[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6276413,"mediaKeyId","2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a","parentId",2660355,"title","Parents, advocates press Central Bucks SD board after state report on Jamison Elementary restraints","audioSeconds",3749,"startMs",710000,"endMs",4459000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a&start=710&end=4459","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a/thumbnail_710000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6276413/Pennsylvania/Parents-advocates-press-Central-Bucks-SD-board-after-state-report-on-Jamison-Elementary-restraints","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6276413-a81ed2a4e02f3f2a7663f0836eead909/orig.mp4?Expires=1770953816&Signature=ULoaXTGFVPzPsdTjMcXEGmdaLkSm2Jh1vUHiEHkSMVSjCEKB86NH2FVvrTMYejviN6d~oKJ9s3mI-DyNOGveJlaEqSnC4p07QuDsypHUBGiEQ2uxYIYm5O90rSn0j82kWOH8OAIab9NOGovQMsEXwbjDv0HlYAJJufFMWT3sH-Sn48edgse4hvoSnFEl1wuhNaoruEAFL4LJUtn3sFFaYtRNQ-I2d-RiZLx87m45QkWw7YKO9Zei~QIMufeCMKMs~wDfOoYDjEYXOysFGXZoCNWI0wR1yfkT87XtPTdUENV9dPggbmrJ2e0QIIvppm5w7OrfNtYTUtoMcKAr1uvgHg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Central Bucks School District","date","2025-02-21T00:00:00Z","article","The Central Bucks School District Board of School Directors faced sustained public pressure Feb. 20 after commenters and family members said a Pennsylvania Department of Education review found students at Jamison Elementary were improperly restrained and otherwise mistreated.

The claims prompted repeated questions about when and how the district reported the incidents to ChildLine and why parents say they were not told earlier. Joanna Holton, a mother who identified herself as the parent of a kindergarten student at Jamison, told the board the state investigation found her son had been restrained and that his behavior support plan was not followed. “My son matters. He deserves to go to school and be safe,” Holton said.

The board had met in executive session multiple times in February “to consult with counsel regarding the independent investigation of alleged abuse at Jamison Elementary,” board president Irma Gibson said during opening announcements. Gibson said the board met Feb. 10, Feb. 19 and again immediately before the Feb. 20 meeting for that purpose.

Why it matters: parents, disability advocates and some board members said the allegations raise questions about mandatory reporting, personnel decisions and whether administrative actions protected students. Speakers asked the board to place staff on leave, to re-evaluate the district’s reporting practices and to consider staff discipline or resignations if officials had failed to report or acted to conceal abuse.

What the board and officials said: Dr. Yanni, the district superintendent, characterized a staff memo circulated to the board as a quick brainstorm of possible facility‑consolidation options on a separate agenda item when he spoke earlier in the meeting. Regarding the Jamison matter specifically, board leaders said they had sought legal advice and received an independent investigation; they did not announce personnel actions at the meeting. Board solicitor Mr. D'Ascio told the board during a policy discussion that “the law is clear, corporal punishment is not permitted.”

Public testimony and concerns: Parents and residents gave detailed allegations during the meeting’s public‑comment period. Shannon Harris, a parent, asked why a staff member who is the subject of a state report had not been removed and asked whether the district was continuing to pay any person now on leave: “If the state report has come out and there is evidence of child abuse, why hasn't this Board taken action to remove her from the district?” Harris said. Several other speakers asked similar questions about reporting timelines, contact with parents, and whether the district had used internal reports to minimize or omit allegations when it communicated with outside agencies.

Procedural and legal issues raised: Speakers cited a district ChildLine report filed Nov. 20 and alleged discrepancies between what HR records, the district’s internal report, and the Pennsylvania Department of Education found. Multiple public commenters asked whether district administrators had used district resources to challenge or rebut the PDE findings. Commenters repeatedly called on the superintendent, certain administrators and board members to resign or be placed on administrative leave until investigations were complete.

Board action during the meeting: The board did not vote on personnel actions tied to the Jamison matter at the Feb. 20 meeting. The board did vote on two policy items during the policy block: items 11b and 11c (renumbering and nondiscrimination policy revisions) passed on a roll call 8–1 amid questions from board member Mr. Pepper about discipline language and mandatory reporting; Mr. Pepper said he would vote no until he had additional clarity. The board also held votes elsewhere on the agenda (finance, operations, human resources leaves) but took no formal new personnel actions tied explicitly to the Jamison allegations at this meeting.

What parents want next: Speakers asked for clearer public reporting about the district’s handling of mandatory reporting and for immediate staff actions (paid leave or removal) tied to the classroom named in the state report. Several called for external criminal or county‑level review when they said local law enforcement had not contacted parents despite a ChildLine filing. The board did not announce any additional external referrals during the meeting.

