Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Livestream topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and trustees demand probe after district livestream cut during public comment
Summary
Parents and community members accused Trustee Florencio Briones of ordering staff to cut a Sept. 17 livestream during public comment and asked the board for an independent investigation, a uniform complaint and a public censure; trustees debated whether to agendize an investigation but the request did not reach consensus.
Dozens of parents and community members told the El Monte Union High School District board on Oct. 1 that a Sept. 17 livestream was deliberately cut during public comment, silencing speakers for 33 minutes and leaving more than 400 viewers without access. "On 09/17/2025, during a livestream board meeting, Mister Florencio Briones, without legal authority on or board consensus, unilaterally ordered district staff to cut the livestream during public comment," said Ricardo Padilla, who identified himself as a longtime educator and board member speaking to the room as a community advocate.
Speakers repeatedly asked the board to investigate and to hold someone accountable. Commenters called for an independent review of communications and directives, filing of a uniform complaint (UCP) and full public disclosure of who authorized the stoppage. "This was not a technical glitch. It was a deliberate act," Padilla said, urging a public censure and vote of no confidence if the inquiry shows misconduct.
Trustees discussed the request during roundtable at the same meeting. Several trustees recommended an investigation but one trustee said he needed the written materials before supporting placement of the item on a future agenda. Legal counsel advised that the board may direct staff to bring an item for consideration but that a majority of trustees must support placing new items that carry substantive action; when asked for consensus to agendize an investigation, the motion failed to gain enough support and the board did not direct staff to open an independent probe that night.
Board members and legal counsel cautioned about meeting procedure during the exchange and several trustees said they wanted documentation and a staff report before taking further steps. The meeting record shows the board did not adopt any formal action on the allegation at that session. The board adjourned after a closed‑session readout that reported approval of a settlement (payment of $20,000) and rejection of a claim dated Sept. 10, 2025.
