The Berkeley Heights BOE Lawyer Addiction

How Much Money is Being Taken Away from our Classrooms?

The skeptics out there, and those who agree with Ms. Stanley that there is nothing alarming about the districts legal bills, might be interested to understand the role a district/board attorney serves. It is also worth noting that each call, each email or text incurs a fee. So when items like “review TAPinto article, redactions, phone call with X, reply to email” come up time and time again it begs the question of “why?”

Highlights from NJSBA regarding Board attorney;

“Many boards have policies that determine who can pose questions to the local attorney, and how they can do it... Reviewing these policies ensures that the board member complies with his or her ethical obligations. It is also a best practice to notify the board president in advance as often the board president has a wealth of institutional knowledge and may be able to narrow the focus of the inquiry.“

I have skimmed through the BHPS Board Policy manual and no such policy exists or is nearly impossible to locate.

“Multiple calls from board members on various topics can quickly add to the monthly bill. Therefore, it does not serve either the district or the attorney if the board member does not have a clear idea of the question being asked.“

“Understand the attorney’s role It is important to understand that the board attorney is exactly that; the attorney to the board of education. Essentially, the attorney’s client is not you the board member, nor is it the administration. The client is actually the board of education as an entity, separate and apart from board members as a group of individuals. According to American Bar Association Model Rule 1.13(a), “[a] lawyer employed or retained by an organization represents the organization acting through its duly authorized constituents (emphasis added).” 

Some things to point out;

On 6/16/22 – the day of the Board meeting Robert Cianciulli motioned to have Pamela Stanley submit ethics violation against S. Akiri, the following fees were incurred by the district:

Review Proposed [redacted by district] ($33).

Prepare for and attend BOE executive session ($495).

Participate in Zoom with Admin ($115.50).

Review/revise and finalize [redacted by district] ($198).

Attend meeting with Varley, Penna and Cianciulli regarding [redacted by district] ($165)

Attend BOE meeting ($660).

Email J. Kot regarding [redacted by district] ($16.50)

Conversation w/MJG regarding [redacted by district] ($33)

Email M. D’Aquila ($16.50).

Review and analysis of [redacted by district] ($66).

Add [redacted by district] and conduct final review [redacted by district] ($148).

Revise and edit [redacted by district] ($148.5).

The day’s total: $2095!

And for what?

We can presume the redacted items are all about Ms. Akiri and the ethics violations created using district funds. How involved was Dr. Varley, Ms. Kot, A. Penna, R. Cianciulli and M. D’Aquila in this process? And how come Pam Stanley seems to be absent from a single meeting in preparation of this ethics violation?

Parents have submitted ethics violation against the Board (that were founded to be substantiated by the SEC and it cost them NOTHING.

Why does Pam Stanley have the privilege of using our tax dollars to have an Attorney complete her now largely dismissed complaint?

Why did Robert Cianculli, Joy Young and Angela Penna support this use of District Dollars with their votes?

She shouldn’t.

They shouldn’t have.

That is why they are all now the subject of several SEC-validated ethics complaints which is why….you guessed it….they are using District dollars in engaging attorneys to defend.

Other Articles on the BHPSNJ Ethics Troubles and Legal Costs