One day before she faces another vote to remove her as board president; issues public statement on reasons; Board VP Lewis unable to attend

By Allen Payton

Antioch School Board president Ellie Householder has called for another special board meeting, her second one, this month. It will be held tomorrow, Tuesday, Sept. 21 at 5:30 p.m. This time it’s to discuss in closed session, Public Employee: Discipline/Dismissal/Release. (See agenda) It was scheduled, today, after Wednesday’s board meeting agenda was issued which includes another vote for Householder’s removal as board president. (See related article)

Householder posted an announcement of the special meeting on her official Facebook page and wrote, “I am calling a special closed session meeting of the Board of Education on Tuesday, September 21, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. to take action that will impact the future direction of the Antioch Unified School District,” with a link to the statement about her reasons for calling the meeting on her blog.

Householder and the other board members were asked who the employee is and if it’s Superintendent Stephanie Anello via email, Monday morning. However, the school board only has one employee and cannot discipline any other district employee.

In response, Householder provided the following statement: Householder Statement on 9-21-21 Special Board Mtg

“ANTIOCH SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT ELLIE HOUSEHOLDER STATEMENT  REGARDING THE SPECIAL EDUCATION MEETING ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2021

On Monday, September 20, 2021, after consulting with Vice President Dr. Clyde Lewis, I am calling a special closed session meeting of the Board of Education on Tuesday, September 21, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. to take action that will impact the future direction of the Antioch Unified School District.

From the moment that I took my oath of office, I have made it my singular focus to create an environment that provides ALL of our students with a nurturing and supportive environment to ensure that they have the foundational skills to have long-term success.

However, the sad reality is that the students of the Antioch Unified School District are performing well below average, as compared to the rest of the state, especially Black and Latino students. Under the current superintendent, student performance has worsened.

As a board, we have the fiduciary responsibility to serve our students. In our opinion, the current set of facts at the district have made it so that a change must occur now as far as the leadership of the Antioch Unified School District.

To those who attack me for taking this position, you make my point, as anyone with an objective mindset could easily see that the scores continue moving in a downward trajectory. Regardless of the attacks, I will continue to fight for our students.

If we truly love Antioch, we must do everything in our power to protect our students, as our city’s future hinges on their success. This is no longer about old Antioch vs new Antioch. This fight is about whether Antioch will even exist as our school district’s track record continues to crush the hopes and dreams of our students, and in the process, our city.

Antioch Unified School District Fact Sheet  (CAASP 2018-2019)

Reading and Writing

• 45% of white students do not meet state standards for reading and writing
• 67% of Black students do not meet state standards for reading and writing
• 60% of Latino/Hispanic students do not meet state standards for reading and writing

Math

• 46% of white students do not meet state standards for mathematics
• 79% of Black students do not meet state standards for mathematics
• 71% of Latino/Hispanic students do not meet state standards for mathematics

Suspensions (at least once…)

• 9% of white students
• 2% of Black students
• 2% of Latino/Hispanic students”

———

Householder was also asked if the special meeting was called in response to Anello’s comments on the KPIX CBS5 TV news report about the board’s Sept. 8th meeting in which the board president unilaterally removed the agenda item for a vote to remove her as board president. Householder posted the video of the report on her official Facebook page. In that report, Anello was quoted as saying, “In all my years of public service, I have never witnessed such a blatant misuse of power. It is a huge disservice to the citizens of Antioch.”

In that same report, Householder said about Anello, “That’s all just noise. That’s all just a distraction. She’s playing petty politics.”

Householder was also asked, “aren’t you by issuing that statement before the closed session meeting, publicly discussing your reasons for disciplining, dismissing or removing the superintendent?”

She did not respond before publication time.

Lewis Confirms Meeting is about Anello, But Can’t Attend

Lewis was asked to confirm what Householder wrote about him in her statement and for any additional comments on the matter.

“The conversation Ellie and I had was, she thinks it’s time to move forward with removing the superintendent. But no date was determined for a special board meeting,” Lewis said. “Tuesday, I’m not available. I have to work. I can’t make that meeting. I have a work meeting at that time.”

Asked further about the superintendent and if the possible action is in response to her comment reported by KPIX CBS5, Lewis responded. “I’m a process-oriented person. I wasn’t elected to get involved in personal disputes. I was elected to govern.”

Asked what the board is doing to improve the education of the district’s students, he said, “We need to have more conversations around how we’re going to improve the education of our kiddos.”

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Meeting Information

According to the staff report on the one-item agenda, “Location: This meeting is being held pursuant to Executive orders N-29-20 (https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.17.20-N-29-20-EO.pdf) and N-08-21 (https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/6.11.21-EO-N-08-21-signed.pdf) issued by California Governor Gavin Newsom. Any or all Board members may attend the meeting by videoconference.

Closed Session: 5:30 p.m.

The meeting will be livestreamed and can be viewed at https://youtu.be/TY04POBHgYA. Persons wishing to make a public comment on items on the agenda can submit their comments until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

Comments can be submitted via an online form at https://tinyurl.com/CommentSpecialMeeting or by email to kelliecavallaro@antiochschools.net. Comments received by 4:00 p.m. will be read to the public during the meeting.

