An analysis of BHPSNJ OPRA Requests Over a Six Month Period
OPRA, the Opera (or what feels like a never-ending charade) in which those who “abuse” OPRA, because of the strain it puts on staff are made out to be public enemy #1 while others file voluminous requests, ad nauseum, for what some could speculate to be political or personal gain.
After months of back and forth with the OPRA Custodian to obtain the top secret OPRA folder (I will remind our readers that this used to be public and accessible on the district website and reflected on the BOE agenda) the Business Administrator holds in his possession, we finally received copies of what the public wanted to obtain from the District. It turns out that most of the requests came from two former BOE Members – one of which was overly critical of other residents who submitted OPRA requests.
While the Districts world of OPRA is similar to an Opera, with crescendos and decrescendos, the latest “dump” of OPRA records has us in a bit of a crescendo at the moment. Intermission is officially over, here’s what has been happening behind the scenes…
On August 9, 2024, BHCW/NJ21st requested a copy of all OPRA responses provided by the District from April 2024 through August 9, 2024. After an extension taking about 2 months time, our team has received those responses.
The one item, the holy grail, from these documents is that the Township and the BHPD had NO PART in consulting with or providing feedback or insight to the transportation consultants. The BHPD wasn’t contacted until late May to meet with the BOE regarding transportation. Yet some Board members consistently led the public to believe differently. Does this sound strangely similar to what ended up being a twist of lies surrounding the “consultation” (which was just a “relevant hypothetical conversation”) regarding traffic safety during the reconfiguration of schools?
Other areas of interest include HIB (which is never, ever subject to OPRA), the Stanley-Starbucks-Facebook incident, CMS Mascot, and more.
The responses also demonstrate a lack of consistency in redaction of personal information. For instance, some full names and emails are blacked out, while others contain sender names (this is permitted under OPRA) and senders’ personal emails (this is not permitted to be shared under OPRA).
Here is a summary of the requests:
2/29/24 Former BOE Member requests emails between R. Nixon and J. Nardi that pertain to bills not being paid for January 2024.
I’m not sure why, but there appears to be some very deep unresolved feelings this former BOE Member has, which is evident and clear in the tone of the emails and the shared “disappointment” in both Nixon and Nardi.
4/25/24 A community member requests emails in regard to the CMS Mascot from Varley, Hopkins, Geiger, and Kobliska.
There are a ton of emails, and I found them interesting. What I found confusing was how the changing of the mascot would be a marketing strategy to yield more profitable fundraising results – but this was not anything of too much discussion. The email which hit home for me, and it should for you as well – regardless of your feelings on CMS being Tigers or Junior Highlanders comes from a long-time educator and coach at CMS: “In my heart, for the school, the students, and the town, making the change would be a mistake with costs beyond the dollars that would be saved.”
Again, this notion that money would be saved or made by changing the mascot comes up again, but beyond this I can not determine what THAT means.
5/10/24 Former BOE Member requests emails from BHPD in regard to Hazardous Routes and/or Bussing
Documents reveal an email from N. Joly to the BHPD Captain and the Township asking about the reported “assessment” the consultants conducted with the BHPD and Township. The Township Adminsitrator replies that she is unaware of any assessment and the BHPD Captain relays that no such assessment took place with anyone from the BHPD (this email was dated 3/11/24).
An email (missing header, date/time, etc.) was sent from P. Stanley to the BHPD Captain and an Officer requesting their presence at a transportation meeting scheduled for 3/28/24 (Please note, this email transaction occurred months after the transportation presentation (2/26/24)). The public was assured that the Township and BHPD were all consulted as part of the presentation. The 3/11/24 email was the first record of any attempt to consult and collaborate (on transportation and bussing) between the Township and the BHPD on record.
5/3/24 Former BOE Member Requests all emails from the public to BOE members (and their responses) regarding bussing from 4/24-5/2.
One interesting point to note is that whomever was responsible for redacting the names of those who emailed the BOE was utterly selective. Some members of the public (myself and my NJ21st cohort) were not redacted, while others’ anonymity was kept safe.
