“…the employees of the AUSD have No Confidence in Ellie Householder’s ability to lead the Antioch Unified School District.”

Separate online petition started to remove her from school board

By Allen Payton

The Antioch Unified School District staff, including teachers, classified and management employees, announced Wednesday night, that 97.5% approved a Vote of No Confidence in Antioch School Board President Ellie Householder. A total of 669 staff members voted in favor, only 15 district employees voted no and three voted to abstain.

The three groups are the Antioch Education Association (AEA) representing the teachers, California School Employees Association Antioch Chapter 85 (CSEA) and the Antioch Management Association (AMA), representing the principals and district leadership. The A A members voted 441-8-0, the CS A members voted 213-6-2 and the AMA members voted 45-1-1.

The AEA announced on their Facebook page, Wednesday night, Sept. 22, “The employees of the Antioch Unified School District have overwhelmingly voted in support of a Vote of No Confidence in School Board President Ellie Householder.”

Also on Wed. night, on the CSEA’s Facebook page, the AEA’s post was reposted with the comment, “Resounding vote of ‘no confidence’ in Ellie Householder.”

In addition, during public comments of the school board regular meeting, representatives of the three employ groups issued the following statement:

“A vote of no confidence is defined as ‘a formal vote by which people indicate that they do not support a leader, government, etc.

In an electronic secret ballot election held from September 18-22, 2021, 97.5% percent of votes cast were in support of a Vote of No Confidence in Ellie Householder as the President of the AUSD School Board. Only 15 votes were cast in opposition, representing only 0.02% of the total ballots cast. The breakdown of votes is as follows: 98.2% of certificated staff (AEA), 97.8% of management staff (AMA), and 97.3% of classified staff (CSEA) stated their lack of confidence in the Board President.

The following violations of Roberts Rules of Order and the Brown Act have occurred at board meetings presided by President Ellie Householder:

• Allowing a substitute motion to go through on a non-debatable motion such as “motion to table”
• Efforts to limit or eliminate public comment by removing agenda items without consensus of the board
• Efforts to shorten public comment by reducing the time limit allowed after comments had been submitted
• Stopping public comments midstream when she felt it wasn’t appropriate or directly related to the agenda item
• Requesting staff to use personal judgement on which public comments should be entered into public record and which should not
• Abusing her presidential authority by not recognizing staff and board members’ requests to speak or provide input during a public meeting
• Asserting that the president must not only collaborate on, but approve, the board agenda. Ed. Code and Board Policy do not require the board president’s approval, just collaboration on the development
• Abusing her authority by calling and/or adding agenda items at special meetings, that were neither urgent, nor necessary
• Violating the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), by publicly posting unauthorized video of students without permission

For all of these reasons, the employees of the AUSD have No Confidence in Ellie Householder’s ability to lead the Antioch Unified School District.

Valorie Luke, President, Antioch Education Association

Scott Bergerhouse, President, Antioch Management Association

Josh Isenbarger, President, California School Employees Association, Chapter 85”

————–

Online Petition Launched to Remove Householder from School Board

In addition, Change.org petition was started by Emily Smith with the title, “Remove Ellie Householder from the District Board”. As of Thursday afternoon, Sept. 23 it had garnered 144 signatures.

It includes the message, “As we have watched multiple ‘emergency’ meetings set up by Ellie Householder, it has become evident that she is not fit for her position. She has unilaterally removed the agenda item involving her removal, TWICE! She has violated The Brown Act and does not follow Roberts Rules unless it is convenient for her argument.  Ellie has turned out district into a laughing stock [sic] and has silenced the other trustees on the board. These are just a few examples of why Ellie Householder is not fit to be the board president. She is refusing to allow the Board to act as a board, silencing them and refusing to recognize them. These are all elected officials. She has been abusing her power, and refuses to listen to other trustees. Let your opinion be heard and let the district know the community wants Ellie Householder out!”

Efforts to reach Householder for comment on both the vote and petition were unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.

