For the second time in a year, a Lehighton Area School District board member has filed a lawsuit in Carbon County Court calling for the removal of five of his colleagues.

David Bradley Sr. filed the latest action Monday, naming LASD directors Wayne Wentz, Larry Stern, Rita Spinelli, Stephen Holland and Nathan Foeller. In his complaint, Bradley argues the five “neglected their mandated responsibility to take lawful action for the benefit of Lehighton stakeholders.”

In asking the court to take action, Bradley cites a failure by the district to file an Annual Financial Report in a timely manner. The AFR was originally due in October, but district administration has stated in public meetings that extension requests have been granted by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.

Bradley also argues that, “board members voted to use public funds in excess of previously authorized budgeted amounts.”

The petition includes 15 signatures, including Bradley and fellow board members Richard Beltz, Gail Maholick and Joy Beers. A majority of the petitioners are also family members or reside at the same address of those four directors.

Three lawsuits in February

Bradley filed three lawsuits in Carbon County Court in February alleging the district violated the Sunshine Act and failed to provide him financial documents.

He argued Lehighton’s athletic and finance committees failed to take public comment in February prior to an official action.

In the third lawsuit, Bradley alleges the district has denied him free and amicable access to financial records.

2020 lawsuit

Monday’s filing follows a similar lawsuit filed last June, when Bradley alleged a violation of 10 title acts of the state school code. The district, through special counsel King Spry Herman Freund & Faul, have filed for summary judgment in the 2020 lawsuit. As of Tuesday, argument on the motion was scheduled for 9 a.m. on March 16 in Carbon County Court.

“Bradley has had a publicly documented contentious and acrimonious relationship with the five board members, in particular Stern, who he has sued previously,” King Spry attorney Brian Taylor wrote in the district’s motion for judgment. “Bradley’s past lawsuits against Stern were all dismissed by this court.”

The district argues that the lawsuit is centered on actions that were taken outside of the applicable statute of limitations and/or have been rendered moot by subsequent actions taken by the board.

“None of the acts alleged constitute a recognized grounds for removal under the Pennsylvania School Code,” Taylor wrote. “Removal is a rare occurrence limited to failure to perform mandatory duties and no such duties were implicated in the pleading. The established record does not bear out or support any failure of a mandatory duty, but only illustrates differences over policy and personal animosity of the petitioner with regards to a board majority with which he strongly disagrees.”

Taylor went on to call Bradley’s petition for removal “an improper and inappropriate invocation of the legal system.”

“Unfortunately, the filing is just the latest in a series of lawsuits (both civil and criminal), Right to Know Requests and school board motion practices by the petitioner designed to remove the board or make their tenure so vulnerable that they resign.”

Bradley, in court paperwork, said his petition was not about the political process, nor was it personal or a vendetta.

“That was suggested by the defendants as a means to muddy the underlying truth,” Bradley, who is representing himself, wrote.

“The community elected public officials to lawfully govern them, and thereby have the right to seek removal of those who neglect the duties they were mandated to perform when provided with government authority.”