Public protests process as EF seeks new solicitor

The board decided to table its decision on replacing John Rushford.

Elizabeth Forward had a packed and eventful special meeting Wednesday evening to switch law offices for the district.

The district has used the law offices of Cafardi Ferguson & Wyrick to provide legal services, including Solicitor John Rushford, who has more than 20 years of experience representing school districts and municipal governments. He has served Elizabeth Forward for nine years.

Rushford was not present at Wednesday’s meeting, and several solicitors who were in the audience along with the public were shouting out legal advice.

The board chose to table the selection until January’s workshop meeting to allow more time to make a decision, with newly elected board President Jamie Evans voting not to table the motion until then. Rushford will remain the district’s solicitor until a new selection is made.

Vice President Rick Cummings and Secretary Scott Henry said Rushford has provided valuable legal advice for the district. They were hoping to have more time to review proposals from MBM Law and Weiss Burkardt Kramer LLC.

“I do believe that he has served this district well,” Cummings said. “I do appreciate both for showing up. I like to digest things, and like to look things through. I do support a change in solicitation, but after learning the information tonight, I think it’s important to understand the decision that’s being made. We have the best intentions in mind.”

This switch comes amid the district filing a lawsuit against its insurance provider, CM Regent Insurance Company, citing a “continued failure” to adequately address damages and fund the rebuild of the high school following the 2023 fire. Evans said the board is aware of the lawsuit while picking new legal representatives.

A change of leadership took place earlier this month after the November municipal elections. Resident and candidate for state representative Dylan Altemara said this vote did not start the new school board well.

Former board member and attorney Ryan Hemminger claimed that one of the firms up for consideration has disclosed to the board that it has done business with CM Regent, but did identify who it is.

“You guys are in litigation, you filed a lawsuit in September against CM Regent for multi-million dollars,” Hemminger said. “There’s a lot at stake. Everybody on this board knows you are relying on those millions of dollars in insurance proceeds that you are entitled to, that this community is entitled to. I know they are watching every decision you make. Every comment made here, they are watching, paying attention, using it against you if there is an opportunity.”

While they will work with David Strassburger of Strassburger, McKenna Gutnick & Getsky to manage litigation for the suit, the board was looking for a change, according to Evans, and the pricing is around the same cost for the firms.

“The process, although it is quick, every board member was contacted when a few things have arisen over the last few weeks,” Evans said. “Every board member sitting here was in favor of a solicitor change. Certain other things happen that I am unable to discuss in public comment. These two firms are the best lawyers in the region.”

Evans added that he, Cummings and superintendent Keith Konyk had a “pleasant” conversation with Rushford about his departure.

Many residents claimed the switch was “last minute,” while other said it’s time for new legal leadership.

Hemminger said he had no intention of coming back to the board to speak, but felt compelled to be at the meeting, stating that he believes the district is making a “grave mistake.”

“My concern is that this decision is being made in great haste with a lot of potential unintentional consequences in making this change, and I fear that the board is not considering all factors, or doing this for reasons unrelated to legal issues within the district,” Hemminger said.

He added that no one has mentioned issues involving Rushford during his nineyear tenure, asked were there was no Request for Proposals put out for law firms to get as many qualified candidates as they can and asked why there are only two candidates.

“It seems to me, in the supposed new era of transparency, this is the least transparent process I could possibly imagine within the first months of somebody’s new presidency,” resident Paul Beck said. “I cannot imagine a more terrible scenario.”

Elizabeth Township Solicitor Matt Racunas, who also attended the meeting, stated that the board knows there was an issue with the process of voting for a new solicitor so quickly, emphasizing that this has nothing to do with the individual law firms.

Racunas added that the way to do this process is to submit RFPs for different law firms, and then they have the interviews.

“It just isn’t right. Consider an alternate route,” Racunas said. “Put somebody in for the interim, if you have to make a change immediately. Do the normal, transparent process. You have that option. I know how it should be done. To possibly have (the selection) that narrow is injustice to you all. See what else is out there, and you may land on one of these two after a fair and transparent process.”

MBM Law is an all-inclusive, full-service firm that covers all aspects of education and school law, including representation at board meetings. It has represented numerous school district clients throughout Pennsylvania for the past 50 years.

Weiss Burkardt Kramer LLC dedicates its entire practice to education and municipal law and has represented school districts such as Charleroi and Steel Center for more than 40 years.

Both law firms were interviewed right before the public session. Residents waited more than an hour for the results, and many board members apologized for the wait.

Residents cited issues with violations of the Sunshine Act, claiming there was a lack of transparency. Racunas said he hopes the district got a legal opinion before they did it privately.

“I was on this board when we hired Mr. Rushford,” board member Thomas Sharkey said. “We did it with an RFP, we did it in public meetings where everybody was permitted to see the interview process. I believe that is the best way to do it.”

Both Beck and resident Eric Piper stated in their public comment that the residents should have been present for the interview process. They were concerned about the way they were going about things and were confused on whether the board got legal advice about the decision.

“I think it’s just extremely disrespectful to leave people in a room for an hour and a half,” Piper said. “You advertise that you meet at 6:30 p.m., you want the community’s involvement in this school district and then you make people wait for an hour and a half to interview candidates. I am not trying to be adversarial, but that’s a little ridiculous.”