Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press board on budget, new high school, privacy and discipline policies during heated public comment
Summary
Public comment at the April 24 meeting featured lengthy, at times confrontational remarks: residents criticized the proposed budget and planned high school project, alleged improper record-handling and privacy violations, raised concerns about discipline and DEI-related guidance, and warned of potential legal action.
More than an hour of public comment at the April 24 Pennsbury School District meeting focused on the proposed budget and capital plans, allegations about board conduct, claims of improper disclosure of a student's schedule and broader objections to federal discipline guidance and DEI-related programming.
Andrew Dell, who identified himself as a candidate for school board, told trustees he often receives no answers to questions he raises at meetings and criticized what he called personal attacks on candidates. "I've been waiting for answers on many things," Dell said during his five-minute comment.
Several speakers made sharper allegations about district financial management and planning for a proposed new high school. Robert Abrams questioned budget comparisons and accused administration of "double dipping" on medical and transportation costs while urging the board to table the budget until numbers were clarified. Multiple speakers raised concerns about wetlands, traffic studies and roof repairs related to the new high school plan and existing building maintenance.
One public commenter, Tim Daly, told the board the district "violated my daughter's privacy rights" and said he had contacted counsel; he asked for an affidavit that certain records had been destroyed and said he intends to pursue legal remedies. The district did not provide a response to that allegation during the public comment period; the board's presiding officer noted that the board would listen and may respond later or direct administration to follow up.
Speakers also criticized a recent federal executive order described by one commenter as discouraging the collection and analysis of disciplinary data tied to race; Sharon Moon urged the board to continue examining disciplinary data and opposed abandoning restorative and behavior‑support programs.
Comments included allegations and strong personal attacks directed at trustees and staff; several board members and attendees later urged civility. The board closed public comment at 10:08 p.m. and moved on to the business portion of the meeting, where the consent agenda and the budget advertisement were approved.
