Update On SEC Matter Involving Superintendent

Earlier today I emailed the Board of Education with regard to the ethics complaint filed against Dr. Varley surrounding allegations of Nepotism. BHCW became aware of this earlier this year when the parent who filed the complaint informed BHCW that the attorneys representing Dr. Varley (board attorneys) were attempting to block her access in a meeting with the OAL Judge presiding over this case (OAL docket number EEC-03574-22)

Yesterday BHCW became aware that a settlement offer was presented to the School Ethics Commission on this matter on 10/17. Given that Dr. Varley is the Superintendent of Schools, it seemed odd to me that this settlement offer has never been discussed with the public (but OPRA requests residents make are readily published).  

The text of my email is as follows (typo and all):

“I am writing to follow up on a matter of public interest. I have two questions.

As per the 10/17/22 SEC agenda, the DAG (Laurie Fichera) intends to present a settlement offer in connection to the nepotism complaint against Dr. Varley 

Is this an accurate understanding?

If so, I have another question.

After reviewing NJAC 6A:28, I cannot find any language that permits a settlement in a case of this type involving prohibited acts by an administrator.

Why was this offer made at the and who approved it?

I would like a response to both questions.

Thank You”

This is important because taxpayer dollars are being used to continue this ongoing legal matter. In my understanding of the policy, the superintendent is only entitled to having legal fees covered by the District under certain circumstances. Our superintendent appears to have violated the district nepotism policy.

School Ethics Commission Finding on 04/26/2022 (posted with parent’s permission):

Background and History Surrounding this Matter