‘Contentious’ is arguably the best way to describe the 9/22/22 Board meeting. While local coverage of the meeting was detailed, it failed to mention some meeting highlights I felt was necessary for truly and wholly understanding the scope of the contention and all-around loss of control.
Pamela Stanley’s prepared speech sought to accomplish one goal: attack parents for increased legal bills, submission of OPRAS, requesting answers to emails and the pile on of ethical violations against the district.
The message was that parents were to blame for the violations of law and ethical violations already substantiated against the Superintendent and BOE members. They were also responsible for Pamela Stanley hiring a lawyer to fill out her ethics complaint against a fellow BOE Member.
This is quite an interesting take as Pamela Stanley is the only individual thus far who used District dollars to file her ethics complaint.
After her inability to remain under control and on-topic after Mike D’Aquila and Board attorney pleaded with her, MULTIPLE TIMES, to “STOP” and stay on topic, she continued her attack on families. (Timestamp 2:34)
During this time, Ms. Akiri attempted to restore order to the meeting:
Sai: “I am asking the president to control the meeting, and I just asked the attorney”
Pam” “you are the one who is interrupting and you need to be more respectful. “
Sai: “and I am sorry that I am interrupting because this is not on the agenda. And if you are speaking about your donation Pam, with all due respect “
Pam: “I am trying to”
Sai: “so Mike I am asking you as the president, we asked the attorney and attorney said we need to stick to the topic. And are you going to allow ti talk about OPRAs and bills then we also should be allowed to speak about it. Thank you.”
Mike: “may I speak.. thank You! Pam please go right to the topic of donation”
After Ms. Stanley’s anti-parent monologue, BOE Candidate Natasha Joly responded to Pamela, stating:
“…it’s ironic you were talking about legal bills when you were the one person who used the Board attorney for an ethics violation complaint against another member when ethics violation complaints do not require an attorney.”
Regarding policy changes, which were wrongfully interpreted surrounding the ability for the League of Women Voters to host its debate at GL, resident John Sincaglia took to the microphone to voice his disdain at the seeming continued negligence of the Board. As Mr. Singaclia approached the podium – Robert Ciancuilli, in an apparent act of rebellion against Mr. Sincaglia got up from his chair and walked out – he returns, walking directly in front of Natasha Joly while she is speaking at the podium, but only to pack up and leave without a word to anyone.
John Sincaglia commented:
“The flimsy and corrupt justification used provide no public confidence in the advice and decision making to this district”
Comments from Mike D’Aquila, Board President in reaction to John Sincaglia’s words, was yet another display of self-victimization and strange blaming of parents for simply exercising their right to hold BOE Members accountable to ethical standards.
“I tried, I’m done! I’m done! …I took this job because I knew it was going to be a bad transition year…and boy, was it, now I regret it. I am so tired of it…I didn’t run because I’m tired of all this, whatever! Congratulations everybody you did a great job of burning me out!” (Time Stamp 2:46)
With 3 Board members exiting the meeting, the question of voting came up. Mr. D’Aquila mistakenly advised the following regarding quorum; “We need 4 for k-8 and 5 for k-12.” District policy 0163 was updated in February of 2021 and states “A quorum shall consist of five (5) Board members, constituting a majority of the full Board membership”
I guess bringing up this error is another “negative attack”