PLEASE NOTE: This link – https://tinyurl.com/CommentSpecialMeeting, is for the Special meeting only. If you wish to submit a comment for the Regular Meeting on Wednesday, September 22nd, please go to https://tinyurl.com/ausd-public-comment-card.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disability Act, persons with a disability who require a disability-related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aides or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the Superintendent’s Office at 925-779-7500 ext. 51000 or FAX 925-779-7509. A notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the district staff to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.

By Allen Payton

Embattled Antioch School Board president, Ellie Householder faces both another vote to remove her from her appointed position during Wednesday night’s regular board meeting, as well as a vote of no-confidence by the district’s faculty, classified staff and management employees. Ballots were sent out over the weekend, the Herald learned on Monday. (See  agenda)

The board vote to remove her as president was first requested by Trustee Mary Rocha and appeared on the Sept. 8 meeting agenda. But during that meeting, Householder said the item was placed on the agenda without her knowledge, and unilaterally removed it, which she didn’t have the authority to do.

In spite of Householder’s action, Rocha still made the motion to remove her as board president and it failed on a 2-3 vote, with just Rocha and Trustee Gary Hack voting in favor.

It was later reported that Householder was provided a draft meeting agenda, which she, Board Vice President Dr. Clyde Lewis, Superintendent Stephanie Anello and other district staff reviewed before publicly issuing the final version. The final agenda also included three items Householder added to the same section as the item for the vote to remove her. (See related article)

This time, the vote to remove Householder as board president was requested by both Rocha and  Hack.

Wednesday’s meeting begins at 7:00 p.m.

Meeting Information

Closed Session: 6:15 p.m.

Open Session: 7:00 p.m.

The meeting will be livestreamed and can be viewed at https://youtu.be/RuWzzzZB_lA. Persons wishing to make a public comment can submit their comments until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Comments can be submitted via an online form at https://tinyurl.com/ausd-public-comment-card or by email to kelliecavallaro@antiochschools.net. Comments received by 4:00 p.m. will be read to the public during the meeting.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disability Act, persons with a disability who require a disability-related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aides or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the Superintendent’s Office at 925-779-7500 ext. 51000 or FAX 925-779-7509. A notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the district staff to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.

 

After less than one year in the position; hired before new board members elected; passed on 3-0-1 vote with one trustee absent; no details provided; appoints Executive Vice Chancellor of Education and Technology as acting chancellor

By Allen Payton

After less than a year in his new position, Contra Costa Community College District chancellor, Dr. Bryan Reece was placed on paid administrative leave effective immediately by a 3-0-1 vote of the governing board, during a special meeting Tuesday night. Ward 1 Trustee John Márquez voted to abstain, and Ward 5 Trustee Fernando Sandoval was absent, as he was out of town on vacation.

Reece started on Nov. 1, 2020 after he was chosen by the board in September, not long before two new trustees were elected, including Sandoval and Board Vice President and Ward 2 Trustee Dr. Judy Walters, the latter of whom voted for Tuesday’s board action. The board approved his contract last October, which includes a base annual salary of $315,000, with performance-based incentives. Later that month, three new trustees were elected to the board, two of whom voted for in support of the action. (See related articles here and here)

The decision was made in closed session under the subject “Public employee discipline / dismissal / release / complaint (Government Code Section 54957)” that began at 5:05 p.m. and lasted for four hours.

According to the minutes of the meeting, “Mr. Li reconvened the public session at 9:05 p.m.  Mr. Li reported out on motion of Dr. Walters, seconded by himself, with one aye vote from Ms. Barrett, one abstention from Mr. Márquez, and Mr. Sandoval was absent for the vote, the GB (governing board) approved paid administrative leave for the Chancellor, effective immediately.  Mr. Li then adjourned the meeting at 9:06 p.m.  The next regular meeting of the GB will be held on Wednesday, October 13, 2021, at 6:00 p.m.”

However, when reached for comment, Board President and Ward 3 Trustee Andy Li said, “we didn’t say anything during open session because it was a personnel matter. I made the statement, reporting out of closed session, since I’m the board president, informing the public of the decision.”

“Then a letter was sent out to the district employees, this morning,” he added.

In that letter, Li announced the action against Reece and the appointment of Mojdeh Mehdizadeh, who currently serves as Executive Vice Chancellor of Education and Technology for the college district, as acting chancellor. (See related article)

Li’s Letter to District Staff

The following letter from Li was to district staff via email:

“This message is being forwarded on behalf of Governing Board President Andy Li

Begin forwarded message:

From: “Li, Andy” <ali@4cd.edu>

Subject: Governing Board Decision

Date: September 15, 2021 at 8:14:15 AM PDT

To: “Li, Andy” <ali@4cd.edu>

Dear 4CD Community,

At our special meeting last night, the Governing Board placed Chancellor Bryan Reece on administrative leave with pay due to personnel matters. The Governing Board has appointed Mojdeh Mehdizadeh to serve as Acting Chancellor until further notice.

