(This is not the article referred to here: https://old.hopnews.com/hopnews-investigation-is-imminent-and-revealing/ )
Dear Editor
Since October 9 of last year, Ms. Stephenson, a sitting member of the Hopkinton School Committee, has not attended a public meeting in person. During that time, the Committee has conducted some of its most important work. This includes deliberations and votes on the school calendar and the FY budget.
There were also joint meetings with the Select Board. Additionally, individual budget presentations from each school principal outlined their needs and priorities. Hopkinton school officials presented the MCAS results and student performance data. These matters are central to the role for which voters elected the School Committee.
At one point during this period, Ms. Stephenson attempted to attend a meeting remotely. However, technical difficulties prevented her from fully participating in the discussion. While remote access can be a helpful accommodation in limited circumstances, it is not a substitute for consistent, reliable, in-person participation. This is particularly true during complex budgetary and policy discussions.
If this extended absence has a valid reason, officials owe the public an explanation. Elected officials must be transparent. Without clarification, residents question whether their representative has been absent during months of critical decisions.
These concerns arise in a broader context that has already tested public confidence. In August, during a public School Committee meeting, Ms. Stephenson was caught on a hot microphone making negative remarks about another School Committee member. She later apologized at a subsequent meeting under public pressure. That incident raised questions about judgment and professionalism. It remains part of the context in which her continued nonattendance is now occurring.
Ms. Stephenson was elected in May 2023 with Adam Monroe, who later resigned from the School Committee due to attendance concerns. When multiple newly elected members struggle to meet the basic responsibilities of their roles, voters have good reason to question whether candidates’ readiness and capacity for service are adequately assessed before they run.
Concerns were also raised during Ms. Stephenson’s campaign about her connection to the community. She had moved to Hopkinton only months before the election. Moreover, she had no children or family members enrolled in Hopkinton Public Schools and had limited prior involvement in the town or its school system. Despite this, she was advanced as a candidate for one of the town’s most demanding and visible public offices.
After the election, HopNews published an article detailing Ms. Stephenson’s criminal record. This included convictions related to repeated DUI offenses and a period of incarceration. This information is a matter of public record and has been previously reported. While past mistakes do not automatically disqualify someone from public service, they raise reasonable questions. These include vetting, eligibility, and suitability for a role that involves oversight of a public school system and regular presence in school settings.
Local political organizations play an important role in recruiting and endorsing candidates for public office. With that influence comes a responsibility to ensure candidates are prepared for the demands of the positions they seek. When questions arise after an election about attendance, conduct, or ability to serve, transparency and accountability become even more important.
Hopkinton Public Schools consistently rank among Massachusetts’s top districts and stand out as one of the town’s greatest assets.
The quality of our schools directly affects student outcomes, community confidence, and property values across Hopkinton.
Oversight of a system with this level of impact requires sustained engagement, sound judgment, and a willingness to fully participate. The community deserves clear answers about Ms. Stephenson’s absence. Furthermore, confidence that those serving on the School Committee are prepared to meet that responsibility is essential.
Sincerely,
Concerned Hopkinton Parent
(speaking for a group of concerned parents)
Great letter but shouldn’t LTEs be signed by a real person versus being submitted anonymously?
You bring up a good point, thank you! It is reasonable to expect most letters to be signed by the author, and many newspapers do require a name and town at minimum. However, as an editorial judgment call, we allow anonymity so that everyone feels safe sharing their views.
Noted – If you have a personal relationship with the person sending the LTE – questions on someone’s judgement and character are fair game. Great to know.
Please always share mine, I don’t care and look forward to the debate.
Anonymously is whats gone critically wrong with Journalism.
It should be considered fake news.
To not reveal sources is to cloak the truth.
You did not make anyone comfortable with your poor decision to push it into the public.
Coward is those who want to be heard from the dark.
God is watching.
As a concerned voter, I would like to ask if before writing this letter, did anyone check on Ms. Stephenson’s health? After reading the letter I went back and looked at the published minutes for the SC meetings and also looked at the HCAM videos of the more recent meetings where no minutes have been published. Ms. Stephenson’s attendance is consistent throughout her elected term until the four meetings she missed in November & December. I would ask, was she ill? Did anyone ask her? or the Chair? Have the authors reviewed attendance for the other members of the SC? How about the Select Board? I noted that two of their members were not at the joint December meeting.
Here’s the problem with these kinds of anonymous attacks, it is so difficult to get people involved in the voluntary running of the town, why would anyone want to put themselves out there for this kind of ugliness?
