Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Controversy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents accuse teacher of inflammatory social-media posts; board says administration will respond
Summary
Multiple parents told the Little Egg Harbor Board of Education they found a staff member's social-media posts offensive and potentially harmful to students; callers demanded accountability and criticized the board's transparency, while board members said personnel matters are legally restricted and that the administration will follow up.
Several members of the public used the board's public-comment period to allege that a district employee posted inflammatory content on social media and to call for clearer district discipline and transparency.
Matthew Smith (speaker S14) identified himself as a parent and said he had repeatedly raised concerns about employee Angela Rangel’s public social-media posts, which he said applauded violence and included images of district children posted without parental consent. “These extended silence and responses with no actual plan or update is unacceptable,” Smith said, asking the superintendent to respond directly to parents.
Cindy Castaldo (speaker S16) told the board she was disappointed by what she described as laughter and inattentiveness during prior public comments and said the board had failed to enforce district non-discrimination policy (citing Policy 3282). She urged a “clear public statement that discriminatory rhetoric online or in person has no place in our schools.” Castaldo also said she had been told the teacher was suspended, and asked how long the suspension would last.
Board response and constraints: The chair (S1) and other board members acknowledged concerns and said administration would follow up. The chair stated, “someone from the administration will be getting back to you.” Several board members noted that personnel matters are legally restricted from public deliberation and that they could not discuss ongoing personnel actions in detail at the meeting.
Context from district presentations: Earlier in the meeting, the district presented an anti-bullying (HIB) self-assessment (Jackie Trezalino, director of planning and evaluation) showing high scores across schools and outlining prevention and reporting procedures. Board members referenced ongoing personnel processes and said some actions occur 'behind the scenes' and are governed by legal and privacy limits.
Claims and status: The specific allegations about social-media content and unauthorized posting of student photos were made by public commenters (parents). The transcript records assertions that a suspension occurred (stated by a commenter) and promises of administrative follow-up (stated by the chair). The board did not announce a formal discipline decision on the record at this meeting.
Next steps: Board members encouraged commenters to contact administrators for follow-up, and the chair noted the administration would respond. The public was told the next regular board meeting is Nov. 18.
Note on sourcing: The claims reported here reflect statements made during public comment in the board meeting transcript. They remain allegations in the record: the meeting record shows public accusations and a pledge that administration will follow up; no formal board action or adjudicated finding is recorded in the transcript.
