penalties consist of banning the students from attending, or participating in, school district or High School League contests for two weeks or two events, whichever is longer. The two weeks began Oct. 26 and will conclude Nov. 6.

The parents who attended Wednesday's meeting restated, in a variety of ways, that they had not received any warning of an escalating situation.

The parents felt they should have been given a chance to correct the behavior at home, before the school "slapped penalties" on the students.

"Why didn't we hear about it until they got kicked out?" said one parent. "They are teenagers, they push the pencil all the way to the line.... We would have reined in our children."

"We were blindsided. Why weren't we notified it was getting to this level?" said a parent.

Another parent called the penalties "a rash decision" and asked "Why were they dealt out so rapidly, without any collaboration?"

Others called the penalties a "knee-jerk reaction," an "overreaction" and a "sledgehammer reaction."

Some expressed frustration that escalating sportsmanship issues were not addressed more adequately along the way, by supervisors and administrators, and that students were not given clearer behavior guidelines.

In response, administrators defended their actions. They said that when resolving the situation, they used their best judgment and High School League guidelines.

Administrators cited examples of addressing sportsmanship issues as they occurred - but disclaimed the possibility of hindsight.

"We could not have anticipated what happened - or all of us would have done something differently," said Hoffman.

"Could we do a better job communicating? Should we? Sure," said Remme.

Parents also expressed anger at how the punishment was metered. They felt some students were singled out for punishment, while others got away unpunished.

Some parents spoke for equal treatment for the entire section ejected, not punishing just part of it.

Administrators said they tried their best to identify "culprits" based on information from surveillance cameras, supervisors present at the game, and police reports.

"We tried as best as we could to minimize casualties," said Bergmann. "And no, it's not a perfect process."

He expressed willingness to correct proven identification errors.

A question about a broader appeal process remained implicitly unanswered.

Hoffman called on everyone to focus less on the past, and more on "where we go from here."

She urged broader dialogue among schools, families and the community on "how to do it better" and called for more parental involvement and volunteering.

Due to time constraints, the parents requested a second, this time publicized, meeting.