I hereby call to order the January 6th, 2026 meeting of the Berkeley Heights Board of Education at 6:45 p.m. Adequate notice of this meeting of the Berkeley Heights Board of Education was given as required by Open Public
Meetings Act as follows. On January 9th, 2025, notice of the board of education meeting schedule was sent to the Star Ledger and the Courier News and was also provided to all schools, PTO presidents, the BHEA president, and posted at the administration building. A copy was also
provided to the public library and filed with municipal clerk. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. In the annual election held on November 5th, 2025, the following individuals were elected to serve on the board of education. Gail Bradford, three-year
term, 2987 votes. Deborah Terrarero, three-year term, 2884 votes. Javier Morales, three-year term, 2599 votes. We're now going to step into the oath of
office. That's how we'll get through. Okay. All right. I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
same and to the governments established in the United States and this state under the authority of the people. So help me God. I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will possess the qualifications prescribed by the law for
the office of member of a board of education and that I am not disqualified as a voter pursuant to RS194-1 nor disqualified due to a conviction of a crime or offense listed in NJS18A12-1
and that I will faithfully impartially justly perform all the duties that the office according to the best of my ability. So help me God. Welcome. Get the Burger King in time here. Stay over here so you guys can
look at yours. There you go. Yeah. So, just make sure that you sign those and return those to me. and we extend our congratulations to the new and returning
members of the board of education. >> Roll call. Miss Airi >> here. >> Miss Bradford >> here. Dr. Forger >> here. >> Mrs. Terrarero here. Mr. Dylan >> here. >> Mrs. Jolly here. Mr. Morales >> here.
>> Mrs. Stanley present. Okay, >> we have a quorum. Okay. >> Motion to open the floor to nominations for board president. >> So move. >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Nominations. >> I would like to nominate Gail Bradford. >> And I would like to nominate Debbie Tur. I would like to nominate Dr. Forager. Are there any other nominations?
>> We're going to close the >> So motion to close the floor to nominations for board president. >> Some Pam or sorry, Mrs. Stanley and Miss Terrero.
All in favor? >> We'll vote on Miss Bradford first. Mr. Kerry. >> No. >> Dr. Forer. >> No. >> Mr. Dylan. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Jolly.
>> No. >> Mr. Morales? >> No. >> Mrs. Stanley? >> Yes. >> Mrs. Terrarero? >> No. >> Miss. Bradford? >> Yes. >> Motion fails. We'll move on to Mrs.
Terrarero. Mr. Airi, >> no. >> Dr. Forer, >> yes. >> Mr. Dylan, >> yes. >> Mrs. Jolly, >> yes. >> Mr. Morales, >> yes.
>> Mrs. Stanley, >> no. >> Mrs. Terrero, >> yes. >> Miss Bradford, >> no. Motion passes. >> Be it resolved that the board of education here here appoints Mrs. Terrarero as the board president.
Congratulations and turning the meeting over to you now. Okay. Okay. >> I'd like a motion uh to the open the floor for nominations for the board vice president. >> So moved.
>> Can I I have a voice vote? >> Oh, you voice. >> Voice vote. Yes. Yes. I I Yes. Mom thinks you need a second. >> There was a second. >> Okay. Um, so nominations are open.
>> I would like to nominate Gail. >> I would like to nominate Natasha Jolly. board secretary. Can you do a roll call? >> Nominations to close. Do >> I have a motion to close? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Have a
>> second. Second. All in favor? >> All in favor? >> Hi. >> Thanks for being patient with me, guys. >> How' you take it? >> What is it? >> Okay. Can you hear me? We will first
vote on Miss Bradford. Miss Airi. >> Yes. >> No. Dr. Forger, >> no. >> Mr. Dylan, >> yes. >> Mrs. Jolly, >> no. >> Mr. Morales, >> no.
>> Mrs. Stanley, >> no. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. >> Mrs. Terrarero, >> no. >> Miss Bradford, >> yes. >> Motion does not pass. Now, we're going to vote for Mrs. Mrs.
Jolly. Miri, >> yes. Dr. Forager, >> yes. >> Mr. Dylan, >> yes. >> Mrs. Jolly, >> yes. >> Mr. Morales, >> yes. >> Mrs. Stanley, >> no. >> Mrs. Terrarero,
>> yes. >> Miss Bradford, >> no. Motion passes. >> Now you say, be it resolved. >> Be it resolved. The board of education hereby appoints Natasha Jolly as board vice president. Congratulations.
