Residents urge Stamford Board to pause principal reassignments, citing retaliation concerns

Dozens of parents, teachers and students told the Stamford Board of Education at a special meeting on March 31 that planned reassignments of school leaders risk destabilizing schools and could amount to retaliation.

Andrea Banias, a longtime Rogers PTO officer, urged the board to "block these transfers" and make near-term personnel decisions subject to heightened scrutiny, saying the moves "don't appear to be in the best interest of our schools." Banias identified Kathy Cummings, the long-serving Rogers principal, as a key example whose reassignment would harm students and programs.

Katie Schaller, a Rogers PTO executive-board member, said Rogers "has become one of the most sought-after K–8 options" under Cummings and cited a near-unanimous faculty vote of no confidence in Superintendent Lucero as evidence of the district's fractured trust. "These decisions destabilize students and staff," Schaller said, urging the board to pause reassignments until a clearer, student-centered process can be followed.

Yvonne Igerfino, who said she works at Rogers and has deep family ties to the district, highlighted Rogers' International Baccalaureate accreditation and warned that moving an administrator who built that program could jeopardize out‑of‑district enrollment and related funding. "That accreditation is the primary reason families from outside of Stamford choose to attend," Igerfino said.

Speakers across the evening also defended West Hill principal Michael Rinaldi. Jennifer Ladd, a West Hill parent, said Rinaldi is uniquely positioned to lead the school through an extensive renovation and called it "not a normal circumstance" to move him now. Emma Wasserman, a West Hill freshman, described Rinaldi's daily presence and said losing him would "disrupt our learning."

Several commenters framed the reassignments as retaliation tied to the district's contentious "4x4" scheduling change and recent public disagreements. Resident Steve Hamberg said administrators were pressured to write supportive statements in favor of the schedule and described the reassignments as "revenge." Others referenced a pending ethics complaint filed by the Stamford Education Association alleging retaliatory management practices.

Supporters of specialized programs again asked the board to avoid swapping leaders who have specialized experience. Dr. Julia Elmore, CEO of a nonprofit working with the district's Anchor program, asked why the board would remove a director she said had produced measurable improvements for students who were not well served elsewhere.

Board Chair read a prepared statement at the meeting acknowledging the abrupt cancellation of a prior special meeting and said the board is "not wavering" but must respect confidentiality while it consults legal counsel. The chair said the board "anticipates addressing the matter as soon as we receive a formal update from our legal representatives."

The board approved its consent agenda earlier in the meeting by voice vote, recorded as 9–0–0.

The meeting produced repeated calls for transparency, and several speakers urged the board to assert its oversight authority rather than defer personnel decisions to the current superintendent as her contract nears expiration. Multiple speakers asked the board to pause reassignments until incoming leadership is in place or until the board has full information.

What happens next: the board did not vote on any reassignment at the meeting. The chair said the board will await a formal legal update before taking further action. Community members said they will continue to press the board in upcoming meetings and through public advocacy.