Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters press board on chaperone pay, student phones and school safety after a weapon report
Summary
Public comment focused on chaperone stipends and staffing, enforcement of a locker/phone policy, and a reported weapon in a school during a polling event; commenters also criticized an earlier board member remark about New York State law and LGBTQ people.
Multiple members of the Connetquot community used the public‑comment period to press the board on several recurring issues: chaperone pay and staffing for student events, enforcement of the phones‑in‑lockers policy, and a reported safety breach at a school that coincided with an election.
Several commenters said teachers are reluctant to chaperone because stipends are low and are paid 'per event' rather than hourly; one commenter urged negotiators to revisit stipend language during contract talks and suggested adding a budget line to fund chaperone pay. Board members and public speakers debated whether the issue is fiscal (stipend amounts) or a lack of staff interest and trust in the board; one commenter urged the board to rebuild trust so staff will volunteer.
In a separate public comment, Gina Carter (identified as a district employee and parent) said on election day she observed an individual enter a school gym with a 46‑inch knife strapped to his belt while a budget vote was underway and asked whether the district will continue to host polling in school buildings. Board members acknowledged the report, said they contacted the regional election official, and that the official apologized and would address the issue with poll site leadership.
Another commenter objected to remarks made by a board member at an Oct. 28 meeting characterizing New York State law as 'immoral' and said those comments were offensive to LGBTQ community members; the commenter cited statements of religious leaders who support inclusion and suggested a board member who finds state law immoral could resign.
Board responses ranged from an apology and acknowledgement to commitments to follow up: administrators were asked to examine contractual and budgetary options for chaperoning, and security and administration said they would follow up on the weapon report with election officials. No formal policy changes were adopted at the meeting.
