Meeting transcript
Special BOE Meeting
April 6, 2026 · Watch on Zoom · All meetings
Okay. It is 07:02PM on Monday. What is the date today anyway? The seventh? April 6. April 6. I'm sorry, guys. I've had a day. And we're gonna call to order a special meeting of the Innova board of education. If everyone could say the pledge of allegiance together. I pledge allegiance to the flag of
The United States Of America to the republic for which it stands.
One nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
So this meeting is very short. Terms of an opening statement, we intentionally made this meeting not part of our regularly scheduled school meeting. We are here only to discuss one thing, and that has to do with whether or not we need to establish a committee to investigate allegation of improper conduct by a board member. So in terms of communications, I have received at least three communications from members of our community who all happen to be on the Republican town council about specifically in regards to an email that was sent as well as other continued allegations. And so we're going to bring this up for a discussion and action. So just so that everyone on our board is aware,
the main reason for having this meeting is due to the risk of litigation of the school board by our sole employee who is the superintendent. We've already had meeting in regards to this, so everyone should be aware of that. So in discussing with our lawyer in consultation, we need to protect the school board as itself from threat of litigation. So I would like to have some discussion regarding whether or not we need to establish a committee to go forward and and further investigate these allegations that have come forward and have been presented by members of our community. I don't know if anyone else has anything to say on the matter.
As far as I'm concerned, we definitely need to proceed and prepared to put forward motions, but wanted to allow us to discuss anything that we needed to prior to my doing that. But based on everything that I've read, we absolutely need to protect ourselves and take action as a board.
Does anyone else have anything that they'd like to bring up in terms of discussion or questions about the process in terms of protecting our board?
No. I think it deserves an investigation 100%. So I don't know that there's a ton to discuss before we move forward and and and investigate and get some more information that we can share with everybody. K. There's risk of litigation?
Yes. There's risk of litigation, from our sole employee, the superintendent, towards the board of education for risk of a hostile work environment.
Oh, so she would not hesitate to, sue the school and take funds away?
No. Not sue the school. Sue the board of education. We are her bosses. She is our only employee.
What are the specifics of something that was done wrong?
From what was brought to my attention, it was specifically emails that you wrote, Marcy, directing people to continue to spread misinformation, specifically about the school board budget and and things contained within it that was then distributed to the entire Republican town people. Again, I'm not I'm not on that, so I don't have the true specifics. I just know what was given to me by the people who brought it forward.
Well, I guess I'll proceed. My understanding is that we need to form a special committee to investigate this before we can take any action.
According to Robert's rules. Yes. Yep. According to Robert's rules.
So I will make a three pronged motion. Would want to,
talk talk privately or even in person about in public about, you know, what is wrong and and, you're trying to silence me because you don't want any dissension?
No. What happened, Marcy, is that we need to investigate whether or not you have violated the code of conduct and the policy of the board of education. And after an investigation, to make a recommendation by the committee to see if that would then revolve result in a trial and censure of you as a Board of Education member. We are not trying to silence you. You have been given numerous requests to stop your actions, and the most recent one of which I'm aware, that resulted in an email to the entire Republican town committee absolutely flies in the face of your responsibility as a board of education member. It makes us susceptible to litigation from superintendent Bruno, and we can't continue to have that susceptibility. She would have every right to sue us. Our board.
Right. It's to protect our board. These things are are public information. This is the things that are not untrue.
So you just And then we need to investigate. Investigation will uncover that. The purpose of the purpose of tonight is to decide if we need to investigate this further. It's not to have a discussion about what has actually or what has supposedly occurred. It's to decide if we want to investigate it as a board. Again, you're just trying to silence me. That's all. I don't think anyone is trying to silence you. My my sole objective right now and the objective of what our board should be is to protect our board and protect the integrity that we have within the board of education.
So as I started to say, I'm gonna make a three part motion. One is that a special committee be established to involve investigate allegations of improper conduct by Marci Minor. Number two is that the chair of the Andover Board of Education be authorized to appoint members of the committee and a committee chair. And number three is that the committee be tasked with, one, conducting an investigation of allegations of improper conduct by Marci Minor. And two, making a report to the entire board of education either exonerating Marcy or listing the charges and the recommendation for a trial. Is there a second? You guys are funny. Yeah. It's just ridiculous that you Marcy, you're not you're out of order. There's a motion pending. There's been a second. Now we can have discussion.
Well, we're discussing it. Why am I out of order?
Because there was a second room to occur before we could discuss it.
Go ahead. You're just trying to silence me. That's all there is. You're trying to get me to resign, and this is just ridiculous. You're you're starting a witch hunt that is is just ridiculous.
You know what? You're worried for me to silence you. But, unfortunately, when you're a member of a board within a town, you have certain responsibilities that you have to abide by. And some of those, you know, have to do with sometimes we vote on things and we don't all agree. And at the end of the day, we need to still support the board that we were elected to be on with what that board votes to at the end of the day. And there have been things that I have voted against or voted for that didn't pass. And at the end of the day, we are all still on this board, to represent the in the best interest of the school.