>> Um, I just wanted to actually thank Gail Bradford for all of her service for the last two years for as board president. You've done an amazing job. >> Thank you. >> Um, and now I want to pass it over to board secretary for board correspondence.
>> We do not have any board correspondents. >> Okay. So, we go to comments. >> The whole thing. >> The whole thing. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, now we're going on to the comments uh from the public on agenda items. During this portion of the
meeting, district residents and staff are invited to address the board of education on agenda action items only. The board requests that individuals state their name and town of residents or school of attendance for the record. Additionally, all in-person public commenters are asked to please sign in.
All comments should be directed to the board president and depending upon the nature and complexity of the question. It may or not be may not be answered during the meeting by the administration. If so, the response would occur after this public portion of the meeting has concluded. Although the
board may not respond to all items raised during the public forum, all public comments will be considered. The board asks that members of the public be courteous and mindful of the rights of other individuals when speaking. Specifically, comments regarding personnel matters are discouraged.
Cannot be responded to by the board. Students and employees have specific legal rights afforded by the laws of New Jersey. The board bears no responsibility, nor will it be liable for any comments made by members of the public. Please note that if any members of the public becomes disruptive during
the meeting, the board president may terminate the participants statement, continued disruptions may result in removal from or adjournment of the meeting. Each speaker statement will be limited to three minutes in duration. At this time, we'll take people that are in
person first. Doesn't look like we have anybody. Um, we like to move over to the folks that are online. Is there anybody online? Okay. So, I guess we will now close the public comment portion and move on to
the resolutions. So, resolutions one- one through 14 all be board members. Um, can I have a motion to >> motion? >> Just a motion. I have a motion. >> So, move. >> Second it.
>> Second it. >> Javier. uh public discussion. >> So I just want to ask about number two. Right. So the law changed that we no longer have to um put it in a newspaper. Correct. >> Correct.
>> So now when we need to change a meeting, we don't have to cost the district money. Right. Yay. All right. Awesome. >> And Jen, I I sorry I had asked about this one as well. Are there um do we will we be leveraging like the online
versions of these publications at all or we're just not doing it at all? >> We're we're going to do what we're required to do but no. >> Okay. >> So, they'll still um show up, Jen, on those um I think previously when you looked at the announcements for public
meetings, all the districts and all the towns meetings would show up. So, would we still be doing that? That was an online version. You mean like online on our website? >> No, no. I think you reported it to some entity which pulled all the county level
public meetings. >> I don't know if it was done through the newspapers, but >> So, under the under the new law, there's going to be a state database, okay, that has all of the public meetings. State has to do that. >> So, it has to be up and running before that takes effect. But there will be a
statewide database that posts the links to all the meetings. >> Okay. So, but if we make any changes, the new meetings, >> it's linked to So, it's a link to your website that is required to then have the most up-to-date information. >> Okay. I have a question on uh number
three, which is the calendar for our schedule of meetings. My question is on the March 26th, we have a regular meeting and the educator of the year. This is right after I believe the preliminary budget session. Is this the
one where we are honoring the ed like the ceremony at the Can we separate this as a separate event? Like can we do our meeting and the presentation be a separate
event? Because what happens is we start this meeting usually goes on pretty long and then we have the board attorney present and we basically I believe open the meeting
then go there to the auditorium. Then that event usually we we plan for one and a half hour but it goes on we all know from experience it goes on longer. So my only request is can we add if we have to do that like can we just
amend it to say just a regular meeting and then you can choose a different date or another time where it's not part of the board meeting. What I would suggest is in the past it was June and we um
recognized educators of the year along with the retirees which is what made it long. If you wanted to hold your regular meeting on March 12th and this be just educator of the year then it could be special meeting for educator of the year on the 26th instead of adding an additional meeting
and having three meetings in a month. >> No. What was your suggestion? So we have a March 12th we have a regular meeting correct >> on the 12th. >> Yeah. Yep. With the preliminary budget. >> Uh-huh. So if we let go so this if so on 26 we
have a regular meeting. So if we wanted to we're still not passing the final budget is on April >> until April. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Because we we may not have the all the information from the state by then. >> And we have a meeting in between as
