Parents and students praise Haven Ultimate, urge auditorium fixes and clearer cellphone policy; lawyer raises safety and guidance-staff complaints

Speakers during the audience-recognition portion of the Wallingford-Swarthmore School District meeting praised the district’s Haven Ultimate program, asked the board to address auditorium maintenance ahead of a February PMEA district band festival, raised questions about how the district will measure the new cellphone policy’s effectiveness, and reported serious allegations about guidance-department handling of student incidents.

Billy Hodges, of Princeton Avenue (identified as a resident at the meeting), told the board that Haven Ultimate brings “respect communication and conflict resolution,” and described the program’s longevity and participation. “Our peak years have had close to 100 students playing, in the seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth grades,” Hodges said, and urged the district to clarify whether Ultimate is a club or sport under district policy. Mary Lynch of Bryn Mawr Avenue added that the program has existed for 12 years and thanked administrators and athletic directors for providing field and gym space when needed.

Students and parents also praised the district’s decision to recognize Haven Ultimate. “I just really appreciate everyone, like, recognizing Ultimate today,” said Juliet Lloyd, who identified herself as a junior from Cooper Drive. Grace Lloyd, a parent, thanked the board for a prompt response to parent concerns after the district agreed to address a list of auditorium issues.

Several parents spoke about Strath Haven High School’s George Slick Auditorium in the context of the district hosting the PMEA District 12 band festival in February. Erin Farsow, of Fairfield Drive, urged the district to address lighting, air conditioning, squeaky doors and “the birds chirping up in the rafters” to make the auditorium more hospitable for hundreds of visiting student musicians, teachers and administrators.

On cellphone policy, parent Mary Anne Giselle (620 Veil Avenue) said she appreciated the board’s work on the policy but sought specifics on how the district will measure success. “I was looking in the policy, and it said there's nothing very specific about what it says. It just says regular reviews and updates will be conducted to ensure the policy remains effective and relevant, and I don't know what that means,” Giselle said. She asked whether teachers will use the same pocket or shelving approach consistently and what metrics the district will use.

A separate and lengthy public comment raised allegations about the district’s guidance staff and the handling of student safety incidents. Lloyd Long, who identified himself as a lawyer representing a local family that asked to remain anonymous, described a sequence of events he said involved an anonymous threatening text, an investigation and subsequent interactions with members of the guidance department. Long said the family had been told that a student received an “inappropriate text” and that school staff returned the child to class before notifying police or the parents; he described the text as an anonymous threat of assault and said his clients were upset by how the situation was handled.

Long also recounted a later incident in which a student had a mental-health episode at school. He said guidance staff later pulled the child from class, and that the parents were told conflicting information; he alleged members of the guidance department accused the family of abuse during communications about the episode. “The following people and organizations do not believe my clients are child abusers … The Nether Providence Police Department, Delaware County CYS, their child's pediatrician, psychiatrist, therapist … all know that my clients try their best and never raise a hand to any of their children,” Long said. He also said he placed the district on written notice and warned of possible higher damages if similar actions recur.

Another speaker, Dean Dennis of Emerald Lane, described his own concerns about his son’s experience and criticized a July 29 letter he characterized as a “demand” for a meeting with a short timeline. He urged the superintendent to intervene and added broader concerns about engagement and transparency.

Board members did not take action during public comment. Several speakers said they had already communicated with Superintendent Doctor Johnston and received written responses or an action plan in reply; parents thanked district staff for prompt follow-up on auditorium concerns. The allegations about guidance staff were presented as claims by the speakers; the board did not announce any specific disciplinary or investigatory action on the record at the time of the meeting.

Why it matters: Parents’ requests about auditorium repairs and event readiness affect hundreds of student musicians and the district’s capacity to host a regional festival. Questions about cellphone-policy measurement reflect a broader state and national discussion about device limits and classroom management. Allegations about guidance-department conduct raise potential legal and student-safety concerns and, as speakers noted, may prompt further district review or investigation.

What’s next: Several parents said district staff have already reached out with follow-up plans for auditorium repairs. Speakers who raised safety concerns said they had sought district action previously and indicated they would pursue formal remedies. The board moved on to other agenda items after public comment.