Click Below for Additional Meeting Resources:
Financial Report Update (Link: 00:00:00 – 00:09:00)
Assistant Superintendent of Finance & Operations Michael Pfifferling presented an updated financial report for the end of October, following up on the September report provided the previous week. Pfifferling explained that the district had improved its encumbrance situation by properly accounting for items that had not been previously encumbered, including teacher leader stipends, electricity, gasoline and diesel fuel for vehicles and buses, legal services, Unit A teacher 403B matches for professional status teachers, a newly discovered school resource officer chargeback, and athletic trainer contract services.
Pfifferling reported that special education out-of-district tuition accounts had been corrected after working with staff to readjust purchase orders to charge appropriate expenses to circuit breaker funding rather than the general budget. This adjustment represented approximately a million-dollar swing in one direction, while the new encumbrances represented a half-million-dollar swing in the other direction, resulting in the district being in a half-million-dollar better position than the previous month.
The assistant superintendent noted that some items still could not be encumbered yet, including athletic facility rentals for ice rinks and other facilities, which are typically encumbered by season. He acknowledged that some budget lines appeared abnormal due to alignment issues between the district’s SoftRight and Munis software systems, explaining that salary payments were not always aligning properly between corresponding account numbers in the two systems.
Pfifferling explained that the reporting process was complicated by having to pull data from two systems and merge it into one spreadsheet. He anticipated that once all data could be transferred to Munis after the last official SoftRight payroll, the reports would be cleaner and smoother. The current unexpended balance was reported as $2.334 million, which must cover expenses through June 30th.
Committee member Schmeckpeper asked about what was driving the $500,000 improvement in the district’s financial position. Pfifferling clarified that the district moved from $2.8 million to what should have been $3.8 million due to the circuit breaker adjustment, but then encumbered an additional $500,000 in expenses, resulting in the net $3.3 million balance.
Schmeckpeper also inquired about negative balances in some budget lines and legal costs appearing at 100% of budget. Pfifferling explained that negative balances often result from staff changes where replacements are hired at different salary steps than departing employees, or from software conversion issues. Regarding legal costs, he clarified that $56,000 had been expended and he had manually encumbered the remaining balance as a precaution, knowing the district uses multiple law firms for different purposes including labor issues and investigations.
Consent Agenda Approval (Link: 00:09:00 – 00:10:00)
Chair Al Williams called for a motion to approve the consent agenda, which included identified schedules of bills totaling $500,243.96 and the meeting minutes from the October 30, 2025 meeting. Vice Chair Kate Schmeckpeper made the motion, which was seconded by committee member Melissa Clucas. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0.
Williams then moved to the next agenda item, a request to name the auditorium, and began to ask if Superintendent Robidoux would be presenting on this topic.
Request to Name High School Auditorium (Link: 00:10:00 – 00:17:00)
Superintendent Robidoux introduced the agenda item by explaining that Greg Dana, who has served the district for over 50 years, had been contacted about a proposal to name the auditorium in his honor. Robidoux noted this was the first step in the process and that the matter needed to come before the school committee for discussion.
A speaker presented a formal letter submitted on behalf of countless alumni, colleagues, and friends requesting that the unnamed Marblehead High School auditorium be officially dedicated as the Gregory Dana Center for the Performing Arts. The letter detailed Dana’s 51 years of service to Marblehead Public Schools, his commitment to the performing arts, and his dedication to mentorship. The speaker explained that although Dana officially retired from teaching several years ago, he remained active as tech director for METG Festival submissions and spring musicals until recently.
The letter highlighted Dana’s role as a lifetime member of the Massachusetts Educational Theater Guild and his impact on generations of students, many of whom pursued technical theater and film at prestigious universities and went on to successful creative careers. The speaker emphasized that Dana’s legacy extends beyond professional accomplishments to include the countless lives he touched, the confidence he instilled, and the community he built through the arts.
Chair Williams responded positively to the request, calling it very deserving and well-written. However, he indicated the committee would like time to hear from the community before making a decision, suggesting consideration at the next meeting or the one following.
Vice Chair Schmeckpeper agreed that Dana would be at the top of the list for naming the space but noted that the district’s policy on naming facilities is somewhat unclear. She suggested the committee should address this specific request first by gathering community feedback, then separately consider establishing clearer parameters for future naming requests when there isn’t a pending proposal before them.