 

District’s attorney who said, “I wasn’t at the meeting” argues in support, citing Robert’s Rules of Order

“I don’t want just you, making that decision” – Trustee Rocha, regarding removing the item from the agenda

Also, unilaterally removes the one item from closed session

Board agrees to hire a parliamentarian for meetings – even though Householder, as Antioch City Clerk serves as the council’s parliamentarian

Rocha calls for censuring Householder

School district staff announce 97.5% vote of no confidence in Householder

“This is uncomfortable” – VP Lewis

By Allen Payton

During the Antioch School Board meeting Wednesday, Sept. 22, 2021, before the regular open session began, a closed session was to be held to discuss one item entitled, “Student Discipline or Other Confidential Student Matter: Interdistrict Transfer Permit”. However, Board President Ellie Householder unilaterally removed it from the agenda, cancelling the closed session, which according to the agenda was scheduled to begin at 6:00 p.m. (See meeting agenda)

“There was a request that this item be pulled for tonight,” Householder explained. “So, I’m going to pull it and we are going to have a separate meeting to discuss that matter. So, we won’t have any items for closed session.”

“I did just want to have it on the record that I did not consult with the superintendent in the development of this agenda,” she continued. “So, a way that we can, you know, continue tonight, and discuss everything on this agenda, I just want to get a consensus from my colleagues, are we OK with this agenda. Because that is in essence what is done by the board president, before the meeting,

All four other trustees agreed to the agenda – which included item 12B, the vote on Householder’s removal as board president.

“Apologies for this false start, here,” Householder said.

“I believe you’re going to have to have a motion and a second in order to remove that from the, just so it’s clean, the closed session item,” Superintendent Stephanie Anello.

“I don’t have to,” Householder responded. So, if there is a motion, that’s fine. But I was requested by the individual that this is regarding to have this item removed. So, we’re not going to discuss it.”

An attempt to ask Anello why Householder didn’t receive a draft agenda for her review before the final version was sent out was unsuccessful before publication time.

Open Session Householder Unilaterally Removes Item for Vote on Her Removal as Board President

Then, at the beginning of the open session that began at the regular time of 7:00 p.m., Householder again, unilaterally removed the item for a vote on her removal as board president, invoking the same Robert’s Rules of Order she has violated during recent meetings. This time it was placed on the agenda by Trustee Mary Rocha and Area 5 Trustee Gary Hack.

“Because our board follows Robert’s Rules of Order, folks on a losing side of a motion cannot bring back a motion for reconsideration,” Householder explained as reason for her action.

Rocha responded, “I’ve gone through the proper channels and put it on the agenda as I was told. It’s not a reconsideration it’s a renewing.”

“Thank you for that information, Trustee Rocha. “If you recall the motion was made and because you were on the losing side you can’t bring it back for reconsideration.”

“It’s not for reconsideration, ma’am,” Rocha shot back. “It’s renewing, which is a different way of looking at it, which it can be heard.”

“I would agree with you,” Hack said.

“I will pose this question to our attorney. It is because we are a board that’s dictated by Robert’s Rules of Order,” Householder said. “I’ve never heard of this…

The district’s attorney, Lou Lozano said, “I wasn’t at that meeting. If there was a motion and if that motion failed, under Robert’s Rules of Order, reconsideration is done when a member on the winning side of the motion asks for reconsideration of the motion. I understand you operate under Robert’s Rules of Order. It’s up to the board to waive those or not. It would take someone on the winning side of the motion to bring that back.”

Rocha continued to argue her point that it was a “renewal of main motion.”

“It’s up to the board if they want to waive Robert’s Rules of Order,” Lozano said. “It would take a member on the winning side of the vote. It’s up to the board. If the board chooses to say we want to hear this motion…it’s really up to the board to decide to hear it.

Area 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez said, “That’s pretty clear to me in following Robert’s Rules of Order. Mr. Lozano brings a very good point.”