Asking about prolonged absences from an elected official is not an attack. Before last night, there was no public explanation, and I think it is reasonable for residents to wonder about attendance and continuity of representation without speculating about anyone’s health. At minimum, the Chair of the School Committee should have made a public comment about Susan’s multiple absences without having to provide her personal details. Matt Kisner, a Select Board member missed one meeting due to an emergency health reason and he also immediately and publicly notified the town and was transparent. That is what elected officials are expected to do. No one is entitled to know her health issues, but certainly an acknowledgment of her absences and the expectation of when she may return.
Bringing up her OUI & previous addiction is a neighborly thing to do, then? Are Hopkinton schools losing their prestige? Don’t try to cloak this in righteousness, it’s an attack and also sour grapes.
Our residential liberals at their best. Vote blue no matter what. The more controversial you are the better. If anyone questions their candidate, it’s racism, homophobia or allegiance with the nazi party.
I’m going to guess that the SC members are aware of what’s going on w Susan. Superintendent as well. If it’s something deeply personal are you still owed an explanation?
Another great comment, thank you! In our view, it is reasonable for residents to notice and question a prolonged absence from a public board, especially when important decisions are being made. While residents are not owed a “why,” they are entitled to know whether the member can still participate, or whether the elected seat is being actively filled, and what steps the committee will take if the absence continues.
HopNews is deeply saddened to learn of Ms. Stephenson’s illness and we plan to make a public statement soon. We wish her nothing but the best in her recovery.
There is only one person in this town who would stoop low enough to write this. We know who it is because once again it’s sour grapes. Gee maybe it is Susan’s health. Would you feel bad then? Post the writers name or don’t post letters someone won’t sign their names too.
The election is over.
The fact that this individual keeps being a disruptive force to Hopkinton keeps me questioning of their intent.
Says the guy that likes to hurl swears at children and snow balls with rocks and frozen water bottles at others. Go vandalize a Tesla
We all know who wrote this letter. Sour grapes.
That’s why we shouldn’t have anonymous LTEs. Transparency is the best approach.
With all due respect, an elected official is expected to sustain their elected position for the tenure of their term. If a medical issue comes up and they can’t meet their obligations, it should be disclosed.
Ms. Stephenson has done an excellent job in her role on school committee. She brings a perspective that few in the community can duplicate. She has been dedicated to her role for the past 2.5 years without question, and I find it deeply unsettling that the question about her limited absence was posed as a dereliction of duty as opposed to a question into her overall well-being.
I find the mention of her past to be in very poor taste because her term is almost complete and it has never had any bearing on her ability to do her job. I am unclear as to the purpose of mentioning in relation to this question.
I am hopeful that as the nation around us becomes more polarized and less concerned with the well-being of others, that we as a community can be better. I do agree we have the right to ensure our elected officials’ fitness for office, but maybe instead of assuming the worst in a public forum, we can treat each other with humanity and ask each other how we’re doing as neighbors, since that is what we all are.
Hop News Staff: I don’t know the subject of the letter (or anyone on the school board for that matter), but allowing someone to post a letter like this anonymously is absolutely the wrong call.
In the legal system, a person has the right to know their accuser – but you’re shielding the author of this letter so they can feel “safe”? How does sharing their name make them unsafe?
No. They have strong and detailed opinions, they should either be willing to put their name to those words, or you should not publish them.
Thanks. We appreciate the feedback!
During the school board election, I felt the information shared by HopNews about Susan’s multiple OUI’s/DUI’s and incarceration was relevant in that it made me question her judgement, personal responsibility, and ability to be a good role model for children (especially teenage drivers).
Ultimately, this knowledge also made me question her prolonged absense from the school committee. Anyone with an OUI would have been flagged on a CORI check by the district, and they would’ve likely faced employment hurdles as a teacher with multiple convictions or a felony. I believe in forgiveness, but I don’t believe she was best suited for a role on the school committee.
Every 85 seconds, someone is killed or injured by a drunk driver and many of those are children. In the US, one person dies every 39 minutes from a drunk driver and these deaths are 100% preventable. I appreciate anyone who is willing to serve, but I also understand why someone chose to write this letter to the editor.
Personal responsibility and transparency matter. The school committee chair should inform the community of the plan to cover for Ms. Stephenson’s position in her absence. I wish Ms. Stephenson the best in her recovery and fight against cancer.
A number of these comments look like HDTC running interference once again. Deflecting blame onto those calling for accountability appears to be their normal playbook.
To bad a good woman with children in the district who wanted to serve was so brutally abused by self appointed power brokers in town. We all know what I’m talking about! Not a fan of opinions without actual names but appreciate there are times when the author can’t divulge their name.