We ask for your support of Mojdeh during this time.

Thank you.

Andy Li

ALi@4cd.edu
(860) 263-9540

President, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board”

————–

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Claims it wasn’t placed on the agenda properly although she reviewed and approved draft agenda before public notification; Trustee Rocha says she submitted it through Board VP Lewis, but he denies; Householder wouldn’t recognize points of order by Trustees Rocha and Hack violating Robert’s Rules of Order for a second meeting in a row; Rocha’s motion to remove Householder fails on 2-3 vote; Householder commits to placing vote on a future meeting agenda

By Allen Payton

During the regular meeting of the Antioch School Board Wednesday night, board president Ellie Householder unilaterally pulled the item on the vote her removal as board president and rebuffed multiple efforts at points of order on her decision by other board members, violating Robert’s Rules of Order for the second meeting in a row. (See meeting video) (See related articles here and here)

“Before delving into the meat of tonight’s agenda, I’m going to be pulling item 10.E. from our discussions, per Board Policy 9322 the board president and the superintendent as the secretary of the board shall work together to develop the agenda for each regular and special meeting. Each agenda shall reflect the district’s vision and goals, and the board’s focus on student learning.  So, every other Wednesday we have agenda meetings, and while the superintendent and vice chair are there, ultimately, it’s the board president who approves items going on the agenda. Last Wednesday, which I believe was September 1st, we did not discuss this item. And, you know, we have these processes for a reason, and we need to adhere to them. So, I’m going to be placing, I’m sorry.”

“I’d like to make a point of order,” said Superintendent Stephanie Anello. “I’m objecting.”

“Since item 10E was placed on the agenda without being discussed I’m pulling it from the tonight’s agenda,” Householder said, completing her statement.

“I’m objecting,” Anello then said. “That was on the…”

“Superintendent Anello, Superintendent Anello,” Householder said, interrupting her. “Just so you know, stop. Can’t provide feedback if recognized by the board president and you are not recognized. Next on the agenda we have superintendent reports.”

“Madame president, I disagree,” said Trustee Rocha, interrupting Householder. “I disagree.”

“Next up Next on the agenda we have superintendent reports,” Householder repeated and continued to speak as Rocha was trying to make her point of order, repeating, “Trustee Rocha, you’re out of order” several times.

“I sent that message to the vice president and the vice president was aware of it,” Rocha stated. “Now, you don’t want to discuss it, that’s up to you. But we have a right to put something on the agenda and I sent through the right course of action. So, I disagree with your trying to remove my remarks, as a trustee.”

Householder continued to move on saying, “Next up we have superintendent reports, so Superintendent Anello, take it away.”

“Oh, so you’re recognizing me?” Anello asked then went into a presentation on COVID issues in the district.

A couple bright spots occurred at the beginning of the meeting when Delta Veterans Group President J.R. Wilson was asked to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. In addition, Board V.P. Dr. Clyde Lewis suggested the board have a moment of silence for the 13 service members who died during the recent attack in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Following that Anello asked her staff to move up the public comments for item 10.E. to general public comments.

“I’m just going to say since the item was pulled, we should move up the public comments from item 10.E.,” Anello said.

Householder tried to have those comments heard at the end of the meeting saying, “do we want to have 60 minutes of public comments, now or move half of them to the end of the meeting?”

Rocha Affected By Power Outage, Her Internet Feed Goes Out

Right prior to them being read, electricity went out in a part of Antioch that includes where Rocha lives. So, she could no longer participate in the livestream. But she was available by phone.

Householder relented and allowed public comments from item 10.E. to be read during general public comments. Those were read prior to those submitted for item 10.E. Some were scathing against Householder while some were supportive, some were against District 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez and some were critical of the rest of the board for tabling the items on the district’s restraining policies during last Thursday night’s special meeting. A few were supportive of Householder, Lewis and Hernandez.

The public comments submitted for item 10.E., on removing Householder as board president, were mostly against her, one negative comment about Lewis.

“We are at 8:21 and on our agenda we can go until 8:30 or we can just move on,” Householder said. “We will read the rest of those comments at the end of the meeting.”

“Madame Chair, this is Mary Rocha. I have a question for the superintendent,” Rocha then said, after Householder recognized her.

“Superintendent Anello is there a point of order here on removing an agenda item that has already been noticed to the public?” Rocha asked.

“That would be a question directed toward me and as I discussed it wasn’t discussed during our weekly agenda meeting,” Householder responded.

“In that case, president you’re saying that you’ll be discussing it at the next meeting, and you can put it on the next agenda, correct?” Rocha asked.

“I can’t say if it can or can’t be placed on the agenda,” Householder responded.

“I would like to hear what Stephanie Anello has to say,” Trustee Gary Hack said, interrupting Householder.

She responded, “Trustee Hack…you are not recognized.”

Rocha’s internet feed then resumed.

“Looks like the power is back on,” Householder said.

“No, the power is not on, yet,” Rocha responded.