“I can’t believe you’re letting this go,” Rocha said as Householder tried to move on to the flag salute. “I have a right to have a motion on the table. I’m sorry I’m not dropping it. I’d rather that you look at your own book and find out.”

Board Vice President and Area 3 Trustee Dr. Clyde Lewis was the only member to not comment about the matter.

ANALYSIS: During their last regular meeting on Wed., Sept. 8, Householder unilaterally removed the same item on a vote to remove her as board president from the agenda, claiming she didn’t approve it to be there, which was later proven false. She then unilaterally moved the public comments for that agenda item to the general public comments for items not on the agenda, at the beginning of the meeting. Once that occurred, the item and any motion, discussion or vote on it was moot. Yet, when the time for that item arrived, Rocha was allowed to make a motion, seconded by Hack and Householder allowed a vote on it, which failed 2-3. Yet, again, the motion and vote were moot. Therefore, having the same item placed on the agenda for the Sept. 22nd meeting was not a reconsideration of the previous motion and vote, but a new one.

Had the district’s attorney, Mr. Lozano, reviewed the video of the Sept. 8th meeting to be fully informed before participating, tonight, he most likely would have given the same advice. However, as Lozano said during the meeting, he was asked at the last minute, to participate by Householder, which is why he was dressed so casually. So, instead, while it would have been correct in a usual situation of a motion, the advice he offered was standard information from Robert’s Rules of Order and not specific to this unusual situation.  (See related article)

Householder Unilaterally Moves Agenda Item 12B Comments to End of Meeting

Following agenda item 12A, Householder was going to allow the public comments for the item 12B, which would have been a vote on her removal as board president. However, since she’d already removed it from the meeting agenda, for the second regular meeting in a row, Householder unilaterally moved the public comments for that agenda item, to item 20 for the general public comments for items not on the agenda, at the end of the meeting.

Rocha Tries Again for Vote to Remove Householder as Board President

Rocha then continued her effort for a vote to remove Householder as board president.

“Madame Chair, 12B is still the same one that I had put down for removal of board chair. Actually, Board Member Hack also brought this item up,” Rocha stated. “Again, this is a different motion than the motion, before. It’s a renewing motion not a reconsideration motion. So, I don’t believe you can remove it. Unless you want to ask the rest of the board members to renew it, then I have no choice, but to accept what the board members wanted to do.”

“Alright, so moving on. Section 7 district reports, we don’t have any this evening…” Householder said.

“I’m asking for a motion, Madame Chair,” Rocha said, interrupting her.

“You can make a motion,” said Householder.

“I’m asking for a motion for the board members that are against this motion,” Rocha said. “So, I’m saying it should be placed on there because it’s a renewing one, not a reconsideration.”

“I hear your comment, noted,” Householder said. “My suggestion would be to talk offline with any one of us. But right now, I mean…”

“If you want a motion, OK, I’ll place the motion, in place and that is to remove you as chair,” Rocha stated. “That’s my motion. I just need a second.”

“The thing is, though, Trustee Rocha, that’s not valid because you already made that motion, last time,” Householder said. “So, if there’s a motion to reconsider of myself…”

“It’s not reconsider, it’s renewing,” Rocha repeated.

“But that’s not a valid motion, so I can’t recognize it. I understand, I’ve fully noted what you said,” Householder repeated. “So, I have to insist we move on with our agenda. So, Section 7…”

“Well, Madame Chair, you can’t remove it without the rest of the board agreeing to remove it,” Rocha stated. “You did not take action.”

“Trustee Rocha, I did take action,” Householder replied.

“No, you didn’t. You didn’t take the vote,” Rocha said.

“Trustee Rocha, I’m not going to argue with you,” Householder said.

“I’m just trying to tell you, it wasn’t voted on,” Rocha said.

“OK, I’m noting your concerns,” Householder responded. “But I’m telling you that it was voted on at the last…”

“There was no vote, when it was taken earlier,” Rocha repeated.

“That’s not a valid motion that you can make, legally, per Robert’s Rules of Order,” Householder stated. “So, I cannot recognize it.”