well. So, so again, right, we've had this calendar for I don't know, two months at least. Um, but so if you see, right, we're opening it public at 6 PM and we don't start exact session to 7:30. So, that's gives us an hour and a half for the teachers, which I think is plenty. Um, and I assume the attorney
doesn't need to be there for the teacher of the year parts. So, I think that's well organized. Again, moving it away from the June, May, June situation, I think will help as well. um because usually those meetings are the ones that that end up being really long because we have to add all the stuff before the
summer. So I I like this uh plan. I think it was well thought out and I think um a lot of us already gave you our feedback. >> Yeah, I think um the what Dr. Feltry said is good. We have like two meetings in March and two meetings in April. So
if the March 2 and two in June, >> right? So if the March 26th meeting is just made to be a special meeting and I guess we need to have a meeting to do the teacher of the year because if the entire board shows up right it has to be a meeting right so if we make it a
special meeting and just focus on the teachers of the year and then we just have the public comment whatever and as long as yeah as I wasn't sure that we are not going to have Mr. Dysler we like you here but if it's not required like you know just that clarification from
the administration so there will be no attorney for this meeting if it if we make it a special meeting and just for having a special meeting with just educator of the year then yes we do not need Mr. Dysler here. Thank you. >> I'm not clear on what is what is the
actual intent as to what what do you plan to do at this regular meeting on the 26th besides educator of the year? Is there >> you're going to have it be a regular meeting? Then there would be agenda items. >> So be there could be bill paying or >> could be
>> um policy adoptions. So it is truly just a regular meeting with the add-on of the educator of the year. >> Yes. Yeah. just the same way as it was in June. >> So would we be able to shift some of the things from the 26th to the other meeting or shut them down and we
wouldn't >> create any problems? I think that's what >> as long as pass, right? >> And it looks like you could just do everything at the 12th and make the 26th just educator of the year. >> Yeah. >> If that's the intent, that's what I'd like.
>> Yeah. Um, do we need to have a special reason for a special meeting? >> So, you don't need a special reason for a special meeting. But if you advertise it as a special meeting for a specific purpose, you're not permitted to then go
out and pass agenda items outside of that specific purpose. If you call it a regular meeting, you could limit it to specific items, but you do have the option to add agenda items. So I think the question for the board right now is
do you want to give yourself do you want to just limit this so you know off the top of the bat look this is this is going to be just for this one purpose we don't want agenda items we want to be able to plan accordingly and just have a special meeting for educator of the year or you can give yourself some flexibility if you think you want to may
maybe pass a few agenda items for example if you have some bills to pay or things like that then you call it a regular meeting you have potentially some flexibility to add agenda items um and then you figure it out in March how many agenda items you so desire. So I think that's kind of what the question is for now.
>> You guys, >> is is there a concept of a mini regular meeting? >> I think >> it's my concept for every meeting, but >> I know that's kind of unheard of here. Uh I think that's what the intent is.
>> Yes. And I think right I think all board members have asked for that, right? I think by moving it to March will help with that and by having uh two meetings in April and two meetings in March it will help with the agenda being smaller right the bills will already be paid on the 12th so I think the intent is there
I don't want to make it a special meeting only because if exact session is needed I think that's important right and we run into issues with running overtime in exact session so I'd like to keep it the way it is but with the intent of letting the staff know that we would like to keep it short >> do the special meetings also have exact
session questions, right? Or >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yes, they can. Again, the you would have to pat have an agenda for it. And typically speaking, again, the purpose of a special meeting is for a specific purpose. Again, you can have an executive session and the like, though, that's not a problem.
>> I mean, look, I I'm I I think I'm fine either way, however you want to do it. I mean, we all agree that the intent is for this to be an educator of the year and for Mr. Disser not to be at the ceremony. Yeah, the only thing I will mention for
again a general meeting is the one thing I just came to my head is if you have like HIP deadlines and the and the like you may have to do like HIP reports and the like in executive session if you do it as a general meeting that would be relatively quick I assume and again I don't think I would need to be there for
those reports unless there's an appeal. I I would support a a regular meeting with it shortened, understanding that we have a shortened regular meeting so that we have most of that for our educators of the year but not limiting it to a special meeting with no agenda items.
