Update: April 26, 2010:

Please see letter to Judge DuBois under newly added Correspondence Section.

Update:  April 20, 2010

Dear fellow parents:

We wanted to update you on the litigation and events surrounding the webcam issues at our two high schools.

On April 14, 2010, the Court issued an Order that, we are happy to report, has provided our group what we sought from the outset in our efforts to intervene:  a seat at the negotiating table along with the school district and counsel for the Robbins.  We have already had two meetings with the parties’ counsel, and have made substantial progress in negotiating the terms of permanent injunctive relief, which means a court order requiring the school district to take certain actions and refrain from taking other actions. Because the negotiations are ongoing and not complete, we are not at liberty to discuss the specific terms, but we will as soon as we are able.

This, however, does not mean that our motion to intervene has been granted.  Because the LMSD’s investigation is not yet complete, the Court extended the deadline for the parties to respond to the motion, from April 28, 2010 to May 11, 2010.

In the meantime, the parties advise us that the investigation and report on the investigation are close to completion.

Unfortunately, the Robbins’ attorney recently chose to release to the press, prior to the completion of the investigation, photos and inferences about an LMSD employee’s conduct and motives. This has sparked the latest viral news cycle, which we find extremely disruptive to our students, who have to walk past TV cameras and reporters on their way to and from school.

As a result, we are exploring ways to call for an end to the tactics that are causing such disruption to our children’s high school education.

We and the parties’ counsel, as well as counsel for the ACLU, are also engaged in discussions regarding ongoing privacy protections concerning the photos and screen shots that are uncovered in the investigation.  One thing all the participants agree on is that no invasions of privacy that may have already occurred should be compounded by further privacy invasions.  This means that we need a court order that governs precisely who (e.g., which counsel, who at the courthouse, et al.) can see what, and when (e.g., only after the student’s and family’s consent).

Fortunately, we have not learned of any evidence to suggest that photos were spread beyond the two LMSD employees who tracked them, nor to suggest that there was any malicious use of the photos taken.  Again, we reserve judgment until the full investigation is complete.

Settlement talks are ongoing. We have decided to remove ourselves from any discussion of dollar amounts being discussed for the Robbins plaintiffs and their attorneys.  Our role is injunctive -- to make sure the community finds out what happened and that the LMSD corrects this issue going forward.  As you all know, one of our aims is to see this case resolved with the least cost to the LMSD in terms of damages and legal fees.

Because we all have an interest in seeing that the school district’s expenses are kept to a minimum, we ask you to withhold judgment until the case is resolved and any reporting by the press can be in context and complete.

Thank you.

  Bob Wegbreit    Larry Silver      Michael Boni     Tom Grady

     bob@lmsdparents.org      larry@lmsdparents.org      michael@lmsdparents.org    tom@lmsdparents.org

And also thanks to David Sorensen, Bart Cohen, Sheryl Levy, and Neill Clark, all high school parents who work at the firm of Berger Montague and have done a good amount of the legal work with us to bring our voice to the table.

(PLEASE NOTE: Although Tom and Bob are elected officials, this matter has nothing whatsoever to do with any actions in those capacities for or on behalf of the Borough of Narberth or their representative roles.  Tom and Bob, as Larry and Michael, are parents of high school children in LMSD and are solely and absolutely engaged in this effort as private citizens.  Thank you.)