“Are you safe?” Lewis asked. “It looks like the lights are out at your house.”

He then offered to go over to her house to assist her, if necessary.

Rocha tried to speak but her internet feed was sporadic, so Householder suggested Rocha call in to participate in the remainder of the meeting which she did.

Later in the meeting, but not during Item 10, Rocha made a motion to remove Householder as board president. Hack seconded the motion, but it failed on a 2-3 vote. Rocha then pressed the board president to place the vote to remove her from that position on the next regular meeting agenda in two weeks. Householder said she would put it on a future agenda but did not give a specific date.

Former Antioch City Clerk Arne Simonsen was asked how can the board president control placing on the agenda an item for a vote on their removal from their position? Isn’t submitting the item through the board vice president the proper channel? He responded, “Mary or any of the trustees can bring the item back to the agenda, tonight. It would probably require a second and vote by the board. That sounds right, going through the vice president. But things are different between the city council and school board.”

Points of Order By Elected Members Must Be Recognized

According to Robert’s Rules of Order any member who notices a breach of the rules has a right to call immediate attention to it and insist that the rules be enforced by raising a point of order. A point of order can interrupt a speaker who has the floor, doesn’t need to be seconded, isn’t debatable, can’t be amended, is decided by the chair, and can’t be reconsidered. The chair generally states, without discussion, his or her ruling on the point of order. However, the ruling may be appealed and the chair, if in doubt, may refer the decision to the body for a vote.

In addition, when asked if points of order must be recognized by the chair of a meeting, Simonsen replied, “yes.” He also said that only elected members can make a point of order, and that the superintendent and other district staff cannot.

Questions on Procedure, Authority and Agenda Approval

During the meeting, an email request was sent to Anello to “please provide either the board’s or state Board of Education policy and procedure for removing the president from that position, and placing the vote on a meeting agenda, or the rule in Robert’s Rules of Order that governs such an action.”

In addition, she was asked, “is the proper procedure to go through the board VP to prevent the president from keeping it from ever being placed on the agenda?” and “does the board president have the authority to unilaterally pull an item from an agenda that has already been publicly noticed?”

A response on those questions from the superintendent is not expected until sometime on Thursday.

Lewis Denies Rocha Submitted Removal Item Through Him

When asked if Rocha submitted her agenda item to remove Householder as board president through him, Lewis said, “No. Mary told me she was going to bring it up during the special meeting on Thursday night but didn’t. I received a phone call that day from Mary Rocha that she will bring up the matter during the special board meeting and when that didn’t happen, I thought would come up at a later date.”

However, he received a copy of the draft agenda for Wednesday’s meeting and participated in the Webex agenda review meeting last Wednesday, Sept. 1.

“I don’t approve agendas. My role in the agenda planning meetings is to offer support and ask clarification questions,” he explained. “In general, during the meetings, some areas we go over with a fine-tooth comb and other areas we don’t. I didn’t catch Mary’s request was on the draft agenda.”

Asked why he didn’t speak up, last night, he said, “based on my understanding of board policy as presented by President Householder she had the authority to remove the item. And I didn’t have the time to go research it during the meeting.”

When asked what the procedure is to place the item for removing the board president on the agenda, and shouldn’t it be done through the vice president to prevent the president from keeping it off the agenda he responded, “We need to review board policy on that. I’m not sure exactly what that is. So, we will have to go back and look.”

Householder Approved Meeting Agenda Before Public Notification

However, it is clear that Householder both reviewed and approved Wednesday night’s board meeting agenda before it was publicly noticed.

Additional questions were emailed to both Householder and Anello Thursday morning asking if the school board meeting agendas get sent to Householder as drafts for review and final approval before being posted on the district’s website and sent out to the public by district staff? And if so, did that happen last week for Wednesday night’s meeting?

In response, Anello shared the email district staff sent to Householder on Wednesday, Sept. 1 with copies of draft agendas for both last Thursday’s special meeting and Wednesday night’s meeting for her to review and approve in time for the agenda review meeting later that day. 9.8.2021 RBOE Agenda – Simple DRAFT     9.8.2021 RBOE Agenda – Simple – posted on AUSD website

From: Kellie Cavallaro
Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 11:45 AM
To: Ellie Householder <EllieHouseholder@antiochschools.net>; Clyde Lewis <ClydeLewis@antiochschools.net>; Dr. Clyde Lewis, Jr. <clydelew@gmail.com>; Stephanie Anello <StephanieAnello@antiochschools.net>; Jessica Romeo <JessicaRomeo@antiochschools.net>
Subject: agendas for today’s agenda review meeting

Attached are the agendas for the 9/2/21 Special Board Meeting and the 9/8/21 Regular Board Meeting for review at today’s meeting.

Thanks,

Kellie

Kellie Cavallaro

Senior Executive Assistant/Antioch Unified School District

Additional questions were emailed to Householder early Thursday afternoon asking, “Did you approve the agenda for the Sept. 8 meeting during your agenda review meeting before it was publicly noticed? It appears you must have at least reviewed it since the final agenda includes three additional items, 10.F., G. and H. requested by you that weren’t part of the draft agenda. And if you did approve the agenda, did you see Item 10.E. during your agenda review meeting prior to approval?”

