Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Legal Representation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Middletown board appoints BOCES as counsel for trustee facing education-law proceeding

Enlarged City School District of Middletown Board of Education · February 18, 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

The board voted Feb. 12 to appoint Capital Region BOCES (Bethany Citrone) to represent Trustee Edwin Estrada in a proceeding filed with the state commissioner of education under Section 306 of New York State Education Law; one trustee criticized the move and one recorded an abstention on a related personnel item.

The Enlarged City School District of Middletown Board of Education on Feb. 12 approved a resolution appointing Capital Region BOCES to provide legal representation to Trustee Edwin Estrada in a matter filed with the commissioner of education under Section 306 of New York State Education Law.

Trustee Andrew Moore introduced the resolution, saying the appointment and the intermunicipal agreement with BOCES were being incorporated into the meeting minutes. The resolution states the board is "legally required to defend and indemnify" Trustee Edwin Estrada under the cited statutes.

Trustee Schroeder spoke against the expense, calling it "a travesty and a waste of taxpayer money" as the public comment period followed. The resolution was put to a vote and recorded as passing with one abstention noted during the roll-call exchange. The board ratified the intermunicipal agreement with BOCES as part of the action.

The appointment names Bethany Citrone of Capital Region BOCES to represent Trustee Estrada in the referenced proceeding. The resolution text in the meeting cites Section 306 of New York State Education Law as the statutory basis for the board’s authority and duty in the matter.

The board did not elaborate on the underlying complaint in open session beyond noting the filing with the commissioner and the need to appoint counsel. There was no separate public vote tally linked to individual board member names in the recorded transcript beyond the chair’s roll-call statements and the note of an abstention.

The board moved on to other business after the vote. The district’s next regular meeting is scheduled for March 5 at 6:30 p.m.