Documents reveal several residents sharing their unhappiness about the BOE’s decision to eliminate hazardous roads as a designation for free bussing, and many others sharing legitimate safety concerns. Included in these documents are purchase orders and emails regarding the superintendent search—I’m not sure why those were included.
Two residents (myself included) implored the Township, police department, and BOE to consider a town hall to hear parents’ and community concerns. I never received a response, and it doesn’t appear the other parent did either. From the earlier OPRA remittance, we see a meeting between the Mayor, BHPD, and two BOE members occurred at some point. The only two BOE members included in this communication were G. Bradford and J. Joly.
There is an interesting email in which P. Stanley takes it upon herself to respond to many emails to concerned citizens/residents/parents about the Board’s decision and calls the bussing situation “uncomfortable.” This assertion of the situation made one resident super angry.
Perhaps most interesting is an email from a for-profit, publicly funded news outlet. Mr. Nixon and G. Bradford were invited to “explain themselves” in the spirit of remaining “fact-based” as it pertains to reporting this issue.
5/1/24 a former BOE Candidate requests all emails between R. Nixon and BOE in regard to HIB matters from 5/7/24-5/9/24.
Due to the nature of these documents, only one document was provided; an email from R. Nixon to the BOE asking them to reconsider their vote.
5/10/24 a former BOE Member makes the same request as the former BOE candidate.
The same single email from R. Nixon was provided. However, there was an email dated 9/6/24 from [email protected] to the former BOE Member’s personal email indicating that there were no responsive records to the request for curriculum committee minutes for May and June. Interestingly, no documents were remitted showing that any such request for these records had been made.
5/3/24 A former BOE Member requests copies of the written oaths for school Board members for: Foregger, Khanna, Joly and Akiri.
The only copies of this are for Joly and Akiri, and, under state statute, are exempt from OPRA.
5/6/24 Former BOE Member requests all emails from the BHPD and G. Bradford from March 1 – April 25, 2024.
NO RESULTS OR RECORDDS were found!
5/16/24 Former BOE Member requests all emails from BHPD to A. Giordano, R. Nixon or A. Juskiewicz from March 1- April 25, 2024.
Two documents were remitted. In a letter dated 4/11/24 to the BOE, a response makes clear that the BHPD will not be making recommendations in regard to who should be bussed to the schools. However, it is the determination of the BHPD that any additional traffic in the areas of GLHS or MKMECC would be detrimental to the community.
5/21/24 A community member requests documents regarding the Kindergarten Autism classroom, the degrees of instruction in that room, and the projected enrollment. Also requested are costs for 1:1 paraprofessionals and bussing for our special needs students.
No responsive documents were remitted because the request for information does not fall under government records. If this individual is reading this article – please email the Business Administrator directly to request these documents or at least have a conversation about how to acquire these documents.
5/29/24 a former BOE member requests emails from an educator to G. Braddord from May 20-24, 2024 regarding this educators opinion of T. Foregger as a Board member.
In the email the educator requests T. Foregger resign. The educator also makes claims to the Boards ties to BHCW and blames “the four” for their failure to appoint Nixon as Superintendent. Another email from the same educator is about how J. Miguies of BHCW posted an article that was “eerily” similar to correspondence with the Board and asserts potential ethical violations.
6/11/24 a former BOE member (once again) requests the written oaths from Foregger, Joly, Khanna, and Akiri that they signed at the January meeting. The response, again, is that these documents are exempt under OPRA.
6/14/24 A community member requests all emails between P. Stanley and G. Bradord to the BOE in regard to the incident involving P. Stanley on June 11 at Starbucks whereupon P. Stanley took a video and scrrenshot of a member of the public then posted that picture on facebook with what many percieved as being highly inappropriate and unethical.
In these records P. Stanley claims she posted the picture as a means of protection against the citizen and his lawyer. Several Board members respond that they aren’t sure how posting pictures of residents on a community forum of 10,000 people on facebook protects anyone- but rather, opens the member up to possible ethical violations.
One thought on “The OPRA “Opera””