Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Board Conduct topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rutland resident tells school committee members used 'we' in ways he says intimidated public

Wachusett Regional School Committee · November 4, 2024
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

At a public hearing, Rutland resident and former WRSD CPAC officer Matt Lavoie said members of the Wachusett Regional School Committee used collective language ('we'/'us') during an Oct. 21 presentation, which he said implied unified committee positions and violated bylaws; the committee did not take formal action.

Matt Lavoie, a Rutland resident and former officer of the district CPAC, told the Wachusett Regional School Committee during the meeting’s public hearing that he was "very concerned" after watching the committee’s Oct. 21 meeting. He said multiple members used collective language that suggested they were speaking for the committee.

"By doing this, the members violated WRSDSC bylaws and policies that prohibit speaking on behalf of the committee and intimidating individuals of the public from speaking," Lavoie said, adding that Chair Runstrom and members Haber and Lorway had used phrases such as "we" or "I hope you guys give us the benefit...that when you are speaking, we are listening." He said that wording can come across to community members as "demeaning and dismissive" and could intimidate speakers.

The committee chair thanked Lavoie for his comment; the transcript records no formal response, investigation or motion arising directly from the allegation during the meeting. No committee member offered a denial or explanation on the record in response to Lavoie’s claims.

Why it matters: A complaint that committee members present individual views as institutional positions touches on meeting procedure and public trust. The committee’s rules are intended to preserve the difference between individual comments and official committee action.

What’s next: The transcript shows no formal follow-up or referral; members continued with the published agenda.