Robidoux agreed with Schmeckpeper’s approach, referencing recent experience with naming the fieldhouse and emphasizing the importance of community input. He supported having a separate conversation about policy framework to avoid complicating the current request, noting that districts generally need clear guidelines about what gets named, when, how frequently, and under what circumstances.
High School Performing Arts Trip to New York City (Link: 00:17:00 – 00:22:00)
Chair Williams introduced an amended agenda item regarding a high school performing arts trip to New York City. Superintendent Robidoux explained that the request came from Colleen, who asked to add this item to the agenda due to timing constraints. He noted that while January may seem far away, fundraising and processing time for students requires early approval. Robidoux expressed support for field trips that provide hands-on learning experiences and mentioned this trip occurs every other year, with the last one taking place in 2024.
A staff member, identified as Colleen, presented details of the enrichment opportunity for high school performing arts students. The trip is open to anyone in a performing ensemble, drama, or music class that meets during the day. Students would travel to New York City on Friday morning, January 16th, stay overnight one night, and return late Saturday night. The itinerary includes a backstage tour of Radio City Music Hall, a 60-minute Q&A with industry professionals and performers, two Broadway shows, and dinner at Stardust Diner where servers are performers. The goal is to expose students to professionals in the industry and show them what life is like in the performing arts field.
Robidoux commended Colleen for taking on this responsibility in her first year, noting that it’s uncommon for new staff members to undertake such challenges. Williams asked about insurance coverage, referencing previous committee member concerns. Colleen explained that students and families have the opportunity to purchase trip insurance for protection should they become ill or need to cancel for other reasons. The district is using Bob Rogers travel company, which Marblehead has used for previous trips and provides insurance options as part of their package.
Williams also inquired about room arrangements, citing previous concerns about the number of students per room. Colleen explained the plan involves quad occupancy with four students to a room with two queen beds. Students will provide feedback on roommate preferences, and teachers will work together to arrange compatible groupings. When asked about supervision ratios, Colleen confirmed a 10-to-1 student-to-chaperone ratio, meaning five chaperones for the 50 students invited on the trip.
Schmeckpeper made a motion to approve the performing arts field trip to New York City in January 2026, which was seconded by Clucas. The motion passed with no further discussion.
Superintendent Evaluation (Link: 00:23:00 – 00:33:00)
Chair Williams announced that the committee had previously completed and unanimously approved Superintendent Robidoux’s evaluation and would now read the major portions into the public record. Williams explained that the committee follows a process recommended by MASC and DESE, and the document represents a composite assessment from all five school committee members as an end-of-cycle summative evaluation report.
Williams outlined three specific goals established for the superintendent. The student learning goal focused on ensuring students have a voice in their teaching and learning, which was marked as “met.” The professional practice goal involved establishing a consistent district-wide culture and developing appropriate staffing patterns to meet student needs, which was marked as “some progress.” The district improvement goal required establishing and implementing a district improvement plan for public schools in three-year increments, sometimes referred to as a strategic plan, which was marked as “met.”
The evaluation included four performance standards covering instructional leadership, management and operations, family and community engagement, and professional culture. The committee marked the superintendent as “proficient” in all four areas, resulting in an overall rating of “proficient.”
Williams read detailed comments for each goal. Regarding the district-wide culture goal, the committee noted that while Robidoux made partial progress and some steps were taken to address staffing patterns, a comprehensive district-wide approach was not fully achieved. The committee emphasized that compiling concrete staffing data remains critical for informing the fiscal year 2027 budget process, while noting that central administration is functioning as a team and direct reports speak well of his management style.
For the district improvement plan goal covering 2026 through 2029, the committee noted that Robidoux has initiated development with completion expected by winter and formal presentation to the school committee for approval. The expected implementation date is July 1, 2026. The plan currently has a structured outline and Robidoux is actively engaging direct reports in its construction. The committee emphasized that ongoing stakeholder input and identification of appropriate data metrics will be critical for measuring outcomes.
Regarding the student voice goal, the committee noted that Robidoux devoted significant attention to this area as part of his broader effort to cultivate a district culture of openness and listening. Building principals demonstrated progress during spring presentations to the school committee, and while some principals embraced student voice initiatives more fully than others, the district made meaningful strides overall.
