Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents accuse Wiseburn board members of conflicts and demand transparency over $100,000 legal contract
Summary
Multiple public commenters alleged a Brown Act violation and conflicts of interest involving two board members and called on the district to rescind or explain a recent $100,000 law‑firm contract; residents said they submitted evidence to the board clerk and superintendent.
Several residents used the public‑comment period to make sharp allegations about board conduct and contracting. Grace Bader said the board limited public comment at a prior meeting and alleged that board member Roger Banuelos used the platform to defend his corporate resume. "You missed the June 25 board meeting, but the Wiseburn community did not," Bader said, citing a district survey she said showed 23% of students are bullied for their race.
Jeannie Agar told trustees she submitted evidence to the board clerk and to the superintendent and alleged two board members are executives of Element Consulting and have improperly benefited from district facilities. Agar said the board quietly voted to pay a law firm $100,000 at the last meeting and claimed the contract violates state law; she said the firm’s name appeared in documents with inconsistent spellings in the materials she received.
What the board did: speakers from the dais acknowledged receipt of public comments and noted the clerk had been given materials; board members did not adopt a motion at the meeting to rescind or investigate the contract. Staff said follow-up would occur with legal counsel and that some records had been provided to trustees.
Context and verification notes: the allegations were raised during public comment and are presented here as statements from residents; the board did not make findings during the July 16 meeting. The transcript contains inconsistent spellings for the retained law firm (appearing as both "Dennis Woliver Kelly" and "Danis Walliver Kelly"). The district did not provide a statement during the meeting responding to the specific allegations; trustees indicated staff would follow up and that evidence had been given to the clerk.
Next steps noted in the meeting: members of the public said they will continue to pursue accountability; trustees and staff said they would review submitted materials and follow up. The board did not vote on this matter during the session.
