Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Longview parents and community members demand administrative leave and transparency after investigation
Summary
Multiple parents and residents told the Longview School Board on April 27 that the district failed to be transparent about an ongoing student‑safety investigation and criticized the board’s recent extension of the superintendent’s contract; commenters urged administrative leave and said recall efforts are underway.
Multiple Longview parents and residents used the board’s public‑comment period on April 27 to press the Longview School Board for immediate action in an ongoing student‑safety investigation, including calls to place involved employees on administrative leave and to explain why the superintendent’s contract was extended.
"You failed us. You shut us out," parent Jess Waldo said during the in‑room public comment period, urging the board to place "all involved" on administrative leave while criminal and internal inquiries proceed. Waldo said a petition asking for termination and other accountability steps had "over 700 signatures."
Other speakers made similar demands. Dustin Freested said a parent survey of more than 200 families found top priorities were "immediate administrative leave for superintendent, preservation of all district electronic records, a full independent investigation into deleted messages and obstruction, and transparency about what was deleted and when." Scott Beck cited court rulings on free speech in public meetings while also asking the board to suspend the superintendent pending the outcome of criminal investigations. Online commenter John Turpin delivered what he described as a formal notice saying recall preparations are being organized and repeated concerns that the district had asked the public to wait for verified facts while the board acted differently.
Board members did not take new action on personnel during the meeting. Superintendent Martha Cloninger provided an update earlier in the session noting the district is cooperating with law enforcement, conducting an internal review and has engaged third‑party investigators Haggard & Ganson (Kathleen Haggard named). Cloninger said those reviews remain ongoing and that the district is "limited in what we can share at this time," and added the district expects a report and recommendations from the third‑party investigator in the coming weeks. She also told the board the district is beginning steps to strengthen prevention and is pursuing an anti‑hazing curriculum to be developed with a board‑informed committee.
Multiple commenters criticized how the superintendent’s contract extension was handled on April 13, saying it was placed on the consent agenda and not discussed publicly. "If accountability requires verified facts, what facts were established? What conclusions were reached?" John Turpin asked online. Commenters asked the board to explain the timing and legal basis for that action.
The board did not announce personnel actions during the meeting. The superintendent reiterated the district’s limitations on disclosure while reviews proceed and said the district would act on recommendations when the third‑party report is complete. Commenters said they will continue to pursue recall and other accountability measures.
The board’s next public meeting will include a scheduled study session where staff plan to present strategic‑planning results; the district continues to say the third‑party investigative report is expected within several weeks and that further actions would follow those findings.
