Board Reverses Course on Poor Decisions: A Recap of the January 30 RIH BOE Meeting

Catching up on the January 30 RIH BOE meeting, a quick synopsis for those who were unable to attend (it was a 3 hour and 15 minute meeting, so I only captured some highlights below.) The full meeting can found on the district’s website.

A majority on the Board (Sullivan, Ansh, Emmolo, Bogdansky, Mariani – “the majority”) reversed course on several of their poor decisions made on Jan 5th:

(1) Reversed the ill-advised changes they made to Policy 0174 Legal Services, to revert the policy back to what it was prior to Jan 5th, allowing the Superintendent to consult legal counsel and taking the Board President out of day-to-day operations.

(2) Restarted the ESIP program that was paused on Jan 5th (which had delayed district operations on energy savings projects).

(3) Re-voted on the same resolution to appoint a Treasurer of Monies that they voted down on Jan 5 (this time it passed unanimously).

(4) Un-tabled and approved the contract stipends for district administrators working on the district's Strategic Plan so that staff could be paid.

While I was happy to see the board walk back their actions, I was disappointed in the continued lack of transparency. There was little to no discussion as to why these Board members reversed course at this meeting. So much for promises of full transparency.

The Board did not agree to re-hire the district attorney who was fired by the majority at the Jan 5th meeting. I asked what would happen if an emergent issue came up, since the Board’s action left the district without legal counsel. My question was not answered.

The Board approved a first read on a Policy 0164.1 that will allow Board members to attend meetings remotely (both Executive Sessions and Public Sessions). This is NOT a best practice. Several members of the public who had been BOE members on other School Boards spoke up with concerns about this policy, which can allow confidential Board business to be overhead in Board members’ homes/offices/or wherever they are dialing in from. This is more time spent by this Board focusing on things that have absolutely zero impact on improving our schools or raising Student Achievement. Legal advice might have been helpful on this policy, but this Board fired their counsel and currently has none.

The Board unanimously approved over $350,000 in architect fees for various projects, without going out to bid and without raising a single question about the fees. This is in stark contrast to the arguments over a $750 dishwasher purchase from a local vendor that took place last year, and the purported concerns about $130,000 in legal fees for an entire year based on the Board’s own usage of the attorney. Note I am supportive of these projects, just not of the obvious hypocrisy.

The majority voted down its own minutes of the January 5 Board meeting. There was no discussion, just the majority of 5 board members voting no. I asked why they didn’t approve their minutes. My question was not answered. Subsequent to the meeting I discovered that the Board Vice President, Kim Ansh, had been privately emailing a district employee directing him to change the minutes, and when he did not, the majority voted down the minutes. All of this should have been a public discussion at the meeting, as Judy Sullivan and Board Counsel pointed out at a July 2021 meeting. Judy Sullivan clearly knew better than to do this. You can see an excerpt of the July 2021 meeting here: https://youtu.be/K1x94U3F6kg

Board member Dr. Aaron Lorenz raised a point of information to ask the Superintendent’s opinion on legal counsel. During open board discussion, Board President Judy Sullivan spent almost 9 minutes blocking Dr. Lorenz’s request. Additionally, Judy Sullivan did not fully acknowledge Dr. Lorenz’s process concerns, and ignored his requests for more information and information sharing with the full board about the legal counsel hiring process, as required by the Open Public Meetings Act. If a Board member is being denied information and answers to questions, what can the public expect to be told? Again, so much for Ms. Sullivan's promises of full transparency. You can see it here: https://youtu.be/YW3TQEpKCek

Board member Helen Koulikourdis raised the issue of moving Board meeting times and locations, undermining the planning work done by the Superintendent in organizing the calendar around statutory requirements such as budget deadlines, and in order to accommodate certain majority board members' friends. You will see the concerns Ms. Koulikourdis raised during board discussion and the debate that ensued for almost 17 minutes. This is again more time spent focusing on things that will have absolutely zero impact on improving our schools or raising Student Achievement (and in this case will actually cost the district money!). You will see there appears to be a lack of understanding by a majority of the Board, that as the NJ School Board Association advises local school boards, School Board Meetings are meetings of the board held in public and not the public’s meetings with the board. It appears these changes are being proposed by the majority not because they are necessary but just because they can. You can see it here: https://youtu.be/ZViTLEOxmiQ

Board member Brian DeLaite raised several points about the conflict-of-interest Judy Sullivan in voting to fire the legal counsel, which he had been unaware of and was concerned about. You can see it here: https://youtu.be/1jrMhqQ1lio

And my own comments at the meeting can be seen here: https://youtu.be/pYDlqYXqTLQ