Pictured is public commenter Betsy Rogowski addressing the school board Monday evening.

Discussion is continuing over hiring a new solicitor for the Warren County School District.

Treasurer Michael Kiehl’s first order of business during his part of the meeting was discussion on getting a request for proposals confirming that the board is directing the administration to hire a new general solicitor for the district.

Board member John Wortman asked the board not forward this item onto the full board meeting in January, noting that the current law firm, Stapleford and Byham, is an excellent firm. He said that when he was on City Council, it provided excellent advice to the city of Warren, keeping the city in compliance with the municipal commonwealth and federal laws.

Claiming the district has been fortunate in having this firm, with its experience for a substantial period of time, Wortman also said that it has been in the best interest of the district and all that are impacted by the district.

“I think the expertise that our solicitor has in school law is demonstrated through the other school districts that have engaged the same firm who rely on the advice of that firm,” Wortman said.

Saying that the board is there to be sure that what is in the best interest of the district, Wortman believes it is in the best interest to retain the current solicitor with Stapleford and Byham while continuing when needed, to engage with the other attorneys for specialized counsel if appropriate.

Board member Paul Mangione agreed, saying that Solicitor Chris Byham has worked well and has been quick to get back to the board. He added that Byham knows what he is doing.

“If there is not a problem, I don’t see why we would go out and try to replace somebody,” he said.

Board Member Tammi Holden disagreed with Mangione, saying she tried to contact Byham and had the opposite experience. Saying that he did not respond to her general questions about the changes with chapter IX (9) asking for Byham to educate the board about that.

Board member Daniel Sullivan also agreed with Holden.

“I’m in agreement with Ms. Holden,” he said. “I think there’s a chance for us to try and improve and try to get through some of the things the new board would like to see done. And I think the only way that that can be done is with a new solicitor.”

A question from the public, Betsy Sobowski, arose where she asked that the board look at more than one candidate and that they have qualifications that they have actually worked in educational law.

“My question would be since this is a committee of the whole, do we have the ability in the committee meeting to vote whether or not to send this to the full board?” Wortman said in response.

Another public commenter brought up that in years past there was an understanding that sometimes anyone on the board could contact the solicitor and sometimes only the board president was allowed to interact with the solicitor. Superintendent Gary Weber said the solicitor has been open to answering individual board members.

“We try to appoint all communications through the president if we can,” Weber said as well as saying that in this particular situation, Byham does not handle Title IX. Attorney Jennifer Gornall of Knox McLaughlin Gornall & Sennett, P.C., handles that.

A public commenter asked if there has been discussion for a new solicitor among the board.

Weber also said how a lot of research over the past 20 years is needed and that Byham quickly pulls up the necessary information. So time in research in historical matters would cost the district if a new solicitor is hired. Weber said he has some RFPs and has looked at them.

“We need to have conversations for exactly what it is that we want to see out of it that we may or may not have necessarily seen with attorney Byham,” Weber said. “Byham has been an invaluable commodity in the district for 20 years.”

Weber is concerned about working with a new one due to it being a heavy task in regards to getting started, telling board members that any issues that any board members have had need to be addressed. Wortman added that if the board put out requests without having a conversation that needs to take place it would otherwise be inappropriate.

Board member Misty Moore mentioned there have been conflicts with attendance in regards for the new board members to have the opportunity to speak and meet with him. They have questions and Byham is supposed to be their guidance. Moore stated that she does not have a problem with Byham putting in a proposal.

Wortman brought up the expenses that would need to be made to which Weber said that Byham attendance is based on the need for him; and is not always needed at the committee meetings.

Moore mentioned Byham didn’t have a great track record so far and that is her concern.

Julia Foster asked the new board members, “Given my situation with Mr. Weber and Mr. Mangione that they’ve not been trustworthy, that maybe you can’t trust that you will get the correct information from these two individuals, from these lawyers?”

She said that it is a concern of hers due to them not giving correct information in the case against her husband, Scott Foster’s dismissal with the district.

Wortman made the motion to postpone this agenda item.

Sobowski said she respects that if anyone is unhappy with Byham. She hopes that this would not affect Attorney Jen Gornall since she is very valuable to special education law. Sobowski expressed how she thought it would be a disservice to the entire county to arbitrarily appoint one person; pointing out that attorney David Bauer has been a polarizing individual in the district for quite some time.

Holden said, “There’s nothing wrong with getting a request for information from anyone and (as it was said earlier), if Byham were going to put him in, maybe he’s going to be the best guy for the job. I’m not against that, but what I am against is being pigeonholed for 15-20 years.”

Wortman proposed that a cost estimate be done for taxpayers.

Rogowski asked, “Would it be possible to include in this that they must have a background in practicing educational law?”