Anello was then asked “if President Householder responded via email approving the two agendas before public notification? If so, can you please provide that/those email(s)? Or did she do it by phone?”

In response, an email showing details of the Webex-held agenda review meeting was provided by Cavallaro.

“Below are two images. The first is a screenshot of the Webex record of who attended the Agenda Review meeting and the second is a screenshot of the email I sent to everyone prior to the meeting with the link to the meeting. (One AUSD WebEx login is Superintendent Anello and the other is me. The Caller was Dr. Lewis who initially joined by phone and then he switched to a computer during the meeting.”

However, that doesn’t provide proof that Householder approved the agenda before it was publicly notified. An additional question was sent to both Anello and Cavallaro asking, “Was that given by her during the Webex discussion?”

Anello responded, “She did not oppose or object to the item as presented.”

Householder has yet to respond to any of the questions emailed to her.

Please check back later with any updates to this report.

Requested by Trustee Rocha before last Thursday’s special meeting; won’t be their first clash; Services Agreement with private security firm Strategic Threat Management also on the agenda

By Allen Payton

Antioch School Board Trustee Mary Rocha has requested a vote of the board to remove current president Ellie Householder during their regular meeting, tomorrow night, Wednesday, Sept. 8.

It follows the posting of a video of a police incident with a violent student at Antioch High School by Householder, prior to obtaining the details, and then her calling a special board meeting, originally to investigate the incident, last Thursday night, during which nothing was accomplished since both agenda items were tabled for up to 60 days. (See related articles, here, here and here)

The matter is item 10.E. under “Items for Information/Discussion/Action by Board”. (See complete meeting agenda)

“I requested it before last Thursday’s meeting,” Rocha said when reached for comment. “I was surprised how many calls came in calling for her removal.”

“Since Ellie became president, she has included (Area 4 Trustee Dr. Clyde) Lewis, as board vice president, in her meetings with the superintendent about each meeting agenda,” Rocha continued. “So, as a courtesy, I called Lewis and left him a voicemail message to let him know that it would be on tomorrow night’s agenda.”

When reached for comment Lewis confirmed that he attends agenda meetings and that he received Rocha’s message writing, “Yes, I’m in agenda meetings. But if there are other meetings, I’m not aware of them” and “Yes” in response to the second question.

Householder’s one-year, rotated term as board president ends in December and it is expected that Lewis, who is currently the board vice president, will be the next president. But that line of succession has not always occurred, as past boards have bypassed the vice president and voted in another trustee as president.

Rocha and Householder Have Clashed Before

This won’t be the first time that Rocha and Householder will have clashed. Rocha challenged her fellow trustee after Householder had posted some negative comments about Rocha on Twitter, in support of the protesters who broke into the school district headquarters during a board meeting, which was closed to just the trustees and staff due to COVID. Rocha was almost pushed to the ground. In response to that and Householder’s participation in a protest at then-Mayor Pro Tem Joy Motts’ home, Rocha attempted to have Householder removed from the School-City Standing Committee but it failed on a 1-4 vote.  (See related articles, here and here)

An effort to reach Householder for comment was unsuccessful prior to publication time.

In addition, during the meeting, the Services Agreement with Strategic Threat Management, Inc., whose security guards were involved in the Antioch High incident and could be seen in the video restraining the student, is on the consent calendar. That could prove to be a lengthy discussion.

UPDATE: Succession and Replacement Process

Superintendent Stephanie Anello was asked, since there is no election item on the agenda, “if Ellie is removed as board president, tonight who becomes board president to at least run the rest of the meeting? Does Clyde automatically become acting board president and will the election for a permanent board president for the remainder of the year be held at the next meeting?

Anello responded, “I believe it would fall to the vice president to run the rest of tonight’s meeting. An item would need to be placed on the next agenda to elect a new president.”

Meeting Viewing and Public Comment Information

The meeting will be livestreamed and can be viewed at https://youtu.be/F-Dsas_w-s0. Persons wishing to make a general public comment or a comment on items on the agenda can submit their comments until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Comments can be submitted via an online form at https://tinyurl.com/ausd-public-comment-card or by email to kelliecavallaro@antiochschools.net. Comments received by 4:00 p.m. will be read to the public during the meeting.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Former City Clerk Simonsen says “temporarily” tabling item can be for up to six months

By Allen Payton

Sometimes elected officials and have been in Antioch and elsewhere for years.

In an email to the Herald, the secretary of the American Institute of Parliamentarians, Atul Kapur pointed out that the Antioch School Board, during their special meeting this past Thursday, misused the motion to Table for the two agenda items. Instead, he argues, the board should have used a motion to Postpone to a Time Certain. That’s because a timeframe of 60 days was added to the motion. (See related article)

Furthermore, while a motion to Lay on the Table is not debatable, no further discussion can be held once the motion is made, and there can be no interruption, Kapur explains that a motion to Postpone to a Time Certain is both debatable and amendable. On a side note, a motion to Lay on the Table takes precedence over a motion to Postpone to a Time Certain, as is provided in the graphic, above.

