Charging a host of improprieties by the Unionville-Chadds Ford School Board, Director Holly Manzone, whose term on the board was to end in November, unexpectedly resigned her position during the board’s Oct. 21 meeting. She read a brief statement, handed in a resignation letter and left the Unionville Elementary School auditorium where the meeting was taking place.

She began her speech by saying that while members of a school board are elected locally, they are “actually agents of the state legislature and are charged with acting in the best interest of all pupils and all citizens.”

Then the tone changed.

“The ability of the school board to govern effectively relies on communication,” she said. “Our board has eliminated most committee meetings and much of the discussion prior to votes takes place in private conversations among board members. Information is not shared with the public or among all members of this board. Without adequate information, I cannot perform the job that I was elected to do. I therefore resign from the school board effective immediately.”

Manzone spoke briefly with reporters in the hallway outside the auditorium saying she had made the decision to resign only a week earlier.

She said she’s enjoyed serving on the board, but “These are issues I think we’ve all known about. It’s pretty much outlined in this letter. I hate to hurt the students or anybody else. I don’t mean harm for anyone, but I had to make a statement.”

The letter she referred to is her official letter of resignation, which is published at the end of this article.

In the letter, Manzone, who was a representative from Region B, alleges the board frowns upon dissent, that meetings are orchestrated and that topics for executive sessions are engineered so that the board appears to comply with the law while violating its spirit.

She also said community members who raise issues are often considered to be problems, that access to important data is withheld and that some information is not shared equally.

Reaction from other board members was of surprise and denial.

Vic Dupuis said Manzone decided to “make a grand exit,” while Jeff Hellrung said Manzone’s allegations were simply not so.

“The board is extremely conscientious about honoring right to know,” Hellrung said, and it’s been “scrupulously careful” to avoid violations. He said that the board makes sure that there are never more than four members attending even a PTO meeting.

In a word, he said, he was “flabbergasted” by the accusation and that for the board to work, members “have to work as a team even if your idea doesn’t prevail.”

Kathy Do said she was disappointed, but hoped that Manzone would still have a positive legacy.

Do agreed with Hellrung, saying she has not seen any behind closed door activity.

Board President Eileen Bushelow said she was as surprised as everyone else. The board will officially accept the resignation during the November meeting, she said.

Manzone’s letter

October 21, 2013

To: Members of the Board of School Directors, UCFSD
John Sanville, Superintendent, UCFSD
Bob Cochran, Secretary, Board of School Directors, UCFSD

It is with regret that I hereby resign from the Board of School Directors of the Unionville-Chadds Ford school district, effective immediately.

As a member of the School Board, I have viewed my role as representing the interests of the constituents who elected me as well as the students of our district. I do not think School Board members should simply rubber-stamp the decisions of the School Administration, but rather should critically examine our district’s policies, practices, and results to identify issues and potential improvements. While I believe UCFSD is an excellent school district, there is clearly room for improvement. In my view, the best way to effect that improvement is to have open and honest discussion, based on facts and data that are unfiltered by administrators or others who wish to influence outcomes of decisions, audits, and performance reviews.

Over the past several months, this kind of discussion has become increasingly difficult and I no longer believe it is possible for me to discharge my duties responsibly and effectively. The administration and Board have become more concerned with looking good than with confronting real issues that need to be addressed. In particular:

• Open discussion is frowned upon and dissent is squelched at both the public and executive session meetings.

• Meetings, especially public meetings, are often orchestrated, with many “premeetings” and phone calls behind the scenes to prevent genuine public discussion of contentious issues and avoid any embarrassment to the administration or the Board, i.e., “no dirty laundry.”

• Executive sessions are over-used. If there is a way to characterize a topic so that it can be discussed privately in executive session, it is. Engineering topics in this way may allow the district to comply with the letter of the Sunshine Law, but it surely violates its spirit.

• Community members raising issues are often themselves considered the problem. Energy is expended complaining about these individuals rather than focusing on improvement.

• Access to underlying data and original documents is withheld, even if it is not confidential. “Confidentiality” is used as an excuse to withhold access to broad categories of data, without foundation.

• Information is shared unequally, with not all Board members receiving the same background for deliberations. Also, private “votes” are held without canvassing all members.

We have become a model of poor governance. I share the feelings of some Penn State Board members quoted in the Freeh report: issues are filtered, Board members are shown only “rainbows” and not “rusty nails,” and meetings are scripted, with decisions “baked.” I can no longer continue to participate on the Board on this basis without violating my principles and disturbing my conscience. I cannot allow my continued presence on the Board to connote agreement with these practices.

The final straw for me has been a recent situation in which the district administration failed to adequately investigate and pursue a clear violation of our residency requirements, confirmed by investigative reports. Rather than aggressively defend the interests of the district and our taxpayers, the administration dragged their feet for more than two years and ultimately struck a “deal” with the parties—without discussing their actions or the terms of the “deal” with the Board. The Board learned of the deal and its

terms only a year after it was struck. The “deal” includes forgoing back tuition payments for the period of non-residency and a pledge not to question district residency in the future. When I asked for the reports underlying this course of action, I was told I could not see them. While this particular instance may be a “done deal,” the refusal to examine it means there is no hope of improvement or change in the future. It is not possible for me to represent the interests of our citizens under these conditions.

It has been my privilege to serve our district for the past four years. I hope that by calling attention to the practices and behaviors outlined above, UCFSD can make the changes in governance that are badly needed to realize the full potential of our students and educators and to become an example of good citizenship for our children.

Sincerely yours,
Holly Manzone
School Director
UCFSD Region B