Citizen Portal
Sign In

Woodland Hills parents and commenters press board over unexplained Capital Projects spending and Sunshine Act doubts

Woodland Hills School District Board of Education · January 15, 2026
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

Public commenters at Woodland Hills School District raised allegations of missing accounting in the Capital Projects fund, challenged a solicitor invoice and urged the board to explain an absent superintendent and district credit-card purchases.

Public commenters at a Woodland Hills School District board meeting on Jan. 16 raised questions about financial transparency and compliance with Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act, calling on the board to provide clearer accounting for district spending and to explain the prolonged absence of the superintendent.

Timothy Reed told the board the district’s fund report shows $284,000 withdrawn from the Capital Projects 2025 fund in October and that more than $900,000 was withdrawn from that fund between August and October without a public accounting of where the money went. “It is unacceptable that so much money can be spent with no public visibility,” Reed said, and he challenged the board’s handling of a solicitor invoice he said billed Woodland Hills for work performed for another district.

A separate public commenter identified as Sarah criticized near-term P-card purchases and questioned an almost $600 charge tied to the athletic department’s holiday decorations. “Everyone is using their P-cards as if they have their own personal credit cards,” she said, urging the board to demand receipts and tighter parameters for purchases.

Several speakers also asked why the superintendent has been absent for more than three months and requested the board provide at least a basic public explanation of the interim leadership arrangement. Parent Jen Alfieri said she and other stakeholders want transparency about whether the superintendent has resigned, been terminated or will return, and asked the board to explain the likely fiscal impact of any administrative-leave arrangement.

Board members did not vote on any of the requests during the meeting. The transcript records calls for follow-up information — including an itemized breakdown of the bill list and further review of exceptions for executive sessions — but provides no formal responses or policy actions to resolve the concerns.

The board plans to consider several consent-calendar items and routine resolutions at a future meeting; public commenters asked that fiscal and governance questions be addressed in those follow-ups.