Kapur’s email, with the subject line “Misuse of Table at Antioch school board meeting,” reads:

“Mr. Payton,

In your article on the special meeting of the school board, you refer to the board using the motion Lay on the Table. Unfortunately, it appears that the motion was misused, when the motion to Postpone to a Certain Time was intended.

The motion to Lay on the Table is used “to lay the pending question aside temporarily when something else of immediate urgency has arisen or when something else needs to be addressed before consideration of the pending question is resumed.” RONR (12th ed.) 17:1

That paragraph goes on to state that there is no set time to take up the motion that is laid on the table. It also states that this motion is commonly misused.

The difference is important because the proper motion, Postpone to a Certain Time, is both debatable and amendable while the motion Lay on the Table is neither.

Happy to discuss further if you find that would be useful.

Atul Kapur, MD, CPP-T, PRP

Secretary, American Institute of Parliamentarians

Certified Professional Parliamentarian and

Teacher of Parliamentary Procedure

Professional Registered Parliamentarian”

UPDATE: Former City Clerk Simonsen Weighs In

However, according to former Antioch City Clerk Arne Simonsen, who earned the title of Master Municipal Clerk, “It was okay to use the Motion to Table which is not debatable.  It could be brought back later. But they could have gone the other route as was noted in the communication you received.”

Asked if a motion to Lay on the Table – which Kapur argues is only to be used temporarily – be done indefinitely, Simonsen responded, “it is often used to ‘kill’ an item, like the legislature putting a bill in the Suspense File. The definition of temporary is up for debate. But temporary is normally considered to be up to six months.”

Therefore, Trust Mary Rocha’s motion to table without including a date certain was allowable and any further interruption, debate or discussion should have been stopped by Board President Ellie Householder, and the substitute motion by Trustee Antonio Hernandez should have not been considered or voted on. Yet, once Rocha added the 60-day timeframe, the motion should have been changed to a motion to Postpone to a Time Certain.

 

Householder interrupts reading of public comments, board majority wouldn’t allow all of them to be read

By Allen Payton

The Antioch School Board, during their hastily called special meeting on Thursday night in response to last Friday’s incident with a violent student at Antioch High School, heard from angry members of the public on both sides of the issue and from district staff, on the district’s Use of Force Policies and Procedures and Board of Education Notification Policies and Procedures. Both items were tabled for up to 60 days on split votes, but not before Board President Ellie Householder interrupted the reading of public comments on the first item and the board majority voted to prevent all of them from being read. (See related articles here and here)

Before reading of the public comments began, Householder offered the trustees the opportunity to speak.

“Did you receive many calls on this?” Trustee Mary Rocha asked Superintendent Stephanie Anello.

“I didn’t get a single call,” Anello responded.

“I called the administrators at Antioch High School, and they said they did get calls from people thanking them for this not going any further,” Rocha stated.

During the public comments, many were scathing against Householder for her posting of the video on her official Facebook page and calling the special meeting.

Householder Stops Reading of Public Comments

“I’m sorry I’m having a difficult time. The following comments have nothing to do with policies and procedures,” Householder said, interrupting the reading of the public comments. “We don’t have general comments on the docket, tonight. The comments need to be specific to the topic.”

“That will be hard to do on this,” Anello said. “There are some negative ones on me coming up. We can take 10 minutes to review them.”

“There are 60 pages of comments,” said Director of Education Services Amy Bettencourt who was reading the comments.

“Are we either referring to the incident or referring to you?” Rocha asked of Householder.

“No. Dealing with policies,” Householder responded. We are getting into dangerous territory talking about the student. People can say what they want about me, that’s fine.”

“There’s no name attached to it, so it’s about the incident,” Rocha said. “It is because of this incident that we are having this meeting.”

“We do not have on our agenda public comments,” Householder said. “So, I’m not going to sit here and listen to comments bashing this student.”

“I hear more of the comments about you,” Rocha said.

Trustee Antonio Hernandez then made a motion to take a break for staff to review the public comments and remove those not dealing with the agenda item.

“As the reader, I am uncomfortable determining what to read or not,” Bettencourt said.

“Maybe we can get on a conference call,” Anello said to Bettencourt. “This could take longer than 10 minutes.”

Board Majority Votes to Prevent All Public Comments from Being Read

Hernandez, Householder and Lewis voted in favor of the motion. Hack and Rocha voted against. The board then took a break at about 6:25 p.m. agreeing to meet back in about 30 minutes.

The board meeting resumed about 25 minutes later and the reading of public comments, including those negative about board members, Anello and the local media, including this publication, continued. Several were in support of Householder calling the meeting and wanting the board to investigate the incident.

Motion To Table on First Agenda Item Passes 4-1

“I really do view tonight as the first conversation of many conversations, so we will have to meet again on this item,” Householder.

Rocha than made a motion to the table the item.