“Renewing is,” Rocha said.

“I cannot. We just had our attorney on here, Trustee Rocha that said…” Householder said.

“It was reconsideration, but not renewing,” Rocha responded. “So, I want the board to take action. Either they want it on the board (she meant agenda) or they don’t want it. I don’t want just you making that decision.”

“Trustee Rocha, I appreciate your concerns,” Householder said. “So, Section 7 District Reports…”

“You did not take action, Madame Chair, you did not take action,” Rocha repeated. “So, that item is still on the agenda.”

Householder continued with the meeting agenda.

Other Matters

The board members discussed holding in-person meetings, again. They’ll make their decision at their October meeting.

Agree to Hire Parliamentarian

In other board action, they then discussed and approved hiring a parliamentarian, which was placed on the agenda by Anello.

“Thank you for introducing that, Superintendent Anello,” Householder said, then public comments were read, all in support of the proposal.

“I think this is a great idea. My only direction that I would provide, is it’s someone…who hasn’t been to our prior meetings, so we have a fresh start,” said Householder, who as Antioch City Clerk is the parliamentarian to the city council.

“I think it’s a healthy addition,” Lewis said. “I think the challenge will be to ensure that person is neutral. I’m a big process guy. I don’t make decisions willy nilly…around emotions. All of my decisions are based around logic and reason. Again, I think disagreement is healthy and I think a parliamentarian can add to that.”

“Both you and I are in agreement with that,” Householder said.

“I think it’s healthy. It would be good to have someone tell us,” Rocha said. “I think it’s also good for us to know what the rules are.”

“I’m absolutely in support of this,” Hernandez said. “We all have to be in agreement with who the person is. Just want to make sure we’re all working together as a board and all on the same page about things like that.”

Hack said, “I would agree it’s 5-0. Absolutely.”

“Is this a paid person?” Rocha asked.

“If we’re going to bring someone in, a contract would be brought before the board,” said Deputy Superintendent Jessica Romeo.

“Hopefully, we can have a contract on the agenda in October,” Householder said.

Future Agenda Items

Under Future Agenda Items Rocha called for a vote to censure Householder on the next meeting agenda.

“At this time, I’d like to bring forward a censureship of Trustee Householder and the need for Vice President Lewis to bring it forward, so the chair does not remove it,” Rocha said.

Public Comments

There were still 140 pages of public comments remaining to be read at the end of the meeting.

“I don’t know if we’re going to be able to make it all the way to the end,” Householder said, suggesting reading comments for 30 minutes and then taking a break. “We’ll decide that later.”

Many of the public comments were against forcing students in the district to wear masks. See all those read during general public comments, here:

Comments for 9.22.2021 RBOE – Part 1   Additional Comments for 6A 9.22.2021

More Additional Comments for 6A 9.22.2021    Two More Additional Comments for 6A 9.22.2021

Additional Comments for 6B 9.22.2021    Additional Comments for Items 12A, 12B, and 12C

School District Staff Announce Vote of No Confidence

During the public comments, one was submitted and read from the three school district staff groups, the faculty, classified and management employees, announcing their vote of no confidence in Householder by 97.5% with only 15 staff members voting no. (See related article and article with further details to be posted on this website, later)

Rocha Makes One More Attempt

During the Reports/Comments from Board Members section of the agenda, Rocha tried again to have a vote on removing Householder as board president.

“Madam Chair, point of order. Trustee Hack and myself, placed on the agenda, as required, a motion to remove board chair, Ellie Householder. I have this book, right in front of me, that says Robert’s Rules of Order. It shows you that on chapter 10, section 38, page 85…the renewal of the motion.”

Householder attempted to stop Rocha saying, “We’ve already discussed this” but Rocha continued to speak.

“So, I’m reading to you, Robert’s Rules of Order makes it easy to reintroduce a defeated motion at a future meeting,” Rocha stated. “This is called renewing the motion. So, all members have to do is request the motion to be placed on the agenda, which I have done the proper way. And so, I am ordering, at least call for the motion. I need a second. I think we should take action and then bury it.”

