Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Ethics Political Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters accuse board member Jason Sailor of legal action and partisan communications; board president disavows district‑level involvement
Summary
Two public speakers at the Perkiomen Valley board meeting accused board member Jason Sailor of joining or promoting a lawsuit they said seeks to remove LGBT protections and of sending political emails claiming to represent the board; the board president said the board did not authorize those communications.
Two residents used the Perkiomen Valley School District public‑comment period April 7 to raise allegations about board member Jason Sailor’s outside political activity and its local effects.
Valerie Drury (Skippack Township) criticized social‑media postings she attributed to Jason Sailor’s campaign page, and she said statements claiming that two named individuals had been “removed from the ballot” were inaccurate. She told the board those claims were “big statements and accusations with 0 backup” and argued the named candidates “didn't follow the law.”
Later in the public‑comment portion, Judy Lofton (Skippack) said Mr. Sailor is listed as a petitioner in a lawsuit filed against the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission and alleged the lawsuit seeks to remove protections for the LGBT community. Lofton read from the Human Relations Act while criticizing those actions and said the lawsuit and related communications have “stoked hate in our community” and led to an out‑of‑district response and a bomb threat that required school building evacuations. She also said Mr. Sailor’s campaign was sending emails under the name “PV Scribe Board” and said the board did not authorize those communications.
Board President Ms. White addressed the matter during her president’s report, saying the board of nine directors “did not approve or direct these communications” and that the board and district were not responsible for the messages that have appeared in some community inboxes.
The board did not take any formal personnel or ethics action at the April 7 meeting. The claims made during public comment were attributed in the meeting to the speakers who raised them. The board did not verify or adjudicate the legal claims during the session; no staff‑led investigation or formal referral was recorded on the April 7 minutes.
