Vaillancourt Wants Seat at Table at Dyer v. School Board

The Howard County School Board has objected to board member Cynthia Vaillancourt’s request to take part in a hearing that may decide whether from his position as a school board member.

“One of the things that is problematic to me,” Vaillancourt said in an interview, “is that I don’t actually know what the things are that Mr. Dyer has supposedly done.” 

On June 9, the school board passed a resolution asking the State Board of Education to remove Dyer, from his seat, charging that he had “repeatedly breached confidentiality provisions that he is obligated, either legally or ethically, to preserve as a member of the Board of Education; acted in ways that undermined the functioning of the Board of Education;” and “used his position in ways designed to further his personal litigation against the Board of Education,” among other items.

Vaillancourt and boardmember Brian Meshkin voted against the June 9 resolution to request Dyer be removed. 

On June 24, the Howard County Board of Education sent a to the Maryland Board of Education. The letter, drafted by the Howard County school board’s attorney, Judith Bresler, detailed incidents that were not cited in the June 9 resolution. The entire board did not see the contents of the letter before it was sent (The letter is attached in the photos section).  

Vaillancourt said that it was not clear that some of the incidents cited in that letter were problematic.

For instance, one of the allegations says Dyer: 

[Used] altered board of education stationery to order staff to take actions in contravention of decisions made by the board of education; using that same altered BOE stationery to to communicate with the county council in opposition to the position taken by the board of education. 

“Is it an impeachable offense to design letterhead that has your name and says I am a member of this board?” Vaillancourt asked.  “I haven’t done it, but I’d like to know if that’s something that rises to a level of misbehavior that should negate an open and free election.”

On Aug 19, Vaillancourt filed a “motion to intervene,” which would give her a seat at the table during Dyer’s hearing.

In the motion, sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings, she said, “The very existence of this removal action ... constitutes a threat against me and chills my exercise of speech on behalf of myself and my constituents.” 

She said that she wants to be a part of the hearings so that the board can receive some guidance about “what is allowable and what isn’t.” 

“If I happened to be the target of this complaint, how would I defend myself?” Vaillancourt asked.  “How would I prepare my defense, if the specific things that I supposedly did weren’t being detailed?”

But a motion to oppose Vaillancourt’s request, filed by Bresler on Aug. 30, said Vaillancourt’s interests would be represented by Dyer, himself.

The board did not vote on the motion or its contents.

“I represent the Board of Education,” Bresler said. “Conducting the hearing in their defense is the lawyer’s professional judgment, unless I get some other direction.”

The OAH has not yet decided whether or not Vaillancourt will have a seat at the hearing.

The next scheduled hearing date is Sept. 24, when OAH will consider Dyer’s motion to dismiss. 

Dyer has a history of being at odds with the majority of the board as was demonstrated at a school board meeting Thursday, Sept. 8, when Board Chairwoman Janet Siddiqui abruptly called a recess to stop Dyer from releasing what she said might be confidential information, according to the Howard County Times. 

"If you're going to release confidential information, stop right now," Siddiqui reportedly said.