Householder ignored Rocha’s motion and continued to seek the direction of a majority of board members.

Anello made a point of order that “there is a motion on the table.”

“I didn’t hear a motion,” Householder said.

“I said I move we table the item,” Rocha.

Hack seconded the motion.

“Every day we don’t have a policy on this is another day something like this can happen,” said Hernandez. “I’m very passionate about this. Just because people are doing their best doesn’t mean there aren’t pathways for doing things better.”

“I think I need to make another point of order,” Anello said. “A vote needs to be held on a motion to table.”

Lewis then attempted to amend the motion for a date certain.

Rocha said her motion was to “allow our superintendent to give us feedback.”

“Do they go to the class and talk to the young man?” she asked about how similar situations are handled by school staff. “What’s the next step, then the next step?

“I think this is a healthy conversation. But until we have a conversation about what the policies are,” Lewis responded.

“I’m not sure how much time the superintendent needs,” Rocha.

“I actually do like, personally, setting the date,” Householder. “Can we table it and provide direction around this?”

“I will add to my motion 60 days,” Rocha then said. “At this time, I call for the motion to be voted on.”

Hack said, “I’m amenable to that as long as Stephanie has enough time.”

Anello said that it was.

“As long as you table something you have to vote on it and not continue to discuss it,” Anello said.

The motion to table passed 4-1 with Householder voting no.

Robert’s Rules of Order requires the end of discussion and debate, without interruption, and an immediate vote on a motion to table without discussion on the motion, either.

Motion To Table Second Agenda Item Passes 3-2

The board then heard the few public comments on the next item, entitled, “Board of Education Notification Policies and Procedures,” with much the same themes.

“Like I said, this is going to be somewhat similar as the last item,” Householder said.

Hernandez, “we have this opportunity to discuss this, here, not in the future.”

Rocha then made another motion to table the item for 60 days. It was seconded by Hack, again.

Hernandez attempted to make a substitute motion to give staff 14 days to return with information on the matter. Householder seconded his motion.

He then argued incorrectly that a substitute motion takes precedent over a motion to table.

A discussion continued about the motions.

In spite of points of order by Anello that a substitute motion did not take precedent, Householder disagreed because she said “it doesn’t make sense” and held a vote on the substitute motion. It failed 2-2-1 with Lewis abstaining saying he wasn’t sure about the motion taking precedence over a motion to table.

The original motion to table was then brought back, and Lewis asked if was “up to 60 days” to which Householder and Rocha agreed.

Hernandez then said there had to be a vote on the motion without discussion.

The motion passed 3-2 with Hernandez and Householder voting no.

The meeting was then adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

The board’s next regular meeting will be held next Wednesday, Sept. 8 at 7:00 p.m.

Publisher’s Notes:

During the meeting some incorrect things were said by members of the public during public comments about the Herald and me. The following is to set the record straight.

Just a quick response to the baseless comment just made about me. I have never had lunch or dinner with either Superintendent Stephanie Anello nor former Antioch Chief of Police Allan Cantando, and have never even been invited, even though I’ve known them for at least 15 to 20 years. As for reporting what our elected and appointed officials do, we will continue to do so, and give all involved the opportunity to offer their perspective on a matter in which they’re involved, regardless of any friendship that might exist or not. Unfortunately, not all respond and we can only publish what people share with us or on social media, or what we must obtain through Public Records Act requests.

As for the email exchange between Householder and Anello included in yesterday’s article, for which I submitted a Public Records Act request, yesterday “for any and all communications regarding tomorrow’s special board meeting”, government officials are required by state law to provide information, which isn’t privileged, to the media and public upon request.

While they have up to 10 days to do so and can extend that for another 14 days if determined it is needed to research, review and make any redactions of privileged information, officials know the media works on deadlines and there is time sensitivity for publishing the news so the public can know about their government. Thus officials provide the requested information as quickly as possible.

The special meeting wasn’t announced by Householder on Facebook until Tuesday evening and wasn’t placed on the district’s website as an official meeting until Wednesday afternoon. So, no Public Records Act request could have been made about any communications about it, until then. Anello provided the very few documents that fulfilled the request that same day.

Allen Payton, Publisher

Emails show she wanted to have board “investigate” last Friday’s incident at Antioch High; superintendent refuses claiming violations of employees’ and student’s rights, her contract and Board Policy

By Allen Payton

In response to last Friday’s incident with a violent student at Antioch High School, which was caught on video that she posted on her official Facebook page, Antioch School Board President Ellie Householder has called a special meeting for Thursday, Sept. 2 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss “District-wide Use of Force Policies and Procedures”. (See related article)

Householder posted an announcement of the meeting as an event on Facebook on Tuesday, August 31, at about 2:00 p.m. but it wasn’t posted on the district’s website until Wednesday afternoon.

Although the board president has the authority to call special meetings, which require just a 24-hour public notification, board policy requires it be an item of urgency that can’t wait for the next regular meeting, which requires a 72-hour public notification. The next regularly board meeting is scheduled for next Wed., Sept. 8.

