Skip to main content

Lehighton board divided over information release

Published October 23. 2018 12:56PM

A vote to allow the board president to authorize appeals or responsive pleadings in between meetings divided the Lehighton Area School District board of directors once again Monday night.

While five board members approved the motion and four opposed it, the official outcome was immediately unclear.

Eric Filer, who was sitting in for regular district solicitor William Schwab, said it was his opinion the board needed six affirmative votes to pass the motion since it involved spending money, while board President Larry Stern called for an official legal ruling.

Lehighton Superintendent Jonathan Cleaver said he asked for the motion based on concerns he had over quick turnarounds in responding to right-to-know requests and court proceedings.

“We’ve never dealt with the level of right-to-know requests, at the cost of the taxpayers, as we are right now,” Cleaver said. “We want to make sure we’re doing our due diligence and making deadlines.”

According to the motion, any appeals or responsive pleadings authorized by the board president would need to be ratified by the board at its next meeting. Otherwise, the solicitor would withdraw the action.

“You’re allowing the solicitor to get paid to do a job you think is OK, but if the board finds out it’s not OK, you’re going to pay him a second time to undo what he just did through this very self-serving motion,” Director David Bradley, who voted against the motion, said. “It violates so many state laws and board policies to allow an individual to act as the board in between meetings.”

Cleaver said Bradley’s RTK requests are at the root of the issue. Recently, the district appealed an Office of Open Records ruling that would require the release of thousands of emails to and from Cleaver, high school Principal Sue Howland and high school Assistant Principal David Hauser.

“We’re not blocking anything we feel is legal and obligated to be released,” Cleaver said. “We’ll give out any contract anybody wants. But how does requesting all of those emails make anyone a better board member? It is absolute nonsense. We are trying to keep the personnel information of our staff, administration and students protected.”

Bradley estimates the district has only spent “several hours at best” reviewing the “several years worth” of RTK requests he has made.

“Why spend so much money on a solicitor blocking transparency rather than embracing it as written in law?” Bradley said.

On the matter of requesting the emails, Bradley told Cleaver, “If you know people are looking over your shoulder, maybe you would make better choices in what you write.”

Parents and staff, Cleaver said, trust the district with keeping privileged information safe, which is something he said he intends to keep fighting to do.

“There is a lot of student information shared from the administration to staff to parents, and those people trust us with keeping that confidential and not posted on social media sites,” Cleaver said.

Comments
"Bradley estimates the district has only spent “several hours at best” reviewing the “several years worth” of RTK requests he has made."
Charge him with abuse of process and have him blocked from harassing the District. Are the people in Carbon County really this retarded??
If the district was transparent, RTK requests would not be needed. But they are not transparent. Previous RTK requests have revealed some very surprising results. Some were quite unethical. All of this needs to stop. There is a reason we have an Office of Open Records in this Commonwealth, and it is not because government is transparent and honest.
Dear Constituents,

Good Evening. Several years of RTK logs were requested for my study. A comprehensive LASD 2018 RTK log will be published on social media. I requested the logs on Sept 12, covering several years activity through September 11, 2018.
The 2018 log includes the fulfillment efforts for the district.
It shows the minutes of time worked on each request to satisfy the law requiring open public records. The average was less than 5 hours a month, so let's say about $250 a month.

I, Citizen David F. Bradley, Sr., made 6 requests in the calendar year to date including the request for the RTK logs. Access to information is required by PA School Code and PA Sunshine Law. Hiding the information or obstructing its lawful transfer is the root of the lawsuit the district has brought against me, defendant Citizen David F. Bradley, Sr.
Carbon County Court Case 18-2635 LASD vs. David Bradley is about blocking a citizen, and duly elected board of director from information needed to do his elected duty. Why?
The LASD district denied the citizen’s request for information but they lost the appeal by the PA State Office of Open Records, who GRANTED the request in their Final Determination requiring the records be released to the citizen.

GO to the Pa Office of Open Records site search FinalDet/35216.pdf

Taxes are begin spent on the Solicitor, at his hourly rate (way greater than $250/mo) in an effort to appeal the State issued Final Determination. That Final determination required the district to release the records. Talk about waste and abuse.
Government officials should not have to file a RTK to get information about the district they oversee. The system is broken, I am fixing it from the inside. They know I have rigid principles, they fear my servitude to the stakeholder, and they fear transparency.

Join me, create lawful transparency, give the people the information and let the people speak. A revolutionary idea? not really. The government works for us, so what would you like to know?

Sincerely,

Citizen David F. Bradley, Sr.

This motion led to a discussion about Right To Know requests. However, if a person reads the original motion, one will see that it gives powers to the president of the Board outside of RTK requests. It is very broad and bestows legal and financial power that belongs only to the board as a whole.
Here is the original motion:
MOTION by , SECONDED by that in-between regular board meetings
the Board President shall have the authority to authorize the taking of appeals to any decision or opinion and/or authorize answers or other responsive pleadings be filed, subject to ratification of the board at its next regularly scheduled meeting. In event not ratified, then the solicitor is directed with withdraw appeal or responsive pleading, funding through the general fund.
They are ALL a bunch of morons!!!!!!!!!!! And we taxpayers ARE sick of them!!!!
Lobbyists funded the "good ole boys" in the election process sith thousands. A silenced community spoke up loud and clear.
End the corruption.

Transparency is coming to Lehighton, watch 'em squirm, and lash out at those of us exposing them.

Sincerely,

Citizen David F. Bradley Sr.

Classified Ads

Event Calendar

<<

November 2025

>>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
      
      

Upcoming Events

Twitter Feed