Some members of the Jim Thorpe Area School District board of directors are upset about a vote last week to remove the newly appointed school board president. But the top attorney for the organization representing the state’s school boards says that the vote complies with state law.

“Should a majority of the board conclude that a change should be made, the board has that ability,” Stuart L. Knade, senior director of legal services for Pennsylvania School Boards Association, said in an email to board members.

Last week, the Jim Thorpe board split 5-4 in a vote to replace the board president, Paul Montemuro, who had been in the position for only a week.

Montemuro was elected at the board’s annual reorganization meeting Dec. 4. Montemuro, three other newly elected board members, and longtime board member Gerald Strubinger supported him, while the four other incumbents voted against.

At a meeting one week later, board member Glenn Confer proposed replacing Montemuro with Strubinger. Strubinger cast the deciding vote in favor of the change.

Immediately following that vote, Montemuro and his fellow newcomers said they were upset with the decision, and questioned if the board could oust the president just a week into his term.

“They didn’t follow school policy or law,” Montemuro said.

During the meeting, Cindy Lesisko-Henning questioned whether they had followed the right policy. The board’s attorney, Carl Beard, responded that the district policy states that officers serve at the pleasure of the board, meaning they can vote to remove them during any public meeting. The only requirement is that they give the public a chance to comment.

“The vote can be taken as long as you do the appropriate comment period before you vote on it,” Beard said.

Knade, PSBA’s senior director of legal services, backed up that interpretation. He said that in the past, Pennsylvania Courts have ruled that a school board can replace an officer whenever it chooses by a simple majority vote.

Knade said in an email to Lesisko-Henning that while the Pennsylvania school code states that the president and vice president of a school board are appointed to one-year terms, the one-year period is not a minimum, and they can be replaced.

“Case law going back many decades tells us that under the state constitution as construed by the PA Supreme Court, school board officers serve at the pleasure of the board, and the board can replace them whenever the board chooses, by simple majority vote,” Knade said in the email forwarded to the Times News.

Montemuro said he doesn’t believe that’s the case for a board president. He said the board can only replace its president during a reorganization meeting. He said the board must notify the public five days in advance that they are going to hold a reorganization meeting.

TJ Garritano, who like Montemuro was elected to the board this year, said that while the decision may have complied with the board’s policies, said he believes that Montemuro’s original appointment as president is good for one full year.

Garritano said there was no good reason for the revote, and it’s taken time away from important issues which the board should be considering. He said there are job openings which the district needs to fill and other issues which the board needs to take care of.

“There are other things we can be productive at. Instead we’re at a stalemate of who’s who,” he said.