Marcy, if you read then what Marcy, let me just talk for one second. If you read any, if not all, of the policies that are in the series nine thousands that we have been discussing for the last couple months, you would know that your alleged misconduct has in fact violated our our code of conduct. If what I understand has occurred, in fact, is determined by the committee to have occurred, you have violated our code of conduct, thereby making the board of education liable for your actions as a board. That's why we have to establish a committee to do an investigation to determine whether or not you have in fact violated the board of education's policies. And if so, then you get your due process. But first, the first thing that needs to happen according to Robert's rules is that we need to have an investigation.
We are not trying to silence you. We are simply trying to protect ourselves because your actions, as far as the current allegations, have made us susceptible to being sued. And that is absolutely something that cannot occur.
No. I'm there's some things that were shared about personal people that, that could subject the superintendent to be ensued. Nobody's saying anything about that.
Right now This meeting is to establish a a committee, Marcy. If you have if you have allegations in that regard, that is your your right to bring up at a board meeting. Although, if you bring up allegations that are in fact untrue or ill informed, you're gonna further create a possibility of liability for our being sued by our superintendent. So we really need to go forward based on facts. And a lot of what was contained in the email that I saw was absolutely not factual.
Well, we can talk about that another time, but, there's also that in the investigative committee.
Think I think right now, unless there's further discussion that's warranted, we need to vote on the motion that's on the floor, which is whether or not we establish the committee.
There's also what about this meeting? You didn't inform me of this meeting. And there's also when what about the letter that went sent to the board of it board of finance? One person act acted as an individual without the authority of the board. That's a policy.
That was violated. No. The board chair is allowed to act on behalf of the board. That's the only person that's allowed to act on the behalf of the board.
Marcy, did you Marcy Marcy, did you inform all of us that you were gonna write a letter to humiliate us saying that we pretty much are lying to back up the superintendent's lies? Did you inform us of that? Because I didn't get the memo. Because you pretty much were accusing all of us on the board of just backing up lies. Well, these
what what I said, these are not lies. So we can, you know, we'll we can investigate it. So I think I think it's pretty I think it's pretty clear, though, that several members of our board are not happy with what has occurred thus far, and then an investigation needs to proceed.
Fine. Just make sure it's not a witch hunt. Make sure it's
Marcy, you're the first person Marcy, you're the first person to call other boards to let people know when they speak out and they speak in the wrong. So maybe you should filter yourself before you send letters. Anyway, I move the question. Yeah.
Okay. We're gonna do a roll call vote, so I'm gonna call you guys one by one. K? Brie? Aye. Sharon? Aye. Jerry? Aye. Shannon? Aye. Alisha? Aye. Marcy? Hey. Go for it.
Hi. And I will vote in favor of establishing a committee as well. Okay. So if we're going to establish this committee, I would now ask, is there anyone that would like to be appointed to the committee that would volunteer to I would. Should. Okay. Shannon happy as well. Sharon? Anyone else? Okay. If you guys are okay with it, then I would like to appoint Shannon and Sharon to the committee to investigate allegations of improper conduct, specifically in regards to Mercy Minor. And then you guys will conduct an investigation. And then with the findings of that, we will then establish likely another special meeting to move forward. K? I would I would like specifically to keep this out of our normal board meetings. Okay? Does everyone understand that? Okay. Understood. Okay.
We do have comments from the public on agenda items on there for tonight. So unless anyone has further discussion on the matter that we're talking about, I'd like to move forward with that, and then we'll we'll Can move forward. Ask one question?
Yeah. I don't obviously, not been involved in this in the past, but do we ever extend this committee beyond the board of ed? No. No?
And and just as an aside, our board does not have a policy on centering a member of our board. There is a suggested policy that is out there by Cave, but we don't have one. So we're following what Robert's rule says. It would be potentially a policy for us to consider, creating in the future, but we don't currently have one. So In the September. Yep. That's where it would go. Okay.
No. No. It it's only, from the board of education. And after the investigation occurs, as I said in my motion, a report comes back to the entire board with a recommendation on what action to take. And then whether or not, if there's a recommendation for a trial, then, there would be a trial, so to speak. A hearing about the alleged misconduct and the result of that hearing, the only, result of which can be Accenture. Right. There's no right that we have of, doing anything other than centering a member for, improper conduct.
And just so that we're clear, the act of centering basically just formally shows that the board does not support the actions and and speaking of that particular board member so as to protect our board from future litigation. From liability. Yep. Yep.
Okay. Does anyone have any further questions before we go to public comment? Nope. Okay. Louise Goodwin?
Yes. I have no understanding or I have not heard of this at all. This is the first I'm hearing of this. Is there any way we could, the public can receive copies of the letter, so called letters that were sent stating this information?
