Barrington residents sharply divided over teacher’s social media posts; students, parents and staff urge both accountability and due process

Dozens of residents, students, staff and parents spoke during an extended public‑comment period at the Barrington School Committee meeting, offering sharply divided views after the district placed a teacher on administrative leave over public social‑media posts about the killing of a national political figure.

Naya Mehtic, a teacher at Barrington High School and co‑president of NEA Barrington, told the committee the union had asked the colleague to step aside and said the union “is unequivocally condemn[ing] violence in all its form.” She said the union had initiated a leadership transition during the leave.

Many parents and students said the posts were a betrayal of trust. “This is not free speech. This is the glorification of violence,” parent Molly Magnuson told the committee. Student Faith Van Ness said she “truly felt scared” after seeing the video and described classroom experiences she said showed political bias.

Other speakers defended the teacher’s classroom record and cautioned against punishing off‑duty speech. Jeff Turner, a paid coach at the high school, said placing the teacher on paid administrative leave “is a defamatory act” that chills expression. Mary King Talbot, a public‑relations professional and parent, said the teacher had been a positive influence and suggested better social‑media policy rather than termination.

Several students and parents raised immediate educational concerns: who will teach AP World and other advanced classes while the teacher is on leave, and whether the teacher’s grading would be biased if he returns. One parent asked whether parking‑lot camera footage relevant to the incident was functioning; the school resource officer had been alerted, commenters said.

Religious and civic leaders also spoke. Rabbi Howard Balsal (Rabbi Howard Balsal) said he had not seen the video but urged perspective and warned against terminating teachers solely for political views. Other speakers called for accountability and for the district to protect all students from messages that dehumanize groups.

The committee reminded attendees that public‑comment rules prohibit identifying personnel during public remarks and said it would not answer questions about the investigation during the meeting. No disciplinary actions were taken at the meeting; the committee appointed an outside investigator to review the personnel matter.

Speakers reflected a range of views: calls for immediate termination, requests for due process and an investigation, student testimony about classroom bias, and concern about short‑term impacts on instruction for advanced courses. The committee asked the superintendent to coordinate next steps and to ensure continuity of instruction while the investigation proceeds.