A longtime district trustee said the run-up to Wednesday’s meeting amounts to “the most toxic” behavior he’s seen over 15 years.
SAN ANTONIO — Judson ISD trustees will potentially vote to fire the San Antonio-area district’s superintendent at a special meeting on Wednesday, but one longtime board member said the run-up to the vote has amounted to “inter-office politics.”
Jose Macias Jr. represents District 4 on the school board and has been a Judson ISD trustee since 2010. He called recent board activity “the most toxic, reckless” that he’s seen over the last 15 years, referring to recent meetings in which board members discussed the future of Superintendent Milton Fields III.
Uncertainty reigned for Macias and at least two other board members at a Jan. 10 meeting when District 3’s Lesley Lee moved to place Fields on administrative leave “pending an investigation (into) reported concerns.”
What was vague to Macias, who said that was the first time the possibility of an investigation came up in a school board meeting, is exactly what those concerns entailed.
“This is absolutely disgraceful in every way, every way imaginable,” he said in response to Lee’s motion, which was made in open session to an audience, including speakers who used public comment time to blast what they said was eroding trust between the district and community. “This should be a conversation in closed session, because I have questions about what alleged investigation is needed to be (conducted.) We’re about to vote, and I have no idea what the investigation is.”
That meeting only grew more tense, with District 1 Trustee Suzanne Kenoyer calling it a “railroad job” to try and oust Fields, who has been at the helm since 2023. Judson ISD has 36 schools and services about 23,500 students while employing about 3,450 staff members.
An effort by Macias to move the meeting into closed-door session failed in a 3-4 vote, with Board President Monica Ryan joining District 5 Trustee Amanda Poteet, District 2 Trustee Stephanie Jones and Lee in keeping the conversation public. Ryan, meanwhile, kept referring to the board discussion as a “continuation” of an earlier December meeting; in that session, Macias says, he argued in closed session that Fields isn’t responsible for budget deficits Judson ISD is contending which.
“These board members just have gotten to the point where they don’t want to work with the man,” Macias told KENS 5.
‘Looks so narcissistic’
Insofar as Fields’ duties are concerned, the Dec. 9 agenda shows the board discussed “the employment, evaluation and duties of the superintendent” in closed session—an item officially requested Jones and Lee. Upon returning to open session, Ryan said “no final action or decision was taken” behind closed doors, and the meeting promptly came to a close.
Macias, however, now says that when he asked Jones and Lee why they asked to put the top of Fields’ duties on the agenda, he received an answer from the board president instead.
“Before either one of them could speak, Ms. Ryan said, ‘Don’t answer him,'” Macias recalls. “It was concerning that new board members that are probably being intimidated because she’s the board president, they don’t realize she holds no extra power.”
(Jones, Lee and Poteet were all elected for the first time in 2025.)
Fast-forward to Jan. 10’s special board meeting, the agenda for which centered on “discussion and possible action” regarding Field’s “employment and duties”—a conversation that was to be aired out publicly, to the chagrin of Macias, Kenoyer and District 6 Trustee Laura Stanford.
“This looks so narcissistic on our part,” Stanford said at the Jan. 10 debate. “We’re taking time away from the district’s true needs. I’m clueless as to what this is about, and I shouldn’t (be) as a board member.”
Stanford went on to say that the most recent Judson ISD documentation on Fields was “a good evaluation.” Kenoyer, meanwhile, argued she was never asked about her availability for the Saturday special meeting, claiming that only “the four people who are the majority on this board who are working together to try and remove our superintendent were consulted about their availability.”
Ryan, overseeing the discussion as board president, condemned what she called “mistruths” being aired out, claiming all board members were clued in on emails about impending investigations—an assertion Macias disputes.
Fields stayed mostly silent. When he did briefly speak, he advocated that the board “collectively should make a decision, investigate when you need to.”
“But please, let’s stop this,” he continued. “This is only a further embarrassment to the district. And it only affects the classrooms even more.”
The January meeting eventually did go into closed session so board members could consult with attorneys; no vote was taken behind closed doors. When the board returned, a 6-1 vote that ended the meeting was to “proceed as discussed in closed session,” with little indication about what that entailed.
Macias was the lone “nay” vote.
“We came back out in order to right the wrong,” the District 4 trustee said Tuesday. “To do it the way it’s supposed to be done, do it with some dignity and some professionalism. And that was totally thrown out the minute the meeting ended.”
Shortly after the meeting’s end, Ryan announced in a press release that Fields was placed on administrative leave with pay, saying only that the decision “involves confidential personnel matter.” Dr. Lacey Gosch was announced as acting superintendent.
Now, with another pivotal meeting looming, Ryan said in a statement that the board was briefed on Jan. 22 about findings from an initial investigation. But Macias says he still hasn’t received enough clarity on what Fields is alleged to have done that warrants his potential firing.
“I was thinking, ‘Maybe there’s something we all missed, maybe there’s something that’s criminal, something bad happened,” Macias said. “But when we finally were given insight, there was nothing. Nothing at least, I feel, that was at the level that required termination.”
Stanford shared in a social media post echoed the sentiment, saying no “criminal or immoral behavior” was revealed.
KENS 5 inquired with Judson ISD about the basis of the investigation into Fields. Ryan said in her statement that the board was “limited in what it can publicly discuss,” citing “confidential personnel and ongoing legal matters.”
“In open session, the board may consider and take action regarding the superintendent’s administrative leave and proposed contract termination based on the investigation findings, as well as the possible appointment of an interim superintendent to ensure the continued operation and stability of the district,” Ryan said in her statement. “The board remains committed to following all applicable laws and acting in the best interest of students, staff, employees, and the Judson ISD community.”
Wednesday’s meeting, which begins at 5:30 p.m., is centered entirely around Fields and his proposed termination; an interim could also be appointed. Macias says he expects many community members to participate in the public comment portion to kick things off.
“This has been very divisive,” he added. “It’s divided on the board, it’s divided our employees, it’s divided in the community. It’s something that did not have to happen this way.”