On March 27, Sullivan, Ansh, Mariani, Emmolo and Bogdansky voted down the Superintendent's recommendation for a substitute teacher.
It's hard to find good subs. I personally don’t know the person they voted down but understand she is highly qualified: 34 years of teaching experience, including teaching in self-contained special education classrooms, time as a Reading Specialist, and a recipient of the Governor’s Teacher of the Year award. This person lives in the FLOW community and has a long record of volunteer service in our community.
Why did the five vote no? Here's what we know:
1. VP Kim Ansh stated at the meeting: "I just have one comment um for members of the public if you'd like to do a little research to understand a little bit of what went on tonight you might want to look up policy 3282, use of social media networking sites, on the district website. That's all." Her reference was to a Social Media policy for current district staff (see link to this policy below).
2. The Board received emails from 3 members of the public.
Sean Kennedy of Wyckoff, wrote "In my opinion, [this person] has a demonstrated politically motivated agenda driven behavior mired in woke, liberalism.” "Is this the type of teacher we can trust with our children?” "Politics and political agenda driven teachers have no place in our schools. Based on her actions and her words I encourage all to vote “no” to [this person]."
Filomena Laforgia of Oakland, former RIH BOE President, said "Based on her actions and activities from when I was a BOE President and now as a constituent, I have serious concerns about this person and her true intent." "This person, in my opinion, should not be allowed to walk the halls of our District, let alone gain access to our children." "Further, this District needs to avoid the drama that may or may not ensue if they were voted in.”
Linda Amerman of Wyckoff had this to say "I am concerned about a vote on a substitute teacher who is on the agenda tonight. [This person] is active on social media and has been posting negative comments about the current Board most of which is untrue and creates alarm in our community.” "I'm not comfortable with having someone employed that causes dissension and division in our school district."
There is no part of the district hiring process that withholds employment because someone posts on social media. There is no part of the hiring process that withholds employment based on political affiliations. It is an ETHICS VIOLATION for a Board member to bring special interests or partisan politics into their Board decision making, specifically, NJ School Ethics Act 18A:12-24.1 f. states “I will refuse to surrender my independent judgment to special interest or partisan political groups or to use the schools for personal gain or for the gain of friends.”
The Board has the right to vote yes or no on hiring decisions. However, they also need to follow Board hiring protocols and the law and protect the district from potential lawsuits. Someone might assert that this decision to turn away a very qualified candidate, was arbitrary and capricious, as the standards five board members appeared to use in this case are not applied consistently to all hirings.
Please pay very close attention to how this Board majority makes hiring decisions. Monday's agenda contains a lot of Personnel motions.
For your convenience here is the link to RIH Policy 3282 which Board Vice President Kim Ansh stated members of the public should "look up" "to understand... what went on tonight" in reference to the Board's hiring decision for this person during the March 27 meeting: https://www.straussesmay.com/seportal/Public/DistrictPolicy.aspx?policyid=3282&id=fe00aa80407b4789890b24592a36dfb6