-Natasha Joly
Three main topics stood out for me at last night’s meeting.
The elimination of Mr. Hopkins’ role as records custodian.
I’m happy about this, as I’ve argued many times why this role, which costs an additional $12k per year, was not necessary based on the number of OPRA requests. Mr. Hopkins did not perform well in this role (kids’ names were not redacted 3 times while other items were over-redacted).
However, Dr. Varley’s response to my question about the board secretary taking on this function as per norms was unclear. She said we’re in a holding pattern, and if the board secretary can’t handle it, it will go to the attorneys. Well, we certainly don’t want that. So why was Mr. Hopkins’ role eliminated as records custodian if the number of OPRA requests is still on par with previous months? Why would we not keep the role or assign it to someone else instead of going to the attorneys? As previously argued by the administration when creating this role, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars if we used attorneys.
Policy 0154
The second item that stood out was the discussion of changes to Policy 0154 – requiring 48-hour notice of anything to be raised as New/Old business. I made the point that agendas are held to a different standard as they can change up to the meeting date. Mr. Cianculli argued that it was different, but to me personally, it didn’t make sense. The whole explanation of the 48-hour rule seemed contrived. Regardless, Ms. Khanna questioned Mr. Cianculli, and there was a civilized discourse on the topic.
Ms. Stanley once again spoke against continued dialogue, stating that as this was a second reading, Ms. Khanna had plenty of time to have all of her questions answered before the meeting. And that having already spent 10 minutes on the topic, they should move on. This is not the first time Ms. Stanley volunteered her opinion during the discussion portion that questions should be answered in Committee. Even if all questions were answered, is the entire Board not interested in hearing a member’s concerns? Is the public not allowed to listen to a discussion among board members over important questions regarding agenda items, given committee minutes are not published and are only available via OPRA requests? Isn’t that why the discussion section is part of the meeting – to discuss agenda items as an entire Board? And since when is 10 minutes too long for a discussion?
Ms. Khanna’s response was spot on:
“We will move on when everyone’s points have been heard.”
Zoom
Finally, the determination not to move forward with ZOOM participation was discussed. The reasons provided were that $6000 per year is too expensive, and as per NJSBA, other Boards don’t do this.
Well, other Boards don’t have a 48-hour notification period for New Business, yet the Board pushed it through. Regardless, NJSBA is an advisory organization. While their guidance is appreciated, it is not binding, and we should do what is best for our District.
I also asked about the cost, as it seemed relatively high. I asked Ms. Penna to publish the Technology Committee meeting minutes to help us better understand who provided the estimate and how it was derived. It also left me wondering – if the Committee is not recommending it, does it mean the decision has been made? The Committee can’t decide anything, so this item can still be approved if the majority of the board votes for it. Even if the cost is $6k per year, it’s worth it to allow greater participation by the community. At a minimum, eliminating the records custodian role will save $12k per year, which would buy two years of ZOOM participation.
Related Article:
11/16/2023 Berkeley Heights BOE Meeting Agenda – Laura & Shauna’s Notes
