Residents press board about Google migration, report redactions and staff departures at Washington Township meeting
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Public commenters asked whether the district was misled on its migration to Google, raised concerns about redacted ethics-report disclosures and alleged coercion or bullying that contributed to staff departures; the superintendent defended the Google migration as a cost-saving measure and attributed redactions to the conflict attorney.
During two public-comment periods residents pressed the board for answers about the district’s technology transition and the release and redaction of an ethics report.
Jerry Tarasci asked a series of precise questions: whether the superintendent’s goals included making Washington Township a Google district, whether switching to Google was presented as producing tens of thousands in savings, whether other vendors (for example PowerSchool) offered counter‑proposals, and whether technical integration issues with certain instructional tools or online textbooks had arisen. Superintendent Doctor Hibbs responded that Google certification was a stated goal, that the move produced substantial savings during a fiscal shortfall, and that the district typically meets with vendors and considers alternatives.
Resident April Renzetti raised concerns about a released ethics report that she said was poorly redacted, leaving visible names and medical details. The superintendent and chair said the conflict attorney performed the redactions and that administrators did not recheck the attorney's work; board leaders expressed concern about the redaction quality and said they would look into next steps to protect staff privacy.
Other public comments alleged that some staff left because of a hostile work environment and requested documentation or investigation; the board said allegations are serious and offered to consider evidence and legal review where appropriate.