LYNNFIELD — Tensions arose between School Committee Chair Kate DePrizio and School Committee member Jamie Hayman at its most recent meeting.

While the Town Common filled with residents to honor and memorialize those who lost their lives and those who were affected by the tragedy on Sept. 11, 2001, the Lynnfield School Committee met as planned to discuss items, such as its operating protocols and communication plan.

DePrizio began the discussion about the committee’s operating protocols.

“Over the past several months, it has come to our attention that one of our school committee members is in violation of our ethical standards in terms of using their role on the school committee in a manner that violates our ethical guidelines as a committee,” she said. “This puts our committee at risk from a credibility standpoint and has the potential to be a serious legal risk for the district.”

She said she was advised by the school committee’s attorney, Colby Brunt, to “send notification” to the committee member by email and read it into public record.

“The email was drafted and approved by our attorney and sent to Mr. Hayman today,” DePrizio said.

“I am writing regarding multiple concerns that have been brought to my attention as Chair of the School Committee. I have discussed these issues with our counsel and Attorney Brunt advised me to send this email to you,” the email states. “The issues brought to my attention regard your communication with the Administrators, Principals, Athletic Department, Curriculum Department and teachers.”

The email asks Hayman to be aware of his position as a member of the School Committee and how some interactions with members of the community may be perceived as a violation of his use of power. The email also reminds Hayman of the operating protocols and communication guidelines as a member of the committee.

DePrizio offered the floor for Hayman to respond.

“So first of all, every single thing in that letter is a hundred percent false,” he began. “I have been on this committee 10 years. If anything, my kids have had to fend for themselves… They shouldn’t have to deal with the fact that I am on School Committee.”

Hayman paused his thoughts and said, “Hey Kate, I’m responding to you. Could you look at me?”

“I’m gonna be very clear with you,” DePrizio replied. “I called you today and you threatened me. A threat that I had to amount to the police. So I am looking at you, but I am unwilling to engage with you in a more formal way that is intimate with eye contact right now. You’ve threatened myself and my family, and I won’t stand for it.”

“I have not threatened your family,” Hayman said. “Can I ask how I threatened your family?”

“You said that you would destroy me and my children, that you would ruin me — you would ruin my reputation in my town. That I should watch my back,” DePrizio said.

“I actually did not say that,” Hayman responded. “I did say I would be more than happy to hire an attorney and file a defamation lawsuit about this because it is completely unfounded.”

He also noted the email mentioned his children, who are students in the school district.

“You’re bringing my kids into this. You’re suggesting they get preferential treatment. You’re suggesting that they haven’t earned everything that they’ve done,” Hayman said. “I take that very personally and I find it incredibly insulting.”

He said he found out about the email earlier that day, on Sept. 11, and asked DePrizio when she began the “investigation” into the concerns.

“I said that I have spoken to staff members and I have brought the concerns of staff members to our counsel,” she said.

“I am the Chair of this School Committee. It is my utmost responsibility to be protective and bring those concerns to the superintendent. And when they rise to the occasion of being ethics violations or potentially being ethics violations, it is my utmost responsibility to be protective of staff members and this district,” DePrizio said. “This is not a Kate-Jamie situation. This is not something I’m doing to you. These are actions that you have taken that have now led us here.”

She said she is “completely” following the advice of Attorney Brunt, who she said drafted the letter to Hayman.

DePrizio is “describing” Misuse of Public Position – Conflict of Interest Law, Section 23(b)(2)ii from the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission, Hayman said. He said the reason complaints regarding the conflict of interest law go to the state is because a neutral party needs to investigate it.

“I have said for 10 years on this committee, ‘If you feel that I am doing something that is wrong, go to the state, file an ethics complaint. It’s a hundred percent anonymous and that is the procedure,” he said. “I welcome any investigation. But you’re not gonna sit here and defame me, defame my family — make stuff up about things I didn’t say.

“You said I made threats… I can actually prove that it’s not true,” Hayman added.

DePrizio clarified she is not filing a conflict of interest violation and is following the advice of legal counsel. “I have not done an investigation.”

She said she did not disclose any of the reports to Hayman to be “protective” of the staff in the district. “You may try to bully me, but you will not bully them.”

DePrizio said she directed Hayman to speak with Superintendent Thomas Geary and Attorney Brunt, who she said Hayman yelled at. Geary did not add to the discussion during the meeting.

“If you think there’s an ethics violation, I encourage you to file one with the state,” Hayman said. “And I will fight this. And I will fight for the reputation. I will fight for my kids.”

School Committee Vice Chair Kristen Elworthy said, from her understanding, there is nothing for Hayman to fight and the letter is only a notification.

“It’s still questioning my integrity. It’s questioning my kids’ integrity. It’s questioning my family’s integrity. And it’s questioning everything that I’ve done on this committee,” Hayman responded.