Context and background: Multiple speakers referenced a Department of Education review and a whistleblower complaint submitted to district officials in November. Board materials and minutes for recent executive sessions, as announced at the meeting, list “consulting with counsel and the independent investigator regarding the allegations of alleged abuse at Jamison Elementary” as the reason for the closed meetings.

Next steps noted at the meeting: Board leadership said the board would continue to consult with counsel and the independent investigator; no timetable for public updates or personnel decisions was provided at the Feb. 20 session.

Ending: Parents and community members left the meeting urging immediate change and more transparency; board members said they were continuing legal consultation and review but did not announce personnel actions at the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","CBSD School Board Meeting - February 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Central Bucks School District Board of School Directors faced sustained public pressure Feb. 20 after commenters and family members said a Pennsylvania Department of Education review found students at Jamison Elementary were improperly restrained and otherwise mistreated.","taxTitle","Central Bucks SD, School Districts, Pennsylvania","taxId",12923,"location","Pennsylvania","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6276403,"Votes at a glance: Central Bucks SD board approves routine minutes, finance, operations and personnel items; policy changes pass 8–1",3225,2472000,5697000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a&start=2472&end=5697","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a/thumbnail_2472000.jpg","/articles/6276403/Pennsylvania/Votes-at-a-glance-Central-Bucks-SD-board-approves-routine-minutes-finance-operations-and-personnel-items-policy-changes-pass-81","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6276403-a5f6d9180b796b35ad36d28e7f526cf5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770953816&Signature=Lq-w4xzcDPtjdto9GvaRVdC0S6ToMJdmETlTLTNaYp6NJsmuFrbSX2nuTPQPYBKhWYeNEBfg3oZtUMxfAZKEb-wsaAX0fLnZfI2FSIJCkqt0kEoYI2hTX6sAvbcSbJ5MT5Xh~kevmtKR~iK6A-dglUUV~Ly1HWIWk21ZT37AT--yf0B~DiSZtzdLQxdcL7B82EgbyS3ek~IQJQbM7uDWtzOXhmIQbiFb1h9uqv8Ckx4jqauf3BcTY7HtXglSPOSWdzaQz88jUvFwQpQof2hGL2SK6bRsXEpz2a-I~5VzKnVLHUiC88ftlUvxocCjsuJYQMPIN1YiEiR6XY5iWhuIRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Central Bucks School District Board of School Directors on Feb. 20 took a series of routine approvals across minutes, finance, operations, special education, student services, field trips and human resources. Most motions passed unanimously; a few drew objections during public comment and from board members.

Votes and outcomes (selected items recorded on the Feb. 20 agenda):

- Approval of board minutes (Jan. 16 and special meeting Feb. 6): both motions passed 9–0.

- Finance items (Agenda item 7, items 7a–7o): motion to approve items 7a–7o passed 9–0.

- Operations items (Agenda item 8, items 8b–8m): approved 9–0.

- Special education items (Agenda item 9, items 9b–9e): approved 9–0.

- Student services (Agenda item 10, items 10b–10c): approved 9–0.

- Policy items (Agenda item 11, items 11b–11c): approved 8–1 after discussion; Mr. Pepper cast the lone no vote seeking additional clarity on discipline language and mandatory reporting.

- Field trips (Agenda item 12, items 12b–12i): approved 9–0.

- Human resources (Agenda item 13): the board split approvals. Items 13b and 13d–13h were approved in a motion that carried 8–0 with one abstention (Ms. Gibson abstained). A separate motion for item 13c (a leave‑of‑absence request list) passed 7–2 after public questions; several board members had voiced procedural concerns about confidentiality and the mechanics of approving grouped leaves.

- Action items 14b–14c: approved 9–0.

Why it matters: The votes moved forward capital planning, staffing and policy housekeeping the board had on its consent and action agendas. Several votes — especially on human resources leaves and the policy language tied to discipline — drew public commentary and board questions about confidentiality, federal leave law and mandatory reporting procedures.

Clarifying details and process notes: Board members and the district solicitor noted that some leaves of absence are effectuated under federal law (for example, FMLA) and that failing to approve a leave could create legal exposure. The board’s HR staff said the grouped leaves list omits names to protect personal information and that some items are affirmations of leaves already in effect. During the policy block, Mr. Pepper questioned whether any district policy permitted corporal punishment; the solicitor replied that corporal punishment is not permitted under law.

