Notes on the 12/12/2024 BOE Meeting

Let’s take a trip down BOE memory lane to gain some much-needed perspective on the hypocrisy surrounding the outburst by incoming Berkeley Heights BOE member Terrero during the December 12, 2024, Board of Education (BOE) meeting.

Reflecting on the December 15, 2023, BOE Meeting

One year ago, at the December 15, 2023, BOE meeting, the former BH BOE addressed several items of new business. This included adopting three revised Board policies (0148, 0164, and 0155), the 2024 Board Goals, and an RFP.

At that meeting, newly elected Board candidates Akiri and Joly both made public statements respectfully requesting the Board delay adopting new policies and Board Goals until the new Board reorganized in January. Their comments can be viewed here: 12/15/23 Meeting.

Neither Akiri nor Joly raised their voices or expressed that they felt “slapped in the face.” Their concerns were shared calmly and professionally. Furthermore, outside of S. Williams, no other members of the public commented on these policy changes being unethical, unjust, or poorly timed.

Fast Forward to December 12, 2024

During this year’s December meeting, a revised version of policy 0155 was on the agenda—a topic that had been discussed extensively in prior meetings. This revision proposed reverting to the original policy language, which would allow the Board President to recommend committee appointments but require the full Board’s approval to finalize these decisions.

The rationale behind this change stems from concerns earlier in the year when Ms. Bradford, with sole appointment authority, placed herself on eight committees, leaving others with far fewer assignments. The Board ultimately voted to restore the original language of the policy, ensuring that all committee appointments in 2025 would be subject to open discussion, deliberation, and a full Board vote.

It is important to note that the suspension on policy introduction occurred because Ms. Stanley consistently blocked this policy given her position as chair on the policy committee.  Ms. Stanley was placed on that committee by none other than Ms. Bradford.  It could easily be re-introduced and approved at the next BOE Meeting.

During the second public session, incoming Board member and Stanley ally Terrero delivered an emotional and critical address to her soon-to-be colleagues. She expressed her frustration, stating that the Board’s actions had “disgusted” her and claiming that reverting the policy language stripped her of the ability to vote on crucial matters. Terrero went further, suggesting the Board’s decision might result in ethical violations.

Beyond the apparent hypocrisy of incoming BOE members suddenly objecting to decisions made during a lame-duck session—a practice they themselves accepted last year—Terrero’s tone and delivery raised significant concerns within the community.

In professional settings, it is widely recognized that respectful dialogue fosters collaboration and unity. Emotional outbursts and accusations, especially towards colleagues, are unlikely to create a productive working relationship. As adults, we must strive for respectful communication, even when addressing contentious issues.

The Board’s decision to restore the original policy language ensures greater transparency and equity in 2025, despite the unfortunate distraction caused by the tone of this recent exchange.

Ironically, the changes the BOE made in the most recent meeting gave Ms. Terrero’ more of a say as she can now vote on committees, so it is unclear why Ms. Terrero was screaming about being “pissed off” at the podium.

Be careful, Ms. Terrero, as your true intentions are showing.

Related Articles

Read All Articles on BOE Agendas and Meetings

Reach Out to the Berkeley Heights Board of Education

Subscribe to NJ21st For Free