Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Washington County board to act after vice president’s disputed social‑media posts
Summary
Several public commenters urged the Washington County Board of Education this week to clarify whether it will censure or remove Vice President Michael Ghesford over allegedly anti‑Muslim Facebook posts; the board acknowledged the concern but took no disciplinary action at the meeting.
Public commenters pressed the Washington County Board of Education on Nov. 18 to say whether it will formally censure or seek removal of Vice President Michael Ghesford over social‑media posts that critics called bigoted.
Dave Williams, a member of the public, said he called at the prior meeting for Ghesford’s resignation and asked each board member to state their position on the posts. “Where do the rest of you stand?” Williams asked, urging the board to consider censure, removal from the vice‑president role or a petition to the State Board of Education.
Other speakers offered a range of views. Ethan Loewen said he did not support the Facebook posts but defended Ghesford’s longer response at the prior meeting and framed the dispute as part of a broader debate over values and how schools address equity and identity. Jody Bowers, a WCPS building representative, criticized the board’s handling of public comment and urged consistent enforcement of the district’s public‑comment policy.
Board members responded that they value public input and civility. Several thanked speakers for appearing; board leadership reiterated that the views of one member do not represent the board’s official positions and emphasized the district’s focus on providing a “safe, respectful, and welcoming learning environment.” No motion to censure or remove Ghesford was introduced at the meeting.
The exchange followed an online petition calling for Ghesford’s resignation that remained active after the meeting. The board’s next scheduled public meeting will provide additional opportunities for public comment and response.
The board’s statements and the public petitions reported to the board were the only formal record of the controversy at this session; the board did not take disciplinary action during the meeting.
