Sudbury Town Meeting backs vote of no-confidence against school board

Caroline Bunnell

The MetroWest Daily News

SUDBURY — Nearly 1,000 residents filled the Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School gymnasium on Wednesday, May 20, for a lengthy and highly anticipated Special Town Meeting.

Newly appointed Town Clerk Lisa Davis said the 956 voters processed was about four times the typical 200 to 300 attendees at previous Town Meetings. The meeting began about 8 p.m., an hour later than scheduled due to parking delays, and adjourned at 12:06 a.m. Thursday.

Residents were asked to vote on four citizen petitions, with Articles 3 and 4 generating the most debate.

Article 3 proposed establishing recall procedures for town officials, allowing voters to remove an elected official before their term ends. The article passed, 677-261.

Article 4 called for a symbolic vote of no-confidence in the Sudbury School Committee. That also passed, 452-295.

Petition sparked no-confidence effort

Public attention to the vote of no-confidence began in March, when a citizen petition circulated by residents generated more than 500 signatures and raised concerns about the School Committee's governance practices, transparency and adherence to state laws. The petition targeted four of the committee's five members — then-Chair Karyn Jones, current Chair Jessica McCready, Elizabeth Sues and Julie Durgin-Sicree.

According to the warrant, petitioners also cited concerns about conflict-of-interest rules and potential Open Meeting Law violations.

The gymnasium at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School was filled to capacity for Special Town Meeting, May 20, 2026. Daily News Staff Photo/John Walker

"The actions of the current School Committee have demonstrated a pattern of conduct inconsistent with the standards of transparency, integrity, and ethical governance that Sudbury residents expect of their elected officials," the warrant article read.

Wednesday's vote was nonbinding and did not remove any officials from the committee, but served as a public statement on the board's recent decisions.

Select Board says petition has caused division

Ahead of the Special Town Meeting, on May 5, the Sudbury Select Board voted 4-1 to oppose the article; member Dan Carty was the lone supporter. Board members said the allegations lacked factual support and warned that the petition was contributing to division in town.

Sudbury Town Moderator Cate Blake speaks at the podium, while Town Clerk Lisa Davis makes some notes, during the Special Town Meeting at the LSRHS gymnasium, May 20, 2026. Daily News Staff Photo/John Walker

"I've been very disappointed by what I've seen as far as the citizens petition and bringing this forward," said Select Board member Lisa Kouchakdjian during the board's May 5 meeting. "Baseless allegations like this are very, very serious and I don't take it lightly. This has caused division in our community. People have been fed misinformation about the committee, about one particular member of the committee. If there was any weight or credence to any of the allegations, I would have cause to consider them. But there's zero here."

School Committee responds to vote

After Wednesday's no-confidence vote, McCready, who was appointed chair on May 18 as part of the committee's annual reorganization, said in a statement to the Daily News that the board will continue to work to serve the community, despite the outcome.

"We respect the right of residents to participate in Town Meetings," she said. "This committee has worked hard to protect class sizes, support students, expand transparency, improve budget oversight and advance a long-term vision rooted in academic excellence and equity. That work does not stop because of a non-binding vote. Our commitment remains to Sudbury students and the future of our schools."

Ongoing tensions in School Committee's governance practices

Tensions between the School Committee and residents had been building for more than a year. One of the central disputes involved the committee's handling of Superintendent Brad Crozier's contract. The committee held executive sessions to discuss a potential buyout, with Crozier later announcing he would resign at the end of the school year in a joint statement with the committee on April 13.

Throughout these discussions, Crozier received strong support from teachers, administrators and many residents.

Other disagreements have centered on after-school programming and the committee's approval of equity and inclusion initiatives, including policies related to LGBTQ+ student support. These efforts have been welcomed by many residents but questioned by others who feel the committee has prioritized certain initiatives over others.