>> Yeah. So some feedback on number three um without deliberate parameters in terms of our meeting protocol around how late we can go. I I just don't think we are disciplined enough as a group to not turn extra time together into
inefficient time together. So, uh I'm not supportive of another meeting every month. Uh we are already spending five and a half hours together at this point. Uh I don't trust that we will spend that five and a half hours any better if we break it up to two days and I'd rather
not come the extra day. Right. Um, secondarily, uh, I have a conflict on March 12th, which is the preliminary budget presentation which I shared. Um, given the fact that I won't be there, right, I can't support that and have Mountain Side completely not represented on that day. U, so then therefore I will
not be supporting number three as written as is. >> M, Mr. Dylan, can you have an alternate for your position as representative to Berkeley Heights? >> As of the moment, no. Uh I spent a lot of time today investigating the
legalities of that and how we would uh vote on that at Mountainside and then come up here given the fact that I'm not sworn in here with another challenge. Um so at the moment I investigated that in an alter alternate uh for to vote in
this seat is not an option. Thank you for asking. I did spend a lot of time researching as an alternative for any time when in which I can't attend, but this one just seemed a little bit more important to me than others. It's just my feedback on the on
the date >> being that um Mr. Dylan can't come on that particular date. Do we have any flexibility to move these dates around in March? Can we move the educator of the year to a different day? Like, can we swap these dates? So, would the 26th
work for you? >> Um, we can't swap the preliminary budget because that has to be submitted by the 20th of March. >> That's right. >> So, we can't do it after. Otherwise, I would say yes. Absolutely. >> That's the 20th though. >> Yes.
>> So, what if we went the following Thursday? That's 19, >> right? >> So, that that doesn't give us much time. >> It won't give her time and I'm not in town. You guys can do it. But >> in town, >> no 19th. >> I know, but like >> that whole week.
>> Oh, that whole week. >> Right. >> I run into the problem that the fifth is >> the the fifth we may it'll be very preliminary. If we do the fifth, it'll be very preliminary because we likely won't have all of the information that
you will want from the state. So, >> what if we move the 12th to like a Tuesday? like the 10th >> that can work but that doesn't help him >> work for me. I'm I'm completely out of state that week. >> Yeah. Just my reason for voting the way I'm voting. I
>> and I'm out of state to follow. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Come here. >> Go ahead. >> I'll ask you a question, but I'm really interested in if he has an alternate date that he could propose. >> Mr. D, do you have an alternate date?
>> Just not that week. I'm being I'll make myself available any day other than that week. I I listen I understand the I my date would probably be the next Monday, right? Because I understand that
we need to wait for the state funding, right? And how much we're getting from them in order to put together the real budget to know what the gaps or windfalls are going to be, right? So, I'm not unrealistic that we can make it any sooner because you're not going to have the information. So my alternative
would be the 16th. >> Does that work for people? Can do people want to look at their calendars? >> So Dr. Filter, you said you're not here on the >> I'm not. I would have to join virtually, but Crystal, if you're comfortable with Crystal sitting in, I'm not here on the 16th.
>> Are you okay with the 16th? The Monday following. >> I'm okay with it as long as everybody else is okay with it. >> I am not there. >> What? I I'm not I'm not I'm traveling. I won't be here. >> All week. >> I'm coming back on the 20th.
