She has used her position to restrict communication by:
- Promoting a set of operating agreements that would channel all communication through the chair or the superintendent and prevent the free flow of ideas and opinions
- Limiting public comments at board meetings
- Preventing discussion between board members and the public at board meetings
- Refusing to respond to public comments or concerns either at board meetings or subsequently
She has failed to respond to concerns voiced by the staff or the public:
- She never followed up on the vote of no confidence by staff, instead professing her unwavering support for the superintendent who was the subject of that vote.
- She never followed up on concerns raised by members of the public at a community forum in November of 2009 despite her promises to do so
- She claimed that no complaints regarding the superintendent had been received despite multiple, on-going concerns raised at board meetings
- She failed to respond when formal complaints were filed – which is a violation of the board’s policy.