Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Security Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent alleges committee member contacted grieving students as school leaders debate back-door access
Summary
School committee members debated badges, buzzers and visitor policy after a member raised problems with a unsecured back entrance; a parent in public comment named a committee member and alleged inappropriate contact with grieving students, recommending tighter controls and background checks.
The Newport School Committee spent the opening portion of its meeting debating how committee members and visitors should access school buildings after a member described a problematic back entrance that lacks the main door’s security.
Mrs. Colin told the committee “we have a big problem right now with the back door,” saying guests and committee members had been turned away at a north‑parking lot entrance and asking for either a process fix or a visible badge to identify committee members during appointments.
Other members resisted issuing badges. Several raised legal and liability concerns and urged a procedural solution: a buzzer/intercom and camera at the back entrance or a policy requiring committee members to notify the superintendent before visiting so staff can meet and escort them. “It is not good security. It’s not good accountability,” attorney Maryanne Carol told members, adding that visitors should “buzz in” through the main door and sign in at the office.
During public comment on the same agenda item, parent Amy Mashado addressed committee access and made a specific allegation about another committee member. “This agenda item was placed by Beth Cullen after she embarrassed herself a few weeks ago when she could not enter the Rogers campus unencumbered,” Mashado said, and later alleged that the named member had texted students who were “actively grieving a recent suicide of their classmate” and had offered to meet with minors outside school without clear credentials or background checks. The chair repeatedly directed the commenter to meet with the superintendent and cautioned that the committee’s role is oversight, while one committee member said such concerns should be resolved through the superintendent rather than as a security‑protocol debate.
Committee members and legal counsel agreed to explore a written policy clarifying when committee members may enter district buildings, review existing policies, and consider modest technical fixes such as a buzzer and intercom at the back entrance. The committee did not take action on badges at the meeting and emphasized that any changes should protect student safety and follow district procedure.