K. I believe that will be addressed, when we have the results of the investigation, which will be another, meeting that can be attended by the public. K. Bob, the I'm
I'm not done yet. Excuse me. So the public I mean, it doesn't make sense for some people to receive this letter and others not receiving it. So we don't know. A lot of the public doesn't know what's going on here. And that doesn't it's it's not a clear mean, that's not really fair for the public not to know what's going on. We if it's actually misconduct,
our actually broadcasting that and publishing that would further the misconduct. So we can't be responsible as a board for furthering alleged misconduct, which is why we have to have an investigation to determine if there was misconduct. And as a part, I would imagine of any part at that point of a trial, obviously, the alleged misconduct and probably as evidence, whatever was said in that email would then come in for consideration. But right now, if we did anything to further publish what we have believed is alleged misconduct, that would further make us susceptible to liability,
which is what we're trying to avoid. Correct. That's why we have to follow this process. Understood. K. Bob Hamburger? We can't hear you, just so you know.
Can you hear me now? Yeah. You're good. Okay. First, a lot has been said about impaneling this this panel, to do this investigation for the purpose of protecting the board of ed against potential litigation from, the superintendent. I would hope that the stated purpose of this panel is not protection, but investigation. That is the purpose of it is to uncover the truth. And whichever way that goes is what's gonna happen in terms of your liability. But to state at the outset that the purpose of the panel is to protect the board sounds prejudicial, and I would hope that you would correct that, that that's not really the the the the public face that you want this panel to have. Because it means that right from the outset, you have a bias, and there shouldn't be a bias. This should be as fair and impartial in an investigation as possible. So that's the first thing. The second is if this investigation uncovers evidence, then certainly you can point to or refer to the evidence because it's already been made public. Okay? Now I would agree, you can't publish it again because that would be a repetition and would represent potential further injury, if if the information is indeed injurious to the superintendent. But certainly saying to the public,
this was said in this forum on this date, allows the public to look up information that's already public publicly published. Again, you can't be operating this under some sort of cloak and dagger. You know? You have to obviously walk the fine line between not saying, injurious things again, but this is this is public information that you're talking about. So you can't really It's not public information.
It's not publicly been published. It's only been sent via email to a specific number of people and came to our attention because some of those people are related to people on the board of education, for example. So it has not been made public, which is why we're not now making it public. Well, I got the impre because it I see something. That has occurred during a meeting, which would require different, different responsibilities on our part. So it's not been a public statement or a or a statement during a meeting. It's not publicly published. Well And as I said in my motion, the committee has been established to investigate.
Yeah. Okay. Obviously. So the evidence has has to be uncovered. But Yeah. Let let let me just let me just back up and and correct. If some of this information is already in the public domain, then the laypeople have a right to to access that. If it has been privately communicated, that's entirely a different story. Okay. I think that's all I had. Thanks. Thank you. Christina Fraser? All set. Thank you. Yeah. Done with Goldrick? Nope. I'm all set. Thanks. Liz Lodzak?
I'm kinda speechless right here, right now. My personal feeling is that people have a right to free speech, and I'm I'm just afraid that this is a witch hunt. My opinion. Diane Grineer?
Wow. The this is sad. This this is a a sad situation. I I I guess that's basically what I have to say. Not not being in the public, not knowing all the details, it does sound a lot like some sort of a a witch hunt or a vendetta. I I'm looking forward to the investigation to to clear this and yeah. Just wow. This is very sad. I'm sorry that this is happening. Thank you. Kim Persson?
I I think I'm gonna say the same thing as Diane did. I it it this is awkward. I feel like maybe you guys could have just had a private conversation with Marcy explaining the 9,000 policies and maybe just, you know, had a whatever, spoke to her about this and and not carried it to this level. I'm hearing words, you know, trial investigation, and I don't know. It's to me, this seems very awkward. Thank you. Yeah. Ron?
Yeah. Joined a meeting to see what was going on with the board of finance and the board of education and everything. Just listening in as part of the public. And I'm gonna say like him and the other say, it's disturbing to hear what's going on in a meeting like this. I think more of this should have been conducted privately with the person on your board. The board of finance, the board of education, everything should be public knowledge anyway. We are paying for this as the people of this town. And right now, the from what I understand and have been understanding at some of the meetings I've attended, you folks are asking for one of the highest
percentages of the budget. And I just was curious of, you know, was there something about the budget that was gonna be on here? So, again, I mean, interesting to hear what the outcome is in this. Thank you.
Yep. Did I miss anyone there for public speak? Okay. So our next regular board meeting is this Wednesday, the eighth at 7PM. And then for those that are interested, the town meeting is on the ninth. There will be a board of education, information session for questions, half an hour prior to the town meeting at 06:30PM. No? Can't hear you. So
I believe we're we're speaking as well as the town speaking a half an hour before the town meeting. Is that correct? Thought it was gonna occur during the town meeting and not before the town meeting. That's what I had heard from the board of finance.
Okay. No one has corrected me otherwise. I thought that we were supposed to have a meeting a half an hour prior because the board of education is not actually part of the town meeting. So that was what we had decided to try to do for this year. So I I guess I'll have to clarify that, and, yes, we'll keep people posted. But we'll we'll touch base again on Wednesday night. Okay? Would anyone like to move to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second. 7729. Okay. Thank you.