Multiple public commenters urge independent forensic audit; employee alleges uninvestigated abuse in special-education classroom

Several members of the public used the Christina School District board’s Aug. 12 meeting to press the board for two separate actions: an independent forensic financial audit and a thorough investigation of alleged abuse in a special-education classroom. Kane Denison Gomez, introducing himself as a member of the public, urged the board to “order an independent forensic, financial audit and assessment” to restore community trust ahead of any future referendum.

The call for a forensic audit was presented by Gomez as a way “to show the public, here's where every dollar went,” and to demonstrate that the district is “not afraid of scrutiny.” He tied the audit to the district’s ability to win future referenda by removing public doubt.

The meeting also included a sustained public allegation from a district employee, Betty Millar, who said she had filed six formal allegations of abuse, including incidents involving students who are 18. “I have filed 6 formal allegations of abuse,” Millar said, and she told the board that the district had not investigated her complaints. She said the district’s written response sent her a policy that “does not define emotional or verbal abuse, contains no requirement to interview witnesses, and offers no protection for students who cannot speak for themselves.”

Millar said she was told the district was preparing for mediation based on an assertion that she had agreed to mediate; she said she never agreed to mediation with someone she accused of abusing students. She also described what she characterized as retaliation for reporting, saying she was “written up” and removed from the classroom only after repeated filings rather than to protect students.

Eileen Reynolds, who said she was speaking about students who live in district-run dormitory situations, told the board she was not accusing the district of current abuse but asked that the district proactively protect students who are “a cultural and a linguistic minority” and who “are not allowed to have phones.” She described an overnight trip she believed lacked appropriate supervision and said dormitory arrangements historically have been associated with safety concerns.

Discussion vs. formal action: these were public-comment appeals. The board did not vote on ordering an independent audit nor did it announce an immediate investigation in response to the allegations during the meeting. The board president cut Millar’s time short at the three-minute public-comment limit; Millar asked for an additional 30 seconds and said the board’s enforcement of the time limit signaled a priority of “process” over student protection.

The public commenters asked the board to take specific next steps—an independent forensic audit and a formal investigation of the alleged abuse—but the meeting record shows no board motion or vote to initiate either. The transcript indicates the board encouraged members of the public to submit questions and that follow-up may come through usual administrative channels, but no direction or assignment to staff to open a formal investigation was announced on the record at the Aug. 12 meeting.

The board did not provide details in the meeting about any existing investigative steps tied to Millar’s allegations; Millar said she had named a witness in her final report and said she was removed from the classroom only after her third set of allegations and another staff member identified a witness.

Ending: The district did not announce actions at the meeting to address the two requests. Members of the public and the board may pursue follow-up through written submissions or by requesting that the board place an item on a future agenda for formal consideration.