ST. FRANCIS – Allegations of wrongdoing and abuse of their positions on the parts of the SAD 27 superintendent and board chairwoman have prompted a district policy review.

The action stems from ongoing complaints brought by a Fort Kent resident claiming, among other things, that his comments have been screened from district school board meeting minutes, his agenda items have been blocked and his right to vote at the district budget meeting in May was denied.

Quentin Paradis presented his allegations Saturday at the board’s regular monthly meeting in St. Francis and was publicly supported by one board member.

“The chair and superintendent have the power to screen comments and to allow issues to appear on the [meeting] agenda,” Paradis said. “I have asked that the issues I want to address be placed on the agenda, and it has never happened.”

At the same time, Paradis accused Superintendent Sandra Bernstein and SAD 27 board Chairwoman Paula Charette of deliberately omitting his comments and complaints from past official board meeting minutes relating to his treatment at the May district budget meeting.

At that meeting, Paradis claims his voting rights were violated when the elected moderator would not permit his motion amending the article dealing with the state subsidy for education to reflect a $100,000 cut.

At the time, Paradis was told his amendment was inappropriate and should be made during an upcoming article dealing with the local appropriation for education.

Paradis did not get a chance to offer his amendment before it was moved by a fellow SAD 27 resident. He claimed that failure to accept his amendment first violated his constitutional rights.

Since the May meeting, Paradis has been trying to secure a letter of apology regarding his treatment from the board. He said his attempts to address the board on the matter have been blocked by Bernstein and Charette.

Neither the chair nor the superintendent have that power or the power to screen meeting minutes, Bernstein said. “That we have that power is untrue,” she said. “The chair has encouraged you to address this board in the public comment period. There has been no effort at screening.”

As for placing items on meeting agendas, Bernstein said that under SAD 27 policy, it is a matter of convincing three board members to request the item. Failing that, a single board member may bring a matter up for consideration during a meeting.

At least one member disagreed.

“At least three times I have requested to have an article put on the agenda,” Priscilla Staples said. “It is very difficult for a board member to get an item put on a selectively designed agenda.”

Changes to the agenda process would require a policy change, Bernstein said.

Before any such action is considered by the board, Bernstein reminded members that agendas inform the public of the board’s upcoming discussions and allow board members time to prepare for any given issue.

“If information is placed on an agenda late, you can’t access public participation under the right to know law,” Bernstein said. “Unless there was a compelling reason to put an [unannounced] item on, I would recommend against it.”

Adhering to a rigid agenda, Staples said, runs the danger of the public having a perception of selective inclusion of items.

The existing policy may or may not need addressing but given the discussions, now could be a good time to examine it, said Garfield King, board member from Fort Kent. “It’s probably for the best for the board to review the format,” he said.

The policy now goes to a committee chaired by Staples for review.

As for Paradis’ complaints, the board took no action on his continued requests for a letter of apology and denied a motion by Staples to place his concerns on Saturday’s agenda for board discussion.