Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Special Education topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Garfield Public School District superintendent recommends assistant special-education supervisor; board approves via consent agenda

Garfield Public School District Board of Trustees · October 28, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Superintendent Dr. Tomko recommended a candidate for assistant supervisor of special education and said the district will fill retirement-driven vacancies; the board approved the personnel recommendation as part of the consent agenda after a brief recusal question from a member.

The Garfield Public School District Board of Trustees heard a staffing update and approved a personnel recommendation for an assistant supervisor of special education as part of its consent agenda.

Superintendent Dr. Tomko told trustees the district is preparing hires to fill recent retirements and is working on a budget projection and new programs. "We are, in the midst of, moving along, getting ready for the general meeting...so, we're looking to make some, some hires," he said, adding the district would present a projection of budgeted monies to the board in the coming weeks.

During questions, Board Member Terry asked whether the assistant supervisor post was newly created; Dr. Tomko responded that it was not, saying it has existed "20 something years." Terry asked whether the position had been posted and whether interviews were held; Dr. Tomko said the position was posted in the district and that interviews had taken place. "The individual on the agenda is my recommendation," Dr. Tomko said.

Terry then disclosed a familial relationship to the candidate (which he described as a "second cousin once removed") and asked whether he needed to recuse himself. The board's advisory opinion, recorded in the meeting, stated that the disclosed relationship did not constitute a violation that would require recusal.

The personnel recommendation was approved as part of a broader consent agenda vote. The board recorded the consent vote by roll call; one member (Mister Ramos) was noted absent.

The board did not disclose the candidate's name or the hire's effective date during the public portions of the meeting.