Williams read an extensive overall summary noting that the evaluation reflects Robidoux’s service as both interim and permanent superintendent. The committee acknowledged that he entered the district during significant turmoil, culminating in a teacher strike, and demonstrated professionalism, calmness, integrity, and diplomacy throughout this challenging period. The evaluation praised his efforts in balancing responsibilities between supporting the school committee in contract negotiations while establishing productive relationships with union leadership.
The summary highlighted Robidoux’s work to reunite staff and students following the strike, refocus the district on teaching and learning, and prioritize academic rigor and student achievement. The committee expressed gratitude for his willingness to commit to a long-term contract and applauded his leadership during the transition and recovery period. The evaluation specifically commended his establishment of the superintendent’s anti-discrimination committee in response to community demands to address antisemitism, calling it a model for superintendents across the commonwealth.
The committee noted Robidoux’s commitment to strengthening district culture through his “moving forward together” motto and his efforts to build relationships within the district. However, the evaluation suggested that while Robidoux is agreeable and frequently says his administration will “make it work,” he could advocate more directly for what he believes is in the district’s best interest to better inform school committee decision-making. The evaluation concluded by emphasizing the importance of building upon data-driven decision-making practices to equip administrators, school committee members, and stakeholders to explain and justify district needs.
Robidoux responded by thanking the committee, noting that this was the fourth iteration of the school committee since his arrival and expressing appreciation for feeling supported. He acknowledged the challenge of the evaluation process for new committee members and noted that he had been interim superintendent for most of the goal period, becoming permanent superintendent only in July. Robidoux expressed excitement about the upcoming goal-setting process, stating that the recent discussions about his goals represented the first time in his ten years as superintendent that he had experienced such detailed conversation and feedback from a school committee about their expectations. A committee member thanked Robidoux for everything he had done.
Superintendent Goals Discussion (Link: 00:33:00 – 01:03:00)
Chair Williams introduced the discussion of Superintendent Robidoux’s goals, explaining that at a previous meeting the superintendent had presented draft goals for November 2024 through May 2027. The committee had discussed four goals: a student learning goal focused on using data to measure academic achievement and student growth, a district improvement goal focused on hiring and retaining high quality educators, a second district improvement goal focused on communicating with stakeholders about the district improvement plan, and a professional practice goal focused on strengthening principals as instructional leaders. Williams noted that the committee had provided feedback at a productive workshop the previous Monday and would regularly revisit these goals to ensure progress and make appropriate revisions.
Robidoux presented his revised professional practice goal, which focuses on developing building administrators as instructional leaders in alignment with district-wide expectations for increased rigor and cohesive practices from Pre-K to 12. He explained that principals need to ensure practices within their buildings are meaningful and aligned with district expectations, operating cohesively rather than in silos. The goal aims to ensure collaboration, communication, and alignment of instructional practices both vertically across all grades and horizontally within grade levels. Robidoux noted that without cohesive expectations, building administrators sometimes operate myopically, and this goal addresses the shift from curriculum directors to a lead teacher and instructional coach model.
The measurement of this goal includes a staff survey regarding the effectiveness of each building principal as an instructional leader, implementation of instructional learning walks by principals in each other’s buildings to create meaningful conversation and sharing of ideas, and making this a shared evaluation goal for each principal. Each principal will schedule at least two learning walks in each other’s buildings between October and June, sharing experiences at biweekly administration meetings. Staff surveys will be administered in the spring with feedback reviewed and shared with each principal to identify strengths and areas for growth.
A committee member asked whether this was an 18-month goal, and Robidoux confirmed he would make all goals consistent in their timeline. Schmeckpeper suggested incorporating reports on tangible changes made based on the work into district updates, since the committee doesn’t have visibility into principal evaluations. Robidoux agreed to incorporate this feedback and noted that quarterly updates would help maintain ongoing conversation about progress.
Robidoux then presented his district improvement goal focused on establishing practices related to hiring, training, and retention of licensed educators. He emphasized the importance of ensuring properly licensed personnel in classrooms and providing appropriate training, support, and resources so staff remain in the district long-term. He noted that while Marblehead provides high academic standards, its positionality among North Shore communities can inhibit staff longevity, making it incumbent on administration to provide cohesive, collaborative, and meaningful support.
The goal will be measured through HR department oversight, specific tracking of hiring year-to-year, exit interviews for departing staff, and reviewing professional development committee data. Success will be measured partly by decreased departures of licensed educators over 18 months and creation of a systematic tracking system. Robidoux noted that exit interviews often reveal feedback about needing more training or better follow-up on professional development initiatives.
A committee member suggested putting a specific stake in the ground, such as aiming for a certain percentage decrease in people leaving for voluntary reasons, rather than using general enhancement language. Robidoux agreed to consider this feedback, comparing it to special education goal-setting where percentages should be meaningful rather than arbitrary. Williams suggested being more proactive about marketing the district when looking for new people, not just focusing on why people leave. Schmeckpeper recommended changing the goal language from hiring educators to hiring high-performing qualified educators and suggested that Professional Learning Communities might be a place to gather informal information about retention factors.
Robidoux briefly outlined his district improvement goal regarding the development and implementation of the district improvement plan covering 2026-2029. He explained he has gathered input from central administration, principals, and other district administrators, with plans to seek input from staff, then parents and caregivers, and possibly high school students. He aims to bring the plan back to the committee for review in early spring for voting and implementation. Williams expressed concern about the school committee being involved very near the end of the process and requested earlier involvement to avoid potential issues requiring the process to restart with previous entities.
Robidoux agreed to modify the timeline, suggesting he could provide the plan to the school committee at the same time it goes to staff, allowing the committee to be involved in the middle of the process rather than at the end. This would give the committee opportunity to review and discuss the plan before final presentation.
The final goal presented was the student learning goal focused on identifying ways to assess and advance student academic achievement and social emotional growth from Pre-K to 12. Robidoux emphasized that with MCAS no longer being a graduation requirement, it’s even more important to address ways to ensure students meet standards and their achievement is accurately documented in multiple ways. The goal includes working with administrative team members, instructional coaches, and others to examine student data, focusing on areas of strength and identifying areas for growth to ensure district assessments provide meaningful data about student achievement.
The goal also explores ensuring curriculum materials and resources are supported by the budget and implemented with proper training for educators. Robidoux noted the importance of providing training alongside new materials, comparing it to having the sauce with the meatballs. Measurement will include review of data from district assessments including DIBELS, iReady, ISIP, MCAS, and common assessments, along with meetings with administrators, data team members, and instructional coaches. Student outcomes on AP exams, SATs, ACTs, and special education assessments will also provide evidence toward goal completion.
A committee member suggested breaking the 18-month goal into two components: first figuring out what data to use and when it’s most useful, essentially creating a data plan, then implementing those reports. This would allow for a hybrid approach during the current year while setting up for a full first year of comprehensive data review beginning the following September. Robidoux agreed to rely on his assistant superintendents to help frame these initiatives.
Williams noted that while the agenda indicated a vote on the goals, it didn’t make sense given the edits suggested during the discussion. He also wanted to be respectful of committee member Schaeffner’s absence and ensure she had a chance to comment. Robidoux agreed to make the suggested edits and bring the revised goals back to the next meeting for further discussion and potential approval, noting that since the goals are now a public document, the community can also provide comments.
School Committee Goals Discussion (Link: 01:03:00 – 01:25:00)
Robidoux expressed appreciation for the goal-setting process, stating it would help solidify his leadership and practices while helping district administrators enhance their own practices. Chair Williams then moved to discuss school committee goals, explaining that at a previous meeting the committee had discussed six potential goals drafted by members, and at Monday’s workshop they agreed that members would refine and edit three of these goals for presentation at tonight’s meeting.
Committee member Henry Gwazda presented the first goal focused on decision-making and data storytelling. He explained this goal combined the original goals one, two, and three due to their overlap around data and communications. Gwazda noted excitement about the potential alignment with Superintendent Robidoux’s goals, particularly since three of the superintendent’s goals have data-informed decision focus areas. The goal emphasizes establishing a cadence for data reporting to both the committee and community, developing tools to share information including surveys to gather community input, and demonstrating the use of data to drive decisions. The goal includes two stages: establishing the cadence of data sharing and demonstrating data-driven decision making with supporting numbers when sharing decisions made.
Williams confirmed this goal was a compilation of the original goals one, two, and three from their previous discussions. Schmeckpeper commented that the goal tackles the important question of what to do with data once collected, representing a first step in figuring out data sharing and usage. Clucas noted that the word “data” is broad and asked for clarification about whether it refers to student outcomes data, since many committee decisions are not necessarily numbers-specific. Gwazda acknowledged this point and noted he had identified existing resources rather than things that need to be built, including surveys and tools the district already has access to.
Clucas then presented a goal focused on strengthening financial transparency through budget communication. The goal aims to improve how Marblehead community members understand the school budget by providing clear explanations of cost drivers including teacher contract increases, special education circuit breaker funding, and enrollment shifts. The specific target is to successfully implement a structured financial communications plan that measurably increases community comprehension of key budget drivers before the May town meeting. Success metrics include publishing at least three clear budget explainers before March 2026 and hosting at least two community forums dedicated to Q&A ahead of May 2026. The goal addresses ongoing repeated funding requests in the context of declining enrollment and contractual obligations, with checkpoints in January and completion ahead of town meeting.
Schmeckpeper expressed strong support for this goal, stating that helping the community understand the budget and why it’s built the way it is represents an important school committee responsibility. She noted that Assistant Superintendent Pfifferling has already done excellent work outlining budget details, and this goal is really about packaging and presentation as an explanation exercise.
Schmeckpeper then presented a strategic planning goal that expanded on the original goal around supporting the superintendent in completing the district improvement plan. The goal focuses on refocusing school committee efforts on high-level district oversight and strategic planning to support administrators’ operational work. It includes three components: agreeing to a clear division of responsibilities between the school committee and administration, supporting Robidoux in completing the district improvement plan with specific deadlines and timetables, and considering strategic planning frameworks for the district with clearly articulated school committee responsibilities. Schmeckpeper noted this represents work she has wanted to do all year but the committee wasn’t ready for previously.
Clucas expressed strong support for the strategic planning goal, noting its importance. Gwazda commented that the goal addresses longevity and setting up future school committees with frameworks to continue this work. Schmeckpeper agreed, noting that the plan could be embedded in the year-long agenda approved at the beginning of each year. Gwazda suggested adding a clearer statement of the challenge this goal is meant to address for better communication purposes.
Williams confirmed that Schmeckpeper’s goal was based on the original goal six, and asked about the status of the goal around elevating educator voices. Schmeckpeper indicated she hadn’t developed that goal further but it could still be considered. Williams noted this would give them four goals total if they included the educator voices goal.
The committee discussed whether to vote on the goals immediately or wait for further refinement. Schmeckpeper noted they had discussed at the workshop potentially voting that night with expectations for additional work where necessary to keep momentum going. Clucas expressed some hesitation since they had first discussed goals about a month ago. Gwazda noted that Robidoux’s goals were further along and it was important to keep pace with him.
Schmeckpeper made a motion to approve four school committee goals: the data-driven decision making and communication goal presented that night, the financial transparency goal presented that night, the strategic planning goal presented that night, and the goal from their October 15th meeting regarding elevating educator voices. Gwazda seconded the motion, and it passed 4-0.
Piper Field Lighting Update (Link: 01:25:00 – 01:33:00)
Vice Chair Schmeckpeper provided an update on efforts to increase the number of nights per year that lights can be used at Piper Field. She explained that Superintendent Robidoux had presented a request to the planning board on behalf of the school committee, which was approved by planning board vote at its October 14th meeting. However, the committee is still awaiting the written decision from the planning board, which can take up to 90 days.
Schmeckpeper outlined the next step in the process, which requires going before the Zoning Board of Appeals to request an amendment to conditions within ZBA decisions issued in 2013 and 2000. The process involves submitting an application to the ZBA with deadlines a few weeks before scheduled meetings. She noted that the ZBA will not hear their application until the planning board’s written decision has been issued, as they want that to be part of their review. Since the deadline for the November hearing has passed, the committee is realistically looking at December or more likely January for the hearing.
Schmeckpeper requested committee approval to make the application to the ZBA and noted recommendations from committee member Schaeffner and the town planner to involve legal counsel in the application process. She explained that the law firm the district typically uses does not handle land use matters, but the town planner recommended attorney Megan Paul from the firm Referrals Rail and Weiner. Schmeckpeper had not yet contacted the attorney and did not have information about rates.
Schmeckpeper made a motion for the school committee or their designee to submit an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals to amend conditions of the 2013 and 2000 ZBA decisions. The request would permit use of lights at Piper Field until 9 PM from mid-August through November (approximately 105 nights) and from mid-March through May (approximately 75 nights), plus use of the PA system for 12 varsity level MIA sanctioned high school contests.
Chair Williams asked for clarification about voting on an application that had not yet been filled out and whether all the items mentioned were part of the application. Schmeckpeper explained that these were the same items they had applied to the planning board for, which the planning board approved with added conditions around monitoring and checking back in a year. She indicated her preference would be for the committee to approve asking the ZBA for the same thing the planning board approved, in whatever way their attorney advises they should make the request.
Robidoux thanked Schmeckpeper for taking on this project and confirmed that the request would be essentially the same information presented to the planning board, which had been unanimously approved. He noted that while the ZBA application process might be more complex than the planning board process, the core request remains the same.
Williams expressed concern about approving an application they would not see, but noted his comfort level would increase if there was really nothing new and it was very similar to the previous application. Schmeckpeper offered to amend the motion to include reporting back to the committee once the application has been prepared. Williams agreed this would make him more comfortable, and Schmeckpeper amended her motion accordingly. The amended motion was seconded by Gwazda and passed 4-0.
Subcommittee and Liaison Updates (Link: 01:33:00 – 01:38:00)
Committee member Gwazda provided an update from the facilities subcommittee regarding early childhood education. He reported that Assistant Superintendent Julia Ferreira had created a survey to assess demand for early childhood education, with the goal of making a determination about the feasibility of such a program by the end of the year.
Superintendent Robidoux clarified that they had initially discussed conducting a feasibility study to determine whether an early childhood program would be feasible, but decided to first conduct a needs assessment to determine if there is actual demand. He explained that once they receive the survey results, they will bring them back to the facilities subcommittee to determine potential next steps, which could include moving forward with a full feasibility study. Robidoux noted that the current survey approach is not costing the district anything, unlike a full feasibility study.
Gwazda explained that the survey is targeting parents with children ages 0 to 5 to gauge their interest in services and understand their expectations for a preschool program, noting that in some cases families expect services the district doesn’t currently provide. Vice Chair Schmeckpeper asked for clarification about the survey scope, and Gwazda confirmed it is going to the broadest possible audience, not just current district families.
Chair Williams acknowledged that gauging demand makes sense as a starting point but expressed interest in seeing a business plan as part of any feasibility study. He emphasized not wanting to build something without a comprehensive business plan explaining why the building would be renovated. Gwazda agreed this was important but noted the survey represents just the first step to determine if they should even proceed to the next phase.
Gwazda mentioned that other factors need consideration, including the town’s use of the building and the 18-22 year old students currently served there. The facilities subcommittee plans to meet December 2nd to review survey results, with the goal of potentially returning the school or property to the town if an early childhood program is not viable.
Committee member Clucas asked whether a negative survey result would be the final data input needed to decide against holding onto the property. Gwazda indicated that would likely be the case, as the goal is to either use the building for district purposes or return it to the town.
Williams expressed support for the approach but wanted to ensure they think through the entire process before spending significant money on feasibility studies. Robidoux explained that he and Assistant Superintendent Pfifferling had done preliminary work on potential costs for a full feasibility study, which led to the decision to conduct a needs assessment first. Based on those results, they can then decide whether to proceed with a feasibility study for early childhood education or explore other options that might still fall under school auspices.
Gwazda emphasized that the conversation is not about having a building and determining what to do with it, but rather about determining whether they need the building at all.
Executive Session Motion (Link: 01:38:00 – 01:40:00)
Chair Williams asked if there was any correspondence, and receiving no response, requested a motion to meet in executive session. He cited Chapter 30A, Section 21A3, Purpose 3 to discuss litigation involving Marblehead School Committee and Marblehead Teachers Association, case MUP 2511-555. Williams stated that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the school committee and declared there was no intent to return to open session.
Committee member Gwazda made the motion, which was seconded by another committee member. Williams conducted a roll call vote, with Schmeckpeper, Gwazda, and Williams all voting in favor. The motion passed 4-0.
Williams then announced that the committee would meet in executive session pursuant to Chapter 30A, Section 21A3, Purpose 3 to discuss litigation between Marblehead School Committee and Marblehead Teachers Association, case MUP 2511-555, noting that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the school committee’s litigating position and declaring no intent to return to open session.
All About Town provides all information in a good faith effort to improve community engagement and awareness. However, text is generated by artificial intelligence, and we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information provided herein. Use of the site and reliance on any information on the site is solely at each individual’s own risk.