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

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.