Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Communication topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Durham to include teachers' survey in town communications after no‑confidence vote
Summary
Multiple residents criticized the April 17 Friday Update for publishing the superintendent’s response without links to the teachers’ survey or teachers’ perspectives after a 90% no‑confidence report; Town Administrator Todd Selig apologized and pledged fuller future updates.
Get email alerts on the Education Communication topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the April 20 Durham Town Council meeting, several residents pressed the town to present fuller information about a recent Oyster River Cooperative School District controversy after they said the April 17 Friday Update included only the superintendent’s response and omitted the teachers’ survey and related materials.
"The Friday Update included a summary of the superintendent’s response with no link to the actual survey results and no mention of the teachers’ concerns," resident Colin Blake Butler said, urging the town to adopt "a spirit of balanced transparency" and to present communication from both sides. Catherine Michel, who volunteers at Oyster River Middle School, said teachers took a National Education Association Climate and Culture survey in December and that "the results were upsetting," arguing that the survey should be made available so the public can understand teachers’ concerns.
Kalika Bower, a Lee resident and school‑district stakeholder, said the Friday Update’s omission created a public imbalance, pointing listeners to orcnc.org as a source for teachers’ materials and asking the Council to acknowledge the omission. Tom Daly said school leadership turmoil has affected trust and budget decisions in the district, noting that residents had modified a proposed budget to retain key staff during the deliberative session.
Town Administrator Todd Selig responded during the meeting, apologizing for the omission. "I included it because it was an official communication from the district," Selig said, adding that he had not read the survey and had not known about the teachers’ website. He said he would try to provide more documentation in the next Friday Update and that the omission was not intended to be misleading.
The comments came during the public‑comment portion of the Council meeting and did not prompt any formal Council action. Councilors and the administrator discussed the limits of town authority relative to the school district and committed to better disclosure in future town communications. The town has not provided the teachers’ survey in the official Friday Update linked to the town’s communication as of the April 20 meeting.
