Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board amends policy on electronic participation after debate and public comment

Ridgefield Board of Education (Ridgefield School District) · April 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Ridgefield Board of Education voted April 16 to amend Policy 0155.1 on electronic board member participation after debate and public comment; the meeting also featured calls from residents for policy accessibility and clearer rules on virtual meetings.

The Ridgefield Board of Education voted April 16 to amend Policy 0155.1, the board policy governing participation at meetings using electronic devices, after a motion from Board member Lori Hoffman and a second from Andrew Grippa.

The amendment was approved on a roll-call vote with four members voting yea (Andrew Grippa, Lori Hoffman, Andrew Borek and Ralph Morilla) and recorded discussion from board members about the policy language and participation rules. Earlier in the meeting a separate motion to remove Item P.1 (the policy) from the consent agenda for separate consideration failed on roll call.

Members of the public addressed the board during two limited public-comment periods. Resident Debbie Fugnitti asked that policies be made accessible to the public during meetings. Tawila Hoffman and Lisa Hoffman raised concerns about Policy 0155 (virtual participation) and asked for transparency on how remote participation would be handled. Councilwoman Congalton‑Hali also commented on board participation and attendance.

Board counsel provided legal context during the discussion and board members exchanged views on whether to amend the policy now or defer further edits. The board recorded the motion to amend and agreed to consider final language and formal adoption at a future meeting as needed.

The board’s actions on P.1 were taken alongside routine consent-agenda business; no disciplinary or financial penalties resulted from the policy vote. The meeting record shows that the board requested broader public access to policy drafts and discussed procedural steps for future readings and final adoption.