>> 20th. You're So you got from the 16th to the 20th? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Do we uh would a would a Zoom call be possible for you? No. >> No. >> S What about for you? Would um a virtual
call be possible? >> I don't think we can vote virtually, right? >> True. Yeah. >> Even if you're on a call, you can >> only exact. Right. >> Yeah. Um, considering our board, is this the time where we could put a caveat into
our meeting schedule and say that our meetings will not go substantially later than a certain time and give our body here a constraint to help us to move things along? Yes, but we're not, this is not the
issue at the moment. Um the issue is um finding a date for the preliminary budget meeting that where all of us can attend and vote on. >> Correct. That is correct. But we're also talking about public sessions at the end starting 6:30 public sessions 7:30 uh
not later than adding a table to this also. >> Well, I mean I I agree with Bill, right? I think I don't know what the goal was to add the two meetings to the month. Um, but I think that if the goal was to try to shorten our meetings, I don't
think that's going to work because our board likes to use as much time as they've have physically possible. So, if if that was the intent, I'm I'm okay with scratching a few. If that was not the intent and you felt you needed it, that's fine. But um I I do think that
we've had meetings go ridiculously long, but I would say our policy already has right that we are supposed to be ending at a a decent hour, >> right? It does say that we should have public comment at a decent hour and we are not doing that. So >> we do need to put something in place to
kind of force ourselves to be more efficient. Um as you can see, we've spent 15 minutes on this conversation. So, um, we do need to find a way to get these things done before board meetings, right? At board meetings, you should be ready to say yes or no. Maybe a small
question, but we should be ready to say yes or no. >> So, again, my question was, can we on just the 3rd, 26th >> and it went on to the other meeting, the 26th, if Mr. Dysler is not here, that
was my only question. And can we just make it a spe like, you know, educator of the year? Yes or no? That was my first initial question. >> Most of us said we don't want to make it a special meeting. We want to keep it a regular meeting. >> But but that Mr. Dysller will not be there for the because that's the first
it's first the first thing up >> just for flexibility. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Okay. >> But I I think for me the bigger concern is trying to make sure that mountainside is represented from a preliminary budget perspective. So, I like I said, I'm
willing to do all the leg work ahead of time, provide my feedback. You're just not going to have my vote. Um, and it's preliminary. It's not final. Um, and hopefully we then find a way to incorporate some of the feedback into the the meeting. That's all I can hope.
And maybe by then we we there is an alter there is an alternative way for somebody else on my board to come and represent. I don't know. I don't think that's going to be the case. Um, I think I've exhausted that today. So, I'd like to make a motion to amend number three for March 12th to be
changed to March 16th. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I think that Mountainides representation is important when it comes to the budget. >> Who seconded that?
>> Gail. Gail. Um, I'm going to just open it up for a second discussion before we actually vote on that motion. >> Anybody? >> I just don't know like how is so I am I'm not there on 16th but looks like
there is a preference. It's it is what it is. >> Well, like that we're going to go around this conversation like all day, right? So, if we can just vote and we can all make a decision on what we're going to do because there's the 12th or the 16th. That's our kind of our two options right now. And
>> everybody vote and decide what's what do you think is best for the board, right? >> That's always Okay. >> So, this roll call is um on the motion to amend number three to change March 12th to March 16th.
Miss Aerry? >> No. >> Dr. Forger? >> No. Mr. Dylan. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Jolly. >> So, my only other concern is that Bill's not going to be here, but if we change
it, um, Dr. Feltry is not going to be here either on the 16th. So, I'm going to vote no. >> Mr. Morales? >> No. >> Mrs. Stanley? >> Yes. >> Mrs. Terrarero?
Miss Bradford. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Terrarero. >> Yes. Motion does not pass. Okay. So, um the board attorney has suggested
that um because that has failed that we would request that somebody from Mountainside from the board mountainside actually attends the meeting in public so that they can share their comments during public session.
Can you do that or do you think maybe you could get >> on the record? >> It's irrelevant, right? It's it's voting. um it it it just goes to show I mean
the impact that we have here, right? So, um yeah, sure. But it's it's it's not comparable, right? I can have anybody. It doesn't have to be a board member. I can have any person from the public speak, >> which they already have the right to do. >> Yeah. I think right the
>> I think this shows right what he just said is that Mountain Side right has full voting power on his board and he's asking us to take that seriously and we just voted to not take it seriously and I think that's very frustrating um for
the the people of Mountainside right I I I would be pretty upset right because it's the budget it's not like we're and I don't know what m right? Like situation is and I get that, right? We're we're in a situation where we only
have one and one. I get that. However, we're also representing a whole group of people is not getting representation at the budget meeting and I think that's wrong. >> It's a preliminary budget, Debbie, and we can move on. rewarded
record. >> Um I agree that it is um not a good reflection of our relationship with the mountain side and uh Dr. Maher is perfectly capable of taking the position if Dr. Feltry is not here. But it disappoints me the fact that we are not
um uh voting to support our our colleague here >> and and the people of Brookley Heights, right? They they don't want this. I I think they're really frustrated. I'm very frustrated. Okay. Um, do we want to have any other public comments about any I mean not it's not public comments, sorry. Do we
want to talk about any other items on the under this section resolution section? Go ahead with Dr. Border. >> Yