Huge fan of Mr. Armstrong! I have watched the board meetings online. He seems to be the only voice of reason on that board! Good for you Mr. Armstrong, don't give up even though you seem to be outnumbered most of the time.

This man is a serial troublemaker. How does this action benefit our students, school system, community? The kind of reputation we DON'T need.

If my read of the original Stow Sentry article is correct, Mr. Armstrong left an executive session in which the person being reprimanded was Mr. Armstrong. Can someone confirm or deny this?

I thought Armstrong was trying to save the district money. Now, money that could have been spent on the students will be enriching both his and his attorney's pockets. Way to go Rod.

I agree with Susan. While the board needs to follow the rules, I do not think filing a lawsuit benefits anyone except the lawyers. It is always good to have alternate viewpoints but in the end, the board needs to work together for the benefit of our children.

I am also very impressed with Mr. Armstrong and his sound and responsible actions. It is time that the board be held accountable and responsible for their actions and transgressions.

Rod, I am a huge fan! The current board and treasurer seem to do what they want when they want and they need to be held accountable! Keep up your work for the people...I appreciate it!

Just jumping in to thank all of you for making comments that adhere to the Patch terms of use. (see, I'm not always just bugging people to follow the rules, I applaud people for following them too.) thank you!

I agree that bringing in lawyers is unfortunate, though I believe Mr. Armstrong felt...drastic times take drastic measures & they left him no choice. I thank him for taking a stand.

It is correct that an executive session should be announced ahead of time, and. A valid reason must be given, which would include personnel issues. The only minutes taken in executive session are date, motIon(including reason for session) vote to go into executive session,time of start, time ended and names those making said
motions and votes of all members as to going into executive session and ending session. There are no other minutes taken. That is why certain subject matter, usually because of the sensitivity of the matter at hand are discussed in such sessions. The law is quite clear on what can and cannot be discussed in executive sessions. Not knowing what was discussed I would have no idea of the legality of the discussion, I do however see no benefit in a lawsuit which can only rob the district and it's children of much needed funds. There are more expedient and less costly solutions.

Those who have never questioned this administration may not realize how hopeless being on "the wrong side" of SMFCSD feels. People who doubt decisions from Central Office find themselves purposely marginalized. At last evening's meeting, as in previous exchanges, citizens who question the board were advised by an administrator that those who don't like it ought to leave...as in leave town. Like him or not, Rod Armstrong is an elected representative of the people. Enough among us respected his questions and concerns to vote him in. He has a responsibility to ask the tough stuff. This does not make him a trouble-maker. It makes him an active board member. Yet, doing so seems to have landed him in the same place as his constituents---on the outside looking in. True collaborative representation is not a constant 4 to 1 vote. This may be a last ditch attempt at pushing the reset button. If so, Trustee Armstrong is right to insist on a place at the boardroom table for those he represents, those who choose to support SMF schools by actively seeking awareness and accountability. With the corporate climate of SMF BoE apparently approaching HELL, doesn't every member of the BoE bear responsibility? If the editor asks Armstrong, he will probably tell Patch that he intends to return any monetary compensation he receives from this action to SMFCSD. How do I know? I simply asked.

Can a public official remain in office while suing the entity he represents? It would seem like it could lead to executive sessions Rod could not attend, votes he could not make and in general make him an ineffective elected official. The last thing we need is another ineffective elected official. I think he should resign to pursue his desire to sue the families of Stow and Munroe Falls. We are, after all the people who would pay IF he should win.

I am glad to say that I support Rod. Maybe the public will get the answers they want.

Yep - apparently Mr. Armstrong is all about principles. And not about students. Tell the teachers who have to pay for classroom materials out of their own pockets that the money Armstrong is causing to be squandered in the name of principles couldn't be better used for the benefit of the students. Students don't care about the "principles" of people like Mr. Armstrong. They care about getting a good education and getting decent jobs. As they say, "you can't eat principles".

The School Board exists to serve the students. Board members who forget this shouldn't be re-elected.

No need for the community to become even more fractured. The stakes are already too high. The district has battled lawsuits to defend it's reputation in the past-even initiated them. As the out-going director stated last evening, [I may not have it verbatim] the people who make the tough decisions are often the targets. If the people in question have broken laws, they should pay to defend themselves (except for the employee). If they are found innocent, Armstrong should cover their fees. After all, Armstrong is handling the cost to bring the case forward from his own pocket. Right? Regardless of the outcome, this should not be the taxpayer's burden and I fail to see why it has to be. My thought is that the proof will be in the pudding. If Armstrong looses, he should step down. If he wins, the remainder of the board should do the same. Looser pays all fees and fines. Since it is so far gone, don't argue; let the court decide. Then, maybe we can all get back to working together-sans any board member/s who have acted inappropriately on either end.

Really bob , then why do the parents get a long list every year for supplies !!!!.and pay a fee to take classes.OR how about paying for parking permits for high school .DO the teachers pay for there spots or is that just a gift from the taxpayers.

Making a broad statement that the town and school are both "crooked" is probably a bit of exaggeration, don't you think? If laws were broken, why weren't charges filed? I find it hard to believe that Stow, which is run by our friends and neighbors, can be as crooked and corrupt as all that.

All I know is that now a certain board member has decided to unilaterally force the district to use hard won tax dollars to finance his little vendetta against those who have dared to disagree with him. Certainly a person of his stature and position in the community would have much better ways of dealing with this in a much more constructive and cost efficient manner. The courts are (or should be) a last resort. I haven't seen this individual try to work with anybody in a non-confrontational manner. Perhaps this appeals to some people who see enemies behind every tree and under every rock. But to the majority of Stow citizens, I'll bet they would have appreciated a more mature way of handling things.

If laws were broken, Armstrong has a responsibility to pursue justice. If he is mistaken, he should apolgize, make retribution and leave office immediately. Until we have a verdict, why speculate for the sake of debate?

So watching the video from that night, Mr. Armstrong agrees to go into confidential executive session ("Aye", he votes), finds out that he's the one being chastised, and then complains that the executive session is illegal. Seemed to have no problem voting for it until he found out it was to discuss him.

When you vote for a crusader instead of a practical guy working constructively to get things accomplished, then... yeah... you get a guy like this.

I saw that video too. Though I will admit that I am not as familiar with the board lingo as I would expect board reps to be, I really had no idea what the proposed executive session was about as I watched it motioned and voted upon. Maybe...just maybe, they voted it in solely on Wright's request, because she wanted to talk about something unknown to them in private. How can any of them be faulted for agreeing to discuss a fellow board member's concern? I just think that we should give all of our public servants the benefit of the doubt until we know more about this situation.

Why does the treasurer have so much power. Could it be her cousin sits on the board. She's hiding things. Just look at her staff. Being asked to work with the doors locked during business hours so board members may not have access to their files. The treasurer must go.

@John. She is hiding things? That's a joke. How many audits does she have to pass? I would say that her records should be locked up. The board members should have to go through the Treasure for records. They cannot just come in and grab whatever they want.