On December 21, 2024, this blog website was the first to report a planned political attack by Pennsbury Board Members Jeannine Delwiche, Donna Petrecco, and Linda Palsky against their colleague Donna Ahrens. The progressive “Mean Girls” confronted Ahrens with aggressive bullying after she suggested moving political symbols out of classrooms and into a highly visible display case, so classrooms could focus on education rather than activism. Despite polling showing that the majority of Americans support removing political symbols, Ahrens was targeted for proposing a sensible, centrist solution. The original story included video-recorded comments that showed the vitriol directed at Ahrens. RTKs revealed that intimidation efforts began before the staged events to publicly attack Ahrens in front of the cameras.
Ahrens Targeted By Colleagues Prior To Her Public Statement
In early December, RTKs were submitted to investigate the activities leading to the installation of metal detectors at Board Meetings. Often, RTKs reveal unexpected incidents. The District delayed their response for 35 days, a common tactic when unflattering misconduct is involved. The response revealed that Ms. Ahrens received five emails critical of her conduct: two from Board colleagues, one from a Board Member’s spouse, and two from external community members. To respect the privacy of the external community members, their emails will not be released.
The first communication shows that the targeting of Ahrens began prior to her making the political symbolism comments at the November 21st meeting:
This email suggests that Ahrens is being targeted by fellow members for engaging with the community and being respectful to all constituents. It appears to be an attempt to intimidate her from upholding her governance role and meeting with her constituents. It is worth noting that her husband, Dave Ahrens, is a military combat veteran and a decorated police officer in Falls Township. The accusation of “confidential leaks” occurred shortly after Pennsbury implemented metal detectors for school board meetings due to a perceived threat of violence reported to Falls Township, which has not resulted in any criminal arrests.
The Former Eagles Cheerleader Shows Her True Feathers
When Donna Petrecco, an unelected political activist from Fallsington with close ties to Senator Steve Santarsiero, was appointed by Democratic leadership to replace James Prokopiak, she took an oath to serve the community, including those with differing views. However, like many political activists, her focus seemed to shift towards imposing her ideologies with her newfound power. Petrecco’s tenure on the Board has been tumultuous, with multiple public commenters accusing her of bullying a Pennsbury employee for engaging with public meeting attendees who held opposing views, even instructing the staffer to leave.
In the email, Petrecco confronted Ahrens about her comments that evening out of public view, initially apologizing for her behavior after the meeting adjourned. Petrecco attempted to portray Ahrens as out of touch with children, despite Ahrens’ 30 years of service as a Pennsbury employee and her close engagement with children of all ages. Petrecco then revealed her true motivations, stating that her daughter is gay and that her experience as a parent of a gay student makes her an expert on matters Ahrens couldn’t possibly understand. However, Petrecco seems to overlook that, when acting in her official capacity, her personal experiences and challenges in raising her gay daughter have no relevance in decision-making on behalf of the community at large and the votes she is to cast in their interests.
Delwiche Casts The Next Stone At Ahrens
A few hours after Petrecco sent her attack email about her views on gay rights, an email followed from Michael Celec, the husband of Board Member Jeannine Delwiche. Celec regularly attends meetings and speaks, but he doesn’t publicly disclose that he is Delwiche’s spouse. In contrast, when Dave Ahrens spoke at a public comment session, he made it clear before speaking that he was the spouse of Donna Ahrens.
In this email, Celec personally attacks Ahrens for exercising her rights as a Board Member to share her views on how certain school policies might be counterproductive. Celec asserts that she had no right to do so because it was not up for a vote and not on the agenda. However, under PA Public Meeting law and adopted Pennsbury policy, Board Members have the right to address “New Business” matters at the proper section of the Agenda, rules for which Ahrens followed. It’s important to note that Jeannine Delwiche is the chair of the Policy Committee, and Celec regularly attends every meeting where Delwiche is present. Obviously, they are keenly aware that there is no restriction on what Ahrens would desire to discuss that may come before the Board at a future date. And given the pending Trump EO’s and the Dismantle DEI Act that will be up for vote in Congress. Ahrens was doing just that to protect the School District from potential future litigation should policies not be updated that could be in contradiction to new laws that will be going in place at the Federal level. You can listen to Mr. Celec present comments on the First Amendment while choosing not disclose he is the spouse of Ms. Delwiche.
Celec’s remarks then turn to his disdain for other public meeting attendees exercising their free speech rights, disagreeing with their viewpoints. He expresses disgust that these people applauded Ahrens’ patriotic remarks about the American flag being the only political symbol that should be present in a classroom, a viewpoint held by the majority of Americans. Celec then calls for the censure of Ahrens because she will not comply with the LGBTQ+ directives of the Democratic Party leaders who have controlled the Board’s actions for the last decade. Celec’s stance seems clear: he believes the rights of children he prefers should supersede the rights of children he doesn’t prefer.
Under Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), a person’s right to freedom of speech does not end at the school building doors. However, SCOTUS ruled that free speech is not absolute within a school, particularly when it interferes with educational operations and infringes upon another’s civil rights—the exact point Donna Ahrens was trying to make. In America, one person’s civil rights can supersede another’s. Political symbolism that becomes activism can disrupt educational operations; therefore, Policy 321 should address this issue. It is worth noting that Jeannine Delwiche, Celec’s spouse, chairs the Policy Committee, which has the power to prioritize policy updates. Despite the landmark Marshall v. Amuso injunction placed on Pennsbury for past free speech violations under Policy 903, Delwiche attempted in early 2024 to make Policy 903 changes that would restrict free speech, despite Pennsbury’s past misconduct.
Did Delwiche Write The Email Or Did Her Spouse?
For those unfamiliar with Jeannine Delwiche, she is a proud and extremely active Progressive political activist. The publicly visible social media accounts of Delwiche detail her efforts for social justice and other Progressive objectives. Additionally, Delwiche holds a PhD in Psychology from Cornell and has had a long-standing career as a professional content writer. Given the prose within the email sent from Michael Celec’s account, it is easy to infer that it was written by someone with strong communication skills and a good grasp of English vocabulary. We gave Ms. Delwiche an opportunity to respond to our concerns that she wrote the email to Donna Ahrens and sent it through her husband’s email account. The following is her response made on Pennsbury taxpayer-owned servers:
No matter how Ms. Delwiche frames it, her prepared statements against Ms. Ahrens’ position to abide by Tinker v. Des Moines and remove political symbols were a personal attack. Ms. Delwiche has shirked her duties in protecting all students in Pennsbury and has made it clear on multiple occasions that she either doesn’t understand Federal law or simply doesn’t care if she breaks it when it comes to the reverse discrimination of students caused by the harmful policies she oversees and protects.
So, was it Delwiche who sent the email to intimidate Ahrens from engaging with her constituents or was it her spouse? That’s for you to decide.