Report dissects ‘dysfunctional’ school board
Some members say it’s one-sided; others call it ‘worthwhile’
STAMFORD — Schools Superintendent Tamu Lucero filed an official complaint against the Stamford Board of Education that they have bullied and intimidated her and members of her cabinet.
An investigation into the allegations produced a 60-page report, handed to the board last month, supporting many of the allega
tions with recommendations on how to ease relations.
The report concludes that there was substantiated evidence to suggest “intimidating or demanding speech toward staff,” as well as the board creating an “intimidating and bullying environment,” and undermining the chain of command.
“Board members recognize that the current climate among board members and between the board and administration is dysfunctional and that there are areas for improvement,” the report reads.
The report, prepared by law firm Day Pitney, was obtained by The Stamford Advocate in early August. It includes quotes from board members and specific instances of board member behavior, but does not name any of the members.
Reaction has been mixed, with members who have been critical of the administration saying the report is one-sided and biased, and others saying the complaint is a much needed wake-up call.
What the board is doing with the report remains up in the air, but it was discussed this month during an executive session meeting.
Several board members said a representative from Day Pitney said the report and investigation has cost the city roughly $330,000 so far.
The impetus for the investigation was a letter from Lucero, which stated that board members “regularly and with perceived malice … ignore or repeatedly break the following policies and bylaws which consequently interferes, impedes and disrupts day to day work of the Stamford Public School District.”
It then listed 13 complaints of the board’s actions raised by staff members, including “encouraging a culture that fosters distress for some or all members of the senior leadership team,” creating an intimidating or bullying work environment, publicly criticizing cabinet members and suggesting that members of the senior leadership team are giving false information at meetings.
Day Pitney’s investigation involved reviewing videos of public meetings from mid-2019 up until this year. Representatives from the law firm also interviewed every member of the administration, which includes 11 people, as well as four board members. The other five members declined to be interviewed.
In its report, Day Pitney found many of the accusations to be true. One accusation, that at least one board member took retaliatory action against a member of the administration, was not substantiated by the report.
The report found that several board members, contrary to board bylaws, wrote public opinion pieces and a letter critical of administration that were published in The Advocate, the report found.
Day Pitney investigators also found other instances of board members criticizing Lucero in email communications.
The report found there is a “general climate of distrust” between certain board members and the administration. It claims that whenever staff members present to the board, that some members suggest the administration is providing false information.
Staff members told investigators they felt board members intentionally confront them with “gotcha” questions, in an attempt to get them to state inaccuracies, according to the report.
“Our investigation revealed several instances where board members would focus on a detail outside of the scope of the presentation and phrase questions in a leading or accusatory manner,” the report reads.
“Rude and sarcastic” comments are common in emails between certain board members and the administration, the report claims.
There is also a perception by staff that the board treats members differently depending on their race or gender.
“Generally, there is a feeling that the same presentation by a white male would not get the same scrutiny as a presentation of identical material by women generally, or women of color,” the report reads.
The report states that witnesses who spoke to the investigators seemed to share the perception that the current board is the “least prepared” in recent memory. Members are expected to read the board packet — which includes more detailed information on agenda items — before each meeting. “However, board members routinely demonstrate unfamiliarity with the board packet and ask questions at board meetings that are already answered in those materials,” the report reads.
The recommendations include implementing a formal training on standards of respect and parliamentary procedure, as well as having a facilitator regulate board conduct.
“As noted in the report, the investigation was initiated by corporation counsel as a result of concerns raised by members of senior leadership,” Lucero wrote in an emailed message to The Advocate. “The report is comprehensive and detailed. I look forward to the implementation of the recommendations outlined in the report.”
Attorney John Williams, who is representing board members Jackie Pioli and Mike Altamura at the city’s expense, was highly critical of Day Pitney’s report.
“I read the thing and I said, ‘I wonder what Stamford taxpayers are paying for this,’” Williams said. “What is it? It’s just page after page after page of platitudes.”
Pioli, who said she asked to be represented by Williams because some of the allegations in the Day Pitney report appeared to be directed at her, said she is preparing a response to the findings.
“I’m not sure I would call that report a factfinding report due to the inaccuracy of one-sided allegations,” Pioli, a Democrat, said in a written statement.
Altamura, a Republican, called the report “nonsense.”
“We wasted taxpayers’ dollars and employees’ time during a national health pandemic to intimidate and stop board members from holding staff accountable and transparent to our constituents,” he said in a written statement.
Nicola Tarzia, a Republican, said Day Pitney’s findings and recommendations are “totally biased and one-sided.”
He said there have been numerous times he has been disappointed in the administration, and said such instances were not in the report.
“This is politics,” he said, adding that most of the allegations in the report can be chalked up to merely disagreements between board members.
Democrats Dan Dauplaise and Andy George, a former board president, supported the findings.
“It points out that there are systemic problems with the way the board of education operates,” Dauplaise said. “And those systemic problems are caused by certain members.”
Dauplaise said he supports better training for members, as well as an orientation for new members.
“I hope that training will go into place that will teach board members how to be board members, not from an ideological point of view,” he said. “We’re just there to vote on policy. We’re not there to do anything else.”
George said the report brings up multiple areas of improvement for the board.
“It was a worthwhile report to uncover the concerns of the administration and poor behavior on board members’ part,” he said.
Board president Jennienne Burke and Jackie Heftman, both Democrats, did not respond to requests for comment. Fritz Chery declined an interview, and Becky Hamman, a Republican, did not make any official remarks.