Concerns Over Growing Legal Bills Need to be Addressed

By Shauna Williams

The legal bills accrued by the Berkeley Heights School District Board of Education have skyrocketed in the last year, leading the Board to vote for increases in the cap on legal fees from $85,000 to $125,000 then again to $160,000. At the September 1st Board meeting, business administrator Julie Kot confirmed that our legal bills for the year have reached approximately $150,000.

There is a state policy, N.J.A.C. 6A:23A-5.2, that is in place to help regulate legal bills, and our district’s website shows that we have put our own policy in place to conform to the provisions of the state policy. To sum up what is contained in the district policy, here is a statement given by the Berkeley Heights School District Board of Education. They will “designate an administrative staff member to review all legal bills and designate contact persons to ensure the prudent use of legal services.” This policy is supposed to kick in when legal bills for the district reach or exceed 130% of the statewide average per pupil cost.

The policy, 0174, was updated in Attachment A, March 2022 and reads (in part) as follows:

1. The designated contact person(s) shall ensure that contracted legal counsel is not contacted unnecessarily for management decisions or readily available information contained in district materials such as Board policies, administrative regulations, or guidance available through professional source materials.
   
2. All requests for legal advice shall be made to the designated contact person(s) in writing and shall be maintained on file in the district offices. The designated contact person shall determine whether the request warrants legal advice or if legal advice in necessary.
   
3. The designated person(s) shall maintain a log of all legal counsel contact including the name of the legal counsel contacted, date of the contact, issue discussed, and length of contact.
   
4. All written requests for legal advice and logs of legal counsel contacts shall be forwarded to the business administrator/board secretary who shall be responsible to review all legal bills and compare all legal bills to the contact logs and to investigate and resolve any variances.
   
   To give context to the numbers above, the statewide cost per pupil in 2019-2022 was $18,500. Given steady increases in costs, that number should be roughly $20,400 at this point. 130% of that number is about $26,000 yet our legal bills are a staggering 730% of per pupil costs, and only two board members have a problem with this.
   
   Although an update to this policy was voted upon in March of this year, Board President Mike D’Aquila stated at the September meeting that he was “not familiar with that policy, if there is such a thing”.
   
   

Prior to this, at the May 25th meeting, merely two months after updating the policy on legal bills, Ms. Kot stated that there is no log of legal activity.

Given the amount of our legal bills, the policy dictating that special procedures be put in place, and the relatively recent changes to the policy, it is quite concerning that the board president is questioning whether there even is such a policy, and the business administrator (who has a law degree) is admitting to not following the policy set by the board.

How, exactly, are we going to start getting our legal costs under control when those who are in charge won’t follow the state policies, or even their own?

Deciphering why our legal bills have been mounting is difficult, but there is an inversely proportionate relationship between the district removing avenues of communication and interaction with residents, and growing legal bills. As more and more districts are moving to increase transparency and parental involvement, our district is moving in the opposite direction. They have removed the ability to comment on social media. The Superintendent has repeatedly told parents they are taking up too much time and refused email communications. Emails to the board go unacknowledged. The Board limits participation at board meetings to three-minute segments, with many questions going unanswered, and promises to revisit the questions at future meetings going unfulfilled. Most recently, they have reversed the decision to use Zoom for hybrid meetings in order to give busy parents the ability to ask questions remotely.

This could be a pivotal year for the Berkeley Heights Board of Education. Residents have the opportunity to elect three people to serve on the board, and we have a good field of candidates to choose from. If the current Board does not want to hear from us, let’s install those who do. Residents should ask tough and thorough questions, and serious candidates should be willing to answer those questions. It would be nice to hear from each on this particular matter.

Related Articles:

OPRA, ATTORNEYS AND AWARDS CEREMONIES