Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, student tell board they were ignored after raising safety concerns and say a $11.5M grant was mishandled
Summary
Two public commenters told the Middletown Board of Education they and their students were ignored by district staff after raising safety and grant‑related concerns; one said she secured $11.5 million for UConn collaboration but felt sidelined, and a parent disputed claims about the grant's use and said promised follow‑up was not provided.
At the May 12 meeting of the Middletown Board of Education, two public commenters accused district leaders of ignoring repeated emails and failing to follow up on safety concerns and a student project they said attracted major outside funding.
"I got the $11.5 million funds for UConn," student Aniela Shagoumbi said, adding she felt “pushed aside and ignored” by the district and that only one meeting with the superintendent followed and no promised follow‑up occurred. Aniela asked the board for any action, saying students should not be ignored.
Parent Fumi Keshinro told the board she and her student had sent multiple emails over five months without substantive responses. She said when she met the interim superintendent in April she found him unaware of prior communications and that this raised concerns about who was actually managing day‑to‑day operations in the central office.
Keshinro addressed circulating narratives about the funds, saying the $11.5 million grant (which she said was secured for safety and health measures) is not for any individual’s personal use. “It is for the safety and health of the students in our classrooms in this state and Nyla has taken it outside of the state. It is not for her,” she said, arguing public understanding of the grant’s scope is incorrect.
Both speakers asked the board to respond and to provide clearer lines of follow‑up. Board Chair Daniels acknowledged receipt of public comment and the superintendent said he had arranged some meetings; the meeting record does not show additional immediate action or a formal board directive beyond the public comment period.
The meeting included references to internal communications, promises of follow‑up, and questions about who within the district is responsible for responding to parents and students. Commenters urged the board to ensure responsiveness and accountability to families.