Attempts to reach Householder to ask why the matter couldn’t wait until next week to be discussed were unsuccessful before publication time.

In response to a Public Records Act request, emails between Householder and Superintendent Stephanie Anello show the board president wanted the board to investigate the incident writing, “I have consulted with Vice President Dr. Lewis, and he agreed there are unanswered questions regarding the video of the incident at Antioch High on 8/27.

Please take this email as my official notice calling for a Special Meeting for Thursday, September 2nd at 6 PM, to investigate this incident. There will only need to be one item for discussion/action by the Board: ‘Inquiry into Social Media Post Circulated on August 27th incident at Antioch High School.’

• I would like AUSD staff to be involved for questions, including administration and site safety.
• Additionally, please invite Strategic Threat Management since we contract with them.
• Please attach with this agenda item (1) Strategic Threat Management’s contract, (2) job duties for site safety personnel, and (3) and [sic] written policies that outline how violent situations regarding students is [sic] handled – this can be Antioch High specific, Board Policy, the District’s safety plan – anything to help the board understand different scenarios and responses.
• Lastly, please provide any data we have on student arrests for the last 4-5 years, including but not limited to number of arrests, reasons, school site, grade, gender, and race. Typically, I would only ask for 3 years of data, however, because of COVID, I am extending that time span.”

Anello agreed to schedule the meeting, but refused the remainder of Householder’s requests writing, “I am happy to schedule a Special Meeting. Unfortunately, I can’t agree to the agenda items you requested below for the following reasons:

• This is an ongoing investigation (at the time of your request, staff has had less than 24 business hours to investigate);
• You are asking me to violate employee’s rights;
• You are asking me to violate a student’s right to privacy;
• You are breaching my employment contract;
• You are violating Board Policy;

I’m sure there are many other ethical violations included in this request.

The one item I do believe the Board may discuss at this time is the STM contract. However, I want to go on record as stating I believe that absent of an investigation, this is inappropriate at this time. However, if this is what you would like the Board to consider, please advise and I will calendar the meeting.”

In response, Householder requested the contact information for the district’s attorney.

See complete email exchange between Householder and district staff regarding the special meeting, here: 083121 emails Householder & district staff CPRA 090121

Lewis Responds

When Lewis was asked to confirm his conversation with Householder, and if he supported having the board investigate the incident and her requests of Anello he responded, “No. I mentioned that it should review the procedures since the meeting had been called. That conversation happened after the decision to have the meeting was determined.”

Meeting Viewing and Public Comment Information

The meeting will be livestreamed and can be viewed at https://youtu.be/F-Dsas_w-s0. Persons wishing to make a public comment on items on the agenda can submit their comments until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Comments can be submitted via an online form at https://tinyurl.com/ausd-public-comment-card or by email to kelliecavallaro@antiochschools.net. Comments received by 4:00 p.m. will be read to the public during the meeting.

Requirements for Calling Special Board Meetings

Education Code 35144 – Special Meetings:

A special meeting of the governing board of a school district may be called at any time by the presiding officer of the board, or by a majority of the members thereof, by delivering personally or by mail written notice to each member of the board, and to each local newspaper of general circulation, radio, or television station requesting notice in writing. The notice shall be delivered personally or by mail at least 24 hours before the time of the meeting as specified in the notice. The call and notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted. No other business shall be considered at those meetings by the governing board. The written notice may be dispensed with as to any member who at or prior to the time the meeting convenes files with the clerk or secretary of the board a written waiver of notice. The waiver may be given by telegram. The written notice may also be dispensed with as to any member who is actually present at the meeting at the time it convenes.

The call and notice shall be posted at least 24 hours prior to the special meeting in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public and district employees.

(Amended by Stats. 1986, Ch. 641, Sec. 1.)

From Government Code – Brown Act – Open Meeting Laws; Special Meetings:

a) A special meeting may be called at any time by the presiding officer of the legislative body of a local agency, or by a majority of the members of the legislative body, by delivering written notice to each member of the legislative body and to each local newspaper of general circulation and radio or television station requesting notice in writing and posting a notice on the local agency’s Internet Web site, if the local agency has one. The notice shall be delivered personally or by any other means and shall be received at least 24 hours before the time of the meeting as specified in the notice. The call and notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted or discussed. No other business shall be considered at these meetings by the legislative body. The written notice may be dispensed with as to any member who at or prior to the time the meeting convenes files with the clerk or secretary of the legislative body a written waiver of notice. The waiver may be given by telegram. The written notice may also be dispensed with as to any member who is actually present at the meeting at the time it convenes.

The call and notice shall be posted at least 24 hours prior to the special meeting in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public.

AUSD policy BB 9320 Meetings and Notices regarding who can call a Special Meeting:

Special meetings of the Board may be called at any time by the presiding officer or a majority of the Board members.  However, a special meeting shall not be called regarding the salary, salary schedule, or other compensation of the Superintendent, assistant superintendent, or other management employee as described in Government Code 3511.1. (Government Code 54956)

Please check back later for any updates to this report.