School board member unsuccessfully seeks information on incident

April 6, 2022  |  By Lisa Scagliotti

Despite an inquiry from at least one HUUSD School Board member about an assault on a student at Harwood Union High School in February, the superintendent maintains that it is inappropriate for the school board to discuss the matter.  

News of the February assault had been out in the community for several weeks prior to the March 23 school board meeting where the parent of a student who was assaulted in a bathroom on Feb. 1 addressed the board. The Valley Reporter published a story online and in print about the incident on March 11. 

Former Harwood science teacher and coach John Kerrigan has posted on social media and has written opinion pieces printed in the Valley Reporter and posted in the Waterbury Roundabout Opinion section about the incident as well. 

The March 1 Town Meeting Day election added several new school directors to the school board which met briefly on March 9 to organize and select a new chair and vice chair for the next year. 

Following that meeting, one of the new board members, Ashley Woods from Warren, emailed the board group and Superintendent Brigid Nease with a question on March 11.  

“As a new member of the board I am not quite sure on procedure here but, can we get an update on how the situation with the ‘bathroom attack’ has been handled so far? I would appreciate hearing from Brigid on this,” she wrote. 

Waterbury Roundabout obtained Woods’ message in a public information request recently. The newspaper requested and received email messages from the account belonging to school board member Jacqueline Kelleher who resigned from the board in March. Included in the school district’s reply to that request were emails that circulated among all board members during the time Kelleher’s account was active including several pertaining to the student assault case. 

Nease responded to Woods, copying the group address that reaches all board members. She included the written reply that the school principals sent to the Valley Reporter regarding the matter. The newspaper printed that reply in full. 

Nease added further explanation behind why the board would not receive any information on the matter. 

“Student discipline is one of the most highly regulated and confidential areas of school law. The board is really not permitted to informally know any more about the matter than the general public,” she wrote. “The administration has issued appropriate discipline, conducted required investigations, and developed whatever student plans are warranted. The board has a statutory judicial role and any premature knowledge of serious staff and student matters outside of the formal policy and steps outlined in Title 16 would put the district in jeopardy. Administration by law is not free to simply update the board on such situations nor is it the responsibility of the board to review each case as board members.”

Woods replied to Nease and the board group contact address. She thanked Nease for her quick response, but added three specific questions. 

“Our community holds the school board responsible for how serious situations are handled at school. Many in the community and this mom clearly think that not enough has been done. How does a school board member know how to answer questions without knowing what has been done?” she asked, acknowledging that confidentiality around identities would be necessary. “It seems the situation could be discussed without naming names?”

She also asked for clarification of what Nease meant by "putting the district in jeopardy" in her initial response. “Is the worry a lawsuit from a parent involved in this situation?”

Her third question: “This is a serious situation, scary for the community, especially those sending their kids to Harwood every day. I've had kids at Harwood since 2006 and this event stands out as alarming,” Woods wrote. “I'd like to know the section of title 16 that you are talking about where the law states that the board can't request an update from the principals and superintendent about a violent incident involving students, happening on a campus within our district. How can it be better that we have all heard hearsay but haven't heard the actual facts from the administration?”

In the final message in the exchange, Nease said she would not answer Woods’ additional questions, pointing out that it would risk violating state open meeting law. (State law forbids a quorum of an elected board from conducting business outside of a publicly warned meeting including discussions via email.) 

Nease said that she had an upcoming meeting scheduled with new board chair Rodgers and Vice Chair Kelley Hackett. “I will discuss the matter with them and offer some advice,” she said. “I would share that student discipline matters are an area that the board needs to pursue board training from both [the Vermont School Boards Association] and your school district attorney. It is complicated, highly confidential and regulated based on a number of laws and policies.”

Reached Wednesday, Woods said the email exchange was complete and that she has not had any further discussion on the topic with administrators. 

The full board received at least one additional email reacting to the school assault. The messages released by the school district included one from Waterbury parent Jeanne Atchinson. “I am positively shaking,” she wrote after learning of the incident. “You must do something about this! Perhaps none of you have ever faced an assault. No child should have to face this at school!”

Stressing that “bullies cannot be allowed to rule our schools,” she concluded saying “I am appalled and completely disappointed in this entire situation. I sure do hope that we see some serious changes over there immediately!”

Responding to a request for additional comment on the incident, Nease in an email to Waterbury Roundabout on Wednesday promised she would comment further next week ahead of the school board’s meeting scheduled for April 13. “I will be writing a board report that I will put out Monday with information that can be publicly shared about safety and the bathroom incident,” Nease said.

That report was posted on the school district website on Friday. Approximately four pages are devoted to the section titled “Behavior, Discipline and Harwood Union High School.” That section is published in full in Waterbury Roundabout’s Opinion section.

In it Nease is critical of public discussion that is uninformed and speculative. She explains why school officials must handle incidents such as the bathroom assault with confidentiality required by law. She also details roles of administrators and the school board regarding such matters and she stands by the school principals for their handling of the case.

“Our administrators have conducted thorough investigations. It is my professional opinion based on the information before me that they have followed Vermont and federal law, board policy, and best practices,” Nease writes. “They have implemented strict and necessary consequences. The fact of the matter is that the only known fact is the number of days any student is suspended because they obviously are not at school. Safety plans, schedule changes, monitoring, restorative practices, probation(s), counseling and outside agency support(s) are private information. Period. By law. So, no person can judge without that full scope of knowledge if what was issued is ‘enough’ or the ‘right punishment.’”