Ending: With most motions approved, the board closed its agenda items and moved on to a lengthy public comment period that focused primarily on allegations connected to Jamison Elementary. The board set its next meeting for March 20.","At the Feb. 20 meeting the board approved minutes, multiple finance and operations items, several personnel leaves and policy changes; most motions passed unanimously or nearly so, though some human resources leave approvals drew objection and one set of policy revisions passed 8–1.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6276408,"Board considers converting existing buildings to reduce high‑school addition costs; timing and redistricting cited as hurdles",2786,3100000,5886000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a&start=3100&end=5886","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2660355-f4461747bf489814dca2c2d2871d966a/thumbnail_3100000.jpg","/articles/6276408/Pennsylvania/Board-considers-converting-existing-buildings-to-reduce-highschool-addition-costs-timing-and-redistricting-cited-as-hurdles","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6276408-27c4ac991dc53173fcef4d1ef8550057/orig.mp4?Expires=1770953816&Signature=MSCC8JNuuYWYlMGE36Tzw8l5SOBePJHXqzxSjdDbGtzVUdKJbrDfTFn9iCruF-1GKZu2Zt1j~3E7M6S7CJuizR5AzwTdcT9NkhKuXjLwglfFuPhxW46XEoRouK2uMzqB4HlBHHHCY1~KHkO-H22pbrV2L-25oeoF42kaePCtDn5fh1Nbb3YCbHkkwOX9Y8hLyO6tdJGDJTCQo2QYxvABsHIBCRKm252i9OMsDyKTy3~7eyfak6snGh8tDz7hGwWj3bvQKxgUKAOrH~dwnBDmFuTWqTHYsctKHbixKQcl5qEr3m-iKPXqnTnHbSe3b4w1G03UcaR6~Tu-Xlc20NKEog__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Central Bucks School District board discussed an alternative proposal Feb. 20 that would use existing buildings to accommodate ninth‑grade realignment instead of building multi‑million‑dollar additions at the three high schools.

Board member Mr. Kimikata framed the idea as a cost‑saving and space‑efficiency exercise. He said the district is planning several capital projects, including high school realignment estimated at $45 million–$50 million for additions, an “update the 8” elementary project estimated at $240 million and a 5.6‑million dollar addition at Mill Creek. Kimikata said the district’s combined functional capacity is about 22,000 students; applying the district’s 85% utilization target yields roughly 19,000 functional slots while current enrollment is just under 17,000 — a buffer of about 2,000 seats on paper.

Kimikata’s proposal would convert Tohicken to a high school and Groveland — the district’s largest elementary school and adjacent to Tohicken — to a middle school, shifting grade patterns so ninth graders could be accommodated without building additions at the three high schools. He said on paper the math “seems to work” and estimated potential savings compared with adding new high‑school wings.

Why it matters: the proposal could reduce near‑term capital outlays and interest costs tied to bond financings, but it would require district‑wide redistricting, alterations to transportation routes and significant building scans and retrofits. Board members said the proposal also could push the realignment timeline back by roughly two years and could require temporarily increasing elementary class sizes during the transition.

District response and next steps: Dr. Yanni described the district’s note on the idea as a quick brainstorm and said a comprehensive evaluation would require outside consultants — a demographer, transportation consultant and facilities engineers — to assess building retrofits, parity among high schools and bus‑route impacts. He cautioned that the district does not have in‑house capacity to complete that study quickly and warned the study itself might not produce a viable path, in which case the district would have lost time and delayed needed projects.

Board concerns: Several board members voiced concerns. Miss Foley and others warned that wholesale redistricting is contentious and disruptive to families; Miss Sandanowicz and others focused on the operational difficulty of moving many students, particularly in the district’s more densely populated southern feeder patterns. Board members also noted that converting Groveland would require attention to gym size, locker rooms, toilet rooms, field access and course‑specific space such as family and consumer science and labs.

Outcome: After discussion the board indicated it did not want to move the proposal into a committee study to engage consultants. Several members praised the idea as useful thinking but said the timing, operational complexity and potential community disruption outweighed the possible savings. No formal vote to pursue the conversion study was taken at the Feb. 20 meeting.

Ending: Board members agreed the district must address aging infrastructure and that alternatives should be considered, but they declined to initiate consultant work on the conversion option at this time. Several members emphasized the need to preserve district property and flexibility for future demographic shifts.","Board members discussed a proposal to convert existing district buildings (Tohicken to a high school, Groveland to a middle school) as an alternative to multimillion‑dollar high‑school additions; the idea could reduce construction costs but would likely delay realignment and require district‑wide redistricting studies.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Parents, advocates press Central Bucks SD board after state report on Jamison Elementary restraints

Votes at a glance: Central Bucks SD board approves routine minutes, finance, operations and personnel items; policy changes pass 8–1

Board considers converting existing buildings to reduce high‑school addition costs; timing and redistricting cited as hurdles