Berkeley Heights School District Saddled with Current Attorney for Another Year

While it was clear at the end of 2022 that the Berkeley Heights Board of Education was not going to address calls to look into hiring a different law firm, it was still disappointing to see the firm of Cleary, Giacobbe, Alfieri, Jacobs, LLC renewed for another year with no hesitation or opposition.

This law firm has given our district legal advice that has been faulty to the point of costing taxpayers thousands of dollars. We have nearly doubled our spending for attorneys’ fees in the past year, the vast majority of it going to this firm (brought to us by Melissa Varley). They are benefitting from the poor counsel they are supplying. There are a few glaringly obvious examples of this.

One such occurrence was telling our Superintendent that it was okay to hire her daughter and her daughter’s two friends for a paid summer internship because it was a temporary, part-time position and the pay was minimal.

This led to a complaint (and rightly so) that, to date, has made its way from the School Ethics Commission to the Office of Administrative Law, to be heard by a judge. Then, the Board attorneys attempted to have the resident who filed the complaint barred from attending hearings. As of the time of this writing, a settlement has been proposed by the Deputy Attorney General. The legality of the ability of the DAG to do this is in question, so stay tuned.

The board attorneys also failed to stop two board members from filing ethics complaints on behalf of the Board. Why would they neglect to counsel against this, when the School Ethics Commission states, very clearly and in plain language on their website “Any person may file a complaint with the School Ethics Commission when he or she believes that a school official has violated the School Ethics Act. A Board of Education, as an entity may not file a complaint, although individual members of the Board may file.” As a firm that supposedly specializes in the laws and proceedings related to school districts, this should be basic knowledge. Additionally, though the attorneys had Pamela Stanley file as an individual, they clearly stated it was “on behalf of the board” several times. C’mon man. Don’t be stupid.

They failed to advise Mike D’Aquila and Angela Penna that publishing an article on behalf of the board, without consulting the board, was an ethics violation. Our illustrious BOE leaders then claimed that they DID ask the board. The district, however, was unable to show they did so as an item of business. If the attorney told these two to make that claim, then it seems they don’t understand that it’s also not permissible to discuss and plan board business outside of board meetings.

The attorneys at this firm also have usurped the BOE President’s duties on numerous occasions, speaking over the President to tell residents their time is up, commenting on the nature of an exchange between residents and the board/administration, and even weighing in on construction labor shortages.

We will see if Angela Penna has the strength to put the attorneys in their place – giving legal advice. Unfortunately, even if that happens, the quality of such advice is dubious.

Related Articles:

THE FIRST BOE MEETING OFFERED PARENTS LITTLE HOPE FOR CHANGE

SCHOOL ETHICS COMMISSION DECISION INVOLVING FIVE BOE MEMBERS MOVES CASE TO OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

BOE CANDIDATE RUNNING AS THE PARENT’S VOICE ATTEMPTS TO TAKE DOWN PARENT’S LETTER…AGAIN

OPRA, ATTORNEYS AND AWARDS CEREMONIES

DR. VARLEY’S LEGAL TEAM TRIES TO PREVENT RESIDENT FROM ATTENDING HEARING ON NEPOTISM ALLEGATION

CONCERNS OVER GROWING LEGAL BILLS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED

DR. VARLEY, HIGH PRICED ATTORNEYS AND THE ANGRY SIX VS. SAI AKIRI

THE DISTRICTS WAR ON COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CONTINUES: THE 2022 LWV BOE DEBATE

THE BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT’S 12-MONTH PATH TO LESS INPUT AND ENGAGEMENT