Russell Davis, a resident, used the meeting’s public-comment period to press the Susquehanna Township School District board on academic outcomes and resource choices. “Your number 1 goal is to educate the kids, and we missed the mark,” Davis told the board, saying two schools are in the bottom 15% of the state and asking why a reported $3,000,000 state grant appears to be used to shore up the district’s budget rather than to hire teachers.

A student, Abeniz Nbusay, spoke about athletics and personnel decisions, calling the “sudden firing of coach Dom and coach Carlin” unfair and saying it contradicted comments made at a recent banquet. Nbusay also told the board he had evidence that a coach used a uniform during an indoor season he said would violate PIAA rules.

At least one resident, Willie Harmon, raised procedural concerns and an ethics issue: he asked whether a motion that was seconded could be rescinded under Robert’s Rules of Order and urged the board to adopt a code of ethics after saying “we may have a case of nepotism.” Harmon recommended that the board put anti-nepotism or ethics language on a future agenda.

Board members responded to public commenters by emphasizing due process in hiring and the district’s equal-opportunity employment stance. One board member said, “Susquehanna Township is an equal opportunity employer and all applicants are welcome to apply,” and urged residents to continue holding the board accountable.

The board did not adopt new ethics language at the meeting; members agreed to consider concerns and research procedural questions raised about motions. The public comment period was followed by committee and administrative reports and was not used as an occasion for immediate board action on the allegations cited by speakers.

What’s next: The speakers asked for follow-up and for specific items (ethics code, grant accounting) to be placed on future agendas or researched by staff.