Chariho School Parents’ Forum

December 11, 2008

Dec 9 part 6

Don’t forget, you can find all related letters, vidoes, etc on the “Nov 18” category link on the right.


Dec 9 part 5

Chris Anderson, partner with Nick Gorham, reads the case Chariho has used to remove me, showing that it was an apples-to-oranges comparisson because the general assembly was given the authority to remove someone through the RI Constitution, the Chariho Act does not give the SC the authority.

J Anderson says that this has happened since before the RI Constitution, and Gorham says we still had the Kings Charter.


Dec 9 part 4

Gorham answering whether or not they have the authority to put me back on the Committee he says, “of that I am absolutely sure.”

J Anderson contends that if Hopkinton were to vote to withdraw, that would create a conflict (or the incompatibility) that requires my removal.  Gorham points out that this is strictly supposition, and we don’t run or lives on fears of what might happen.

Furthermore, as someone pointed out to me recently, withdraw is more than a vote from the school committee and town council.  It is spelled out in the Chariho Act (which you can find on the Chariho Links page on the right).

Towards the end of this clip, Holly Eaves tries to shorten the debate and says, “we are not a court.”  Gorham correctly responds, “you are not a court, thats why we are here.”

You see, the Committe did act as the court (both judge and jury) on Nov 18th.

Dec 9 part 3

Gorham comments on Chariho attorney’s comments –  1) can a motion be made, 2) what “conflict” creates the “incompatibility”, 3) does “no mean no”, 4) can we just let Felkner sit there, and 5) if you return him it will damage our case.

Dont forget, you can see all related letters, videos, etc on this meeting and the Nov 18 meeting by clicking on the Nov 18 category link on the right.

Dec 9 part 2

In part 2, Andy Polouski asks if the attorney knows of any other person that has held two elected seats (as if personal experience sets law).  Gorham says he does not.  AP also says that the Committee cant vote on the issue and that it must be put on the Jan meeting – essentially, AP establishes the Committee’s intent – and as you will see in the other videos, his ‘plan’ actually does come true.  I wonder if Deb Carney was in on those strategy sessions or if AP just happened to guess what was going to happen.

DC also refutes the Chariho attorney on the Bailey v Burns case – and she points out that the Chariho Act does not give the Committee the authority to remove me and that if it was on the agenda for Nov 18th she would have studied and been prepared to correct the attorney – she also points out that on Nov 18 the issue was not on the agenda, but we voted on it – but now that it is on the agenda, we can’t vote on it.  DC makes a motion to put me back on.

Holly Eaves says that she agrees with AP, we allowed them to speak and that the Gorham letter is on the agenda but the act of recending our vote wasn’t on the agenda – so wasn’t going to accept this motion until the next meeting.’

So AP asks the Chariho attorney if he thinks they could vote on it – you can guess on his ‘legal opinion’ (isn’t this the same school that refused to allow me to speak with the attorney when the NEA filed a complaint against me?)

Dec 9 meeting

In part one, attorney Gorham requests the Committee to reinstate me until we get a decision from the courts. He also challenged them to present any issue that my presence would endanger.

Many thanks go out to HTC member Sylvia Thompson again for taping this section of the meeting (hows that for a elected representative to promote transparency!).  The full meeting was aired last night and will be again Friday at noon (although, check to be sure).

There are 6 parts to the video – will post them as YouTube finishes the uploads.

November 19, 2008

Tape Part 6

Filed under: 1,Nov 18 meeting (where I was removed from office),Video — Editor @ 11:33 pm

Voice vote to remove Felkner from the Committee:

Bill Day, “I will only be chair here for the next meeting or two, so I will ask for a census to follow your suggestion (Andy McQuade’s suggested to have the police officer remove me from the meeting).”
AP yes, GA no, DC no, RV no, HE yes, MC yes, AM yes, TS yes, BP no (they didn’t count my vote, but it was a ‘no’)

Bill Day, “Officer…”

Tape Part 5

Filed under: 1,Nov 18 meeting (where I was removed from office),Video — Editor @ 11:24 pm

Board votes on the motion: “Mr. Felkner is disqualified from participating in school committee meetings from this day forward until told that there is no legal conflict by the Ethics Commission or Board of Elections.”


Vote: 5 for, 3 opposed (DC, GA, RV) and one abstention (Bob Petit).  They did not count my vote.


Bill Day asked Felkner to leave – Felkner, “I still think I am a member of this school committee.”


BD: calls the police. 

AM: moves to go into Executive Session.  I went in, they wouldn’t proceed with me present so everyone came back into the room.

Tape Part 4

Filed under: 1,Nov 18 meeting (where I was removed from office),Video — Editor @ 11:21 pm

The Motion: “Mr. Felkner is disqualified from participating in school committee meetings from this day forward until told that there is no legal conflict by the Ethics Commission or Board of Elections.”

Tape Part 3

Filed under: 1,Nov 18 meeting (where I was removed from office),Video — Editor @ 11:20 pm

Deb Carney tries to use logic with the attorney – “What section of RI law does it say Mr. Felkner can’t occupy two seats?”

Jon Anderson – “The Chariho Act coupled with the Hopkinton Town Charter, coupled with the Doctrine of Incompatibility.”

DC: “We have heard that its state law, but nowhere here in the Chariho Act does it say he doesn’t have the right to serve on both.”

George Abbott tried to reason with the attorney as well – “You mentioned these conflicts of interest…I realize that the issues are rather different, but I would say we have to remove all the people that have family working at Chariho. I don’t say this to insult anybody, but how does that differ from your opinion that voting on various issues affecting the town would present a conflict of interest ..”

[editors note] Andy McQuade just graduated from Chariho 2 years ago and has an aunt working there. Frmr vice chairman Andy Polouski worked at Chariho for 34 years and has a niece working there. Current vice chairman Bob Petit’s cousin is Brian Stanley, the business administrator. Chairperson Holly Eaves is going to school right now to become a teacher. And frmr chairman Bill Day’s wife and son are employees at Chariho and Bill works for Perspectives as a “one on one” – this position requires that he spend his day with a special needs individual at that person’s workplace. Where does that person work? You guessed it, Chariho – shredding paper. So the frmr chairman, who just arbitrarily ruled to have me removed, has a wife and son employed at Chariho and he spends his days there too. And his employer (Perspectives) receives compensation for that time.

And those are just the ones I know about.

Next Page »