Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chair rebukes member’s social‑media post after executive session; member objects to sharing of constituent email
Summary
The chair of the Cumberland School Committee rebuked a member’s social‑media post about executive‑session business as inaccurate and said the post misrepresented what the committee discussed; the member objected that the chair disclosed a personal constituent email during the meeting.
The chair of the Cumberland School Committee on Aug. 14 criticized a social‑media post by committee member Jason Dean as “inaccurate, misleading, and” lacking “the level of care which members should approach this role,” and the meeting included an objection from Dean that the chair read the contents of a personal email to a constituent into the public record.
Why it matters: The exchange raises questions about internal committee communications and how executive‑session information and constituent correspondence are handled during public meetings.
What the chair said
The chair opened the report out of executive session by addressing a social‑media post by Jason Dean. The chair said the post falsely stated that litigation titled Ross v. Town of Cumberland et al. had been on the executive‑session agenda and that the committee had discussed that litigation; the chair said both assertions were “entirely false and inaccurate.” The chair also said Dean had attributed an allegation of retaliation to a parent; the chair said the parent had not made such an allegation and that Dean had used the word “retaliation” previously without evidence.
Direct quote from the chair: “Overall, the post was inaccurate, misleading, and lacked the level of care which members should approach this role.”
Dean’s response and the email dispute
After the chair’s remarks, Mr. Dean objected, saying the chair had shared the contents of a personal email between him and a constituent in the public meeting without his permission. Dean said, “The chair just shared the contents of a personal email between myself and a constituent in a public meeting without my permission. I don't think that's allowed.”
A committee member asked whether Dean was “allowed to share my personal email with the constituent to the public?” and the chair responded that the committee would look into the matter.
Executive-session votes reported
The committee reported that, in executive session, it voted to deny a student appeal and to uphold the superintendent’s decision; the chair reported that vote as passing 6–0. At the end of the public meeting the committee then voted 4–2 to seal the minutes of that executive session; the meeting record shows Mr. Dean and Mr. Bacon voted against sealing.
What the record shows
- Executive-session appeal decision: reported 6–0 to deny the appeal and uphold the superintendent’s decision (details withheld per statute).
- Motion to seal executive-session minutes: motion by Ms. Smith, second by Ms. Shea; outcome approved 4–2 (Mr. Dean and Mr. Bacon recorded in the negative).
Next steps
The chair said the committee would look into the question of whether personal correspondence had been shared in a manner inconsistent with open‑meetings rules. No additional formal action on that question was recorded in the meeting.
Provenance: discussion begins with the report‑out of executive session at transcript time 129.975 and continues through the sealing motion recorded at 307.715.