“Any other reports?” Householder asked, trying to move forward with the agenda.

“I need a second on this motion,” Rocha continued. “I’m calling for the motion.”

“Trustee Rocha, we’re not going to back and forth. This is an illegal motion,” Householder said. “Is there other reports?”

“No, it isn’t. I just read to you it’s a renewing motion,” Rocha responded. “So, it was placed officially, the way you wanted it.”

Householder continued to speak and try to get Rocha to stop.

“I’m not giving it up,” Rocha said. “I need a second, so we can clear this item.”

“Trustee Rocha, please, for, please,” Householder exclaimed.

“I need a second,” Rocha repeated.

“Trustee Rocha, this is an illegal motion,” Householder repeated.

“I gave you a second,” Hack said, simultaneously.

“OK. Mr. Hack just gave me a second. I’m calling for the motion to be called,” Rocha said. “Call for the motion to be done.”

“But there are other reports,” Householder then said.

“I’m calling for the motion,” Rocha repeated.

“You’re not the board president,” Householder stated. “Are there other reports?”

“But you are, and you have the right to do what I’m asking you for,” Rocha responded. “I’m asking for you…”

Raising her voice, Householder asked, “Trustee Rocha, are you calling for a motion to reconsider my judgement as board chair?”

“I’m calling for the motion for the renewal of the motion I had placed on the agenda,” Rocha responded. “I just want it voted on, so we can clear it and it’s out of the area.”

“Trustee Rocha, you’re out of order,” Householder said speaking over her fellow trustee. “You’re out of order.”

“I’m not out of order,” Rocha shot back. “I have a second on a motion. So, I’m calling for the motion.”

“Do we have any other reports or comments?” Householder asked.

“Again, you’ve misused your power,” said Rocha.

Householder moved on, again asking for any reports or comments from other trustees.

Lewis Finally Speaks Out, Apologizes for Missing Monday’s Meeting

“I have something,” Lewis said, weighing in on the matter for the first time. “You know, I think in terms of being mature about this whole situation, I think a deeper conversation is needed. We are a policy developing board. If the goal is, or if the conversation revolves around justifications for actions against a particular board member, I think that’s a healthy conversation, at some point to have. However, that conversation has not happened, and we haven’t laid out criteria for which that request should happen. I think we should have that conversation.”

“I myself, as a…trained administrator, I’m all about protocol, I’m not about emotion. I’m not about any of that stuff,” he continued. “Any decision I make, any action I take is process oriented. So, you know, I think that is a healthy conversation that should happen.”

“Obviously…as vice president I don’t have the power to put something on the board (agenda),” Lewis stated. “I did recognize your comment, earlier, Trustee Rocha, and I’ll make sure that conversation happens. But I think that’s a conversation we need to have in terms of like, OK, if there are actions taken by a board member, or if there are some things that happen by a board member, how do we move forward as a board? You know. I think those conversations should happen. Those should be clearly defined. It shouldn’t be, ‘Oh, you know, this person made a decision I don’t like, so now I want to get rid of them.’ I don’t think that’s healthy. It sets a precedence that’s unhealthy for the board moving forward. That’s my opinion about that.”

“Now, I apologize to the board and to the public for not being here, last night,” he stated. “I had some personal matters I had to attend to. I won’t go into detail about it. I made a statement about why I wasn’t here. They were personal matters I had to attend to and that’s that.”

“We need a rebalancing, and I don’t know if that requires sort of a consultant to come in,” Lewis continued. “If this is the level of conversation that we’re having amongst ourselves, what message or what tone are we setting for our teachers as well as our students? The students and the public are watching us. Regardless of what side of this conversation you’re on, the students and the public are watching us. This is uncomfortable. And I don’t mean to reprimand. I’m not speaking down to anybody. It’s uncomfortable. So, I’m going to leave it there.”

Householder Returns to Rocha’s Motion

Householder then said about the motion to remove her as board president, “so, just for clarity to address your point, Dr. Lewis, yourself, Trustee Hernandez or me can bring back, what Trustee Rocha is requesting, per what our attorney said to us at the beginning and said to us, last night.”

Rocha could be seen shaking her head, wagging her finger, showing her copy of Robert’s Rules of Order, and speaking, but couldn’t be heard by those watching, to which Householder said, “OK, Trustee Rocha.”

“Our attorney told us, last night in our discussion, as well as at the beginning of this meeting, that those are the only three people that can bring this discussion back,” Householder continued. “I’m trying to be as open to hearing. I believe discussion is great, too. That’s why I asked Trustee Rocha, is she making a motion to appeal my decision. Because then we can have a discussion about it. But frankly, I cannot allow illegal discussion to continue to happen. Because that is one of my very explicitly, enumerated duties as board president to ensure that our board bylaws are followed, adhered to, and by making illegal motions they’re not.”

“I’m trying to tell you how to make the motion so that we can continue the conversation on and that’s ignored,” she continued. “I can’t do anything about that. We’re all individuals.”

“So, with that I really must insist that if this is about the motion on the table and if we, whatever,” Householder said stopping abruptly.

She then recognized Lewis, who shared “some positive things happening in the community.”

“I’m looking forward to a time we can overcome our differences. It’s clear there’s division, here and I think we need to find a way to get past that and work together as a board, work together with the superintendent,” Hernandez said. “Because we’re here to serve the students and the longer that we spend our time having these back and forths, it’s going to keep us away from doing what we need to do to be serving these students.”

“That’s why I came on here,” he continued. “I didn’t come on here to do any of these little political things that are going on. I care about the students and that’s what I’m here for. So, I just hope that we can all, like take a moment to really dig into our own selves and get to work for these students and realize there’s a much bigger thing, here at stake, which is the education our students get every day.”

He then recognized Lewis for “a massive promotion” at work in Alameda County.

“I’d love to see this board continue to focus on positive things and not things that are going to divide us,” Hernandez added.

Use of Force Policy

Lewis asked Anello, “how close are we to getting the conversation going, again about the contract for the use of force? Are we two weeks out or 14 days, something like that?”

“It’s been 14 days. So, we’re definitely working on it,” Anello responded.

“OK. Alright,” Lewis responded.

The meeting ended at 12:35 a.m.

Check back later for any updates to this report.

Teaches at Antioch’s Mission Elementary School; gala will be broadcast virtually

Selected as the Antioch Unified School District’s 2021 Teacher of the Year (TOY), earlier this year, Mission Elementary School’s Crystal Van Dyke will be honored this Thursday night at the county’s annual Teacher of the Year Gala. She is one of 21 TOYs from 15 school districts of Contra Costa County, Contra Costa Community College District and Contra Costa County Office of Education. (See related article)

This year’s gala is being broadcast virtually on the Contra Costa County Office of Education (CCCOE) website, on YouTube and on edTV (Comcast Cable Channel 32). It will include the four finalists giving their three- to five-minute speeches (same speeches given in July). The excitement-filled evening will come to a dramatic close with the announcement of the 2021-2022 Contra Costa County Teachers of the Year.

The four finalists were announced by Superintendent of Schools Lynn Mackey in June: Alisha Douglass, a ceramics teacher at Liberty High School in Brentwood; Kristen Plant, an English teacher at Miramonte High School in Orinda; Michelle Wilson, an English teacher at Dougherty Valley High School in San Ramon; and Christina Zenzano, an English teacher at Rancho Medanos Junior High School in Pittsburg. They were selected from the 21 Teacher of the Year winners within 15 school districts of Contra Costa County, Contra Costa Community College District and Contra Costa County Office of Education.

“It is my pleasure to congratulate the four finalists on the honor of being named one of the county’s top teachers,” Superintendent Mackey said. “All of the professional educators who are being considered for this prestigious award are to be commended and thanked for their professionalism and leadership, especially throughout this pandemic. These four are prominent examples of the great work teachers throughout the county have done over the last year.”

TOY Selection Process

The county’s TOY program is directed by the CCCOE. With such a high caliber of teaching professionals to draw from, the CCCOE’s TOY program uses a three-stage selection process, with a point and percentage system to determine the final candidate as follows:

I Application Screening:

In April/May, a committee representing the county’s education, business, and public-sector partners will meticulously review the applications submitted by the school districts. This committee independently rates each application. After the application screening and scoring are completed, four teachers will be selected to advance to the next phase as semifinalists.

II Classroom Observation and Interview:

In May, a committee of former County Teachers of the Year will observe the semifinalists interacting with their students. Immediately following, the committee interviews the candidates, discussing topics such as their teaching philosophy and techniques. The results of the two screening processes are then combined to determine the four finalists.

III Speech Presentation:

In July, the four TOY finalists will each give a three- to five-minute speech to another panel of a dozen educators, business, and public-sector representatives who will judge the finalists on their speech and presentation skills.

List of past Contra Costa County Teacher of the Year Representatives from 1977 to present (PDF)

The County representatives are announced at the awards dinner gala affair. Local business and community organizations generously donate classroom grants, services and other items to each of the district winners. (See list of donors, here)

History of the TOY Program

In 1972, California began recognizing outstanding teachers, establishing the Teachers of the Year Program. This program is open to all teachers in public schools who teach pre-kindergarten through college. Contra Costa County has participated in the program since its beginning, when Joseph E. Davis, Jr., of the Acalanes Union High School District, was named the county’s first representative.

Since that time, eight teachers from this county have been State finalists: Janet Neill, San Ramon Valley Unified (1975); David Eakin, John Swett Unified (1981); William Thomas, Mt. Diablo Unified (1982); Janice Bergamini, Mt. Diablo Unified (1991); Shauna Hawes, Mt. Diablo Unified (2017); and Kelly Perkins (Mt. Diablo Unified (2019). The County has had four State winners: Mary Allan, Antioch Unified (2001); Janet Gower, Mt. Diablo Unified (2002); and William Pence, San Ramon Valley Unified (1999); and Rosie Reid, Mt. Diablo Unified (2019). Both William Pence and Rosie Reid were selected to represent California at the National Teacher of the Year level.

Follow Contra Costa County’s Teacher of the Year program on Twitter and Instagram at @CoCoSchools and through the hashtag #cocotoy.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

No action taken with VP Lewis absent; split 2-2 on how long public comments should be, Householder unilaterally reduces them from 3 to 2 minutes; she violates Robert’s Rules of Order, again

“We can’t just get filibustered all night” – Area 1 Trustee Hernandez

“It sounds like a poorly written soap opera” – public comment

By Allen Payton

Before holding the closed session to discipline, dismiss or remove Superintendent Stephanie Anello during their special meeting on Tuesday night, the four members of the Antioch School Board in attendance split 2-2 on how many minutes would be allotted to each public comment. It was the second special meeting called by Board President Ellie Householder, this month and during which nothing was accomplished. She shared in a statement issued Monday, as her reasons for calling the meeting and wanting to take the action against Anello, district students’ poor performance and test scores over the past few years. (See related articles here, here and here) (See meeting video)

Following the closed session, Householder announced that no action had been taken, as was expected with the continued split on the board and only four trustees in attendance.

This is also the second time Householder has gone after Anello, and during a special board meeting, as well. The first time was last December, just four days after Householder was elected board president on a 3-2 vote of the trustees, hoping she had the support of the two new members who gave her the one-year title and position. It was done under her explanation of discussing the evaluation process of Anello, which wasn’t scheduled to happen until this June. But the public wasn’t buying that and submitted over 260 public comments and a petition with over 1,400 signatures in support of Anello.

But residents weren’t buying that and submitted over 260 public comments, mostly in support of Anello, as well as an online petition with over 1,400 signatures in support of the superintendent.

During that meeting, as the Herald previously reported, Householder claimed there was a misperception due to an “issue of language” saying it was not for the actual evaluation. She expressed concern over “establishing metrics for the evaluation amidst a pandemic with constantly changing circumstances as it pertains to the education of children in the district.” She also said she wanted to involve new trustees, Antonio Hernandez and Dr. Clyde Lewis, in the process.” (See  related article)

Tuesday’s meeting began at 5:30 p.m. with the district’s outside attorney, Lou Lozano, present at Householder’s request, but Board Vice President and Area 3 Trustee Lewis absent, of which he informed the Herald on Monday, due to a work conflict.

Householder estimated the public comments submitted might last as long as three hours. She asked the other three trustees if the time should be reduced to two minutes for each. Trustee Mary Rocha and Area 4 Trustee Gary Hack supported keeping them three minutes

“We can’t just get filibustered all night and not get our work done,” Area 1 Trustee Hernandez said, speaking in support of reducing the public comments to two minutes.

“I just wondered, if it was your employment, would you want public comment limited?” asked Superintendent Stephanie Anello.

“I’m going to say, I’m the board president and they will be two minutes,” Householder then said.

“Wow. You’re being a bully” Rocha said.

“You don’t have the authority,” Hack interjected.

“Trustee Hack, you are not recognized,” Householder said.

“We have our attorney with us and I’m trying to be respectful,” Householder said.

“You don’t have the authority,” Hack said, again, without being recognized.

“Trustee Hack, I’m trying to be very kind right now but we’re going to be moving on,” Householder said.

Public Comments

AUSD BOE Public Comments 9.21.2021 Pt1     AUSD BOE Public Comments 9.21.2021 Pt 2

The 127 pages of public comments were then read and almost all of them were in support of Anello and critical of Householder. Some were also critical of Hernandez, Lewis and the board as a whole. Many called for Householder to resign or be removed as board president, which is on the board’s regular meeting agenda for a vote on Wednesday night. (See related article)

“It sounds like a poorly written soap opera,” read one public comment, regarding the calling of the special meeting.

“Why do I feel like I moved to Jerry Springer’s hometown?” another member of the public asked in their written comments.

The most serious comment made against Anello was by Willie Mims, representing the NAACP East County Branch for which he serves as Education Chair.

The board took a brief break at 7:50 p.m. with 50 pages of comments left to be read.

Where Was Lewis?

On Monday Lewis told the Herald, “Tuesday, I’m not available. I have to work. I can’t make that meeting. I have a work meeting at that time.”

Efforts to reach him shortly after 8 p.m. asking if his work meeting was done, and if he could join the meeting, since the public comments were still being read, and then again at 9:20 p.m. after the reading of the public comments were finished, asking if he was still at work, were unsuccessful.

Rocha Tries to Adjourn Before Going into Closed Session

At 9:20 p.m., after over three-and-a-half hours of public comments, during which only seven exceeded the two-minute time limit, the board took another brief break.

When they returned, Rocha asked Householder, “Is Dr. Lewis going to be in attendance?”

“I don’t know,” Householder replied.

“In that case, I move to adjourn this meeting,” Rocha said.

Householder Violates Robert’s Rules of Order, Again

The sound cut out briefly, but then Householder, ignoring Rocha’s motion said to her, “let’s go into closed session and you will have the floor, then,” giving Rocha the chance to bring it up, again in closed session.

According to Robert’s Rules of Order, Rocha’s motion to adjourn carries the second highest level of precedence of all motions, and Householder was required to recognize it and, if seconded, immediately hold a vote on it, without interruption, debate or amendment.

No Action Taken During Closed Session

Then the four board members and the district’s attorney adjourned to the closed session and the district’s YouTube channel feed was cut off. It lasted until 10:30 p.m. and when the board returned, Householder reported out and merely said, “Report from closed session, no action was taken.”

They then voted to adjourn the meeting and it passed on a 4-0 vote, with Lewis still absent.

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.