Palmerton Area School District directors on Tuesday approved a fee agreement with the law firm Raffaele Puppio to provide services related to a Title IX complaint.

The contract, signed by attorney Katherine H. Meehan, confirms the firm will serve as an impartial decision maker for the district in the case. Duties include reviewing investigation materials, conducting additional inquiries if necessary, and drafting a detailed report and recommendations.

According to the agreement, Meehan’s services will be billed at $275 per hour, associate attorneys at $200 per hour, and legal assistants at $90 per hour. Out-of-pocket expenses such as court reporting, printing and witness fees will also be the district’s responsibility.

During public comment Tuesday, resident Carolee Boyer asked for clarification on the Puppio contract.

District solicitor Shawn Lochinger responded that it was connected to an active investigation.

“That is for a current Title IX investigation that is ongoing in the district, and they are assisting with that investigation,” he said. “I can’t get into real detail about it.”

The Puppio agreement is one of two legal service contracts the district now has connected to Title IX matters.

Last month, the board retroactively approved an agreement with Grand River Solutions Inc., effective through July 31, 2026.

That contract sets billing at $250 per hour for investigation analysis and $210 per hour for fact-gathering. According to the company, investigation analysis involves providing a written report with an analysis of evidence, findings of fact and a determination of responsibility if requested. Fact-gathering refers to impartial collection of information and evidence within a scope determined by the district.

Board members passed the Grand River Solutions agreement without discussion. Superintendent Angela Friebolin declined to comment after the Grand Rapids vote, saying only, “The district has no comment at this time regarding the Grand River Solutions agreement.”

Another issue raised during public comment was the presence of security at board meetings for the past several months.

Resident Richard Banko questioned the cost, noting, “I don’t understand why we’re paying $3,850 a year for a security guard. I don’t understand why you’re wasting our taxpayer money.”

The answer, according to board President Earl Paules, is a simple one.

“It’s not that hard to figure out,” Paules said. “The reason they are here is because of me.”

District officials said the decision was made for safety reasons.

“We have security guards in our schools all day long and at after-school activities,” Dr. Dan Heaney, assistant superintendent for technology and academic programs, said. “They attend all of our other after-school activities. We thought it would be prudent to have them here as well.”

Heaney is also the district’s safety and security coordinator.

“As long as I’m in that position, I feel that we should have security at our meetings,” he said.

Board member MaryJo King supported the decision.

“If someone requests or feels uncomfortable being here, then we should protect and honor their wishes,” she said.

When asked if she had ever felt uneasy during a meeting, she answered, “Yes, I have at a school board meeting. Absolutely.”

Banko said he remained unconvinced.

“I’ve been here for eight years, and we never had a security guard,” he added. “I’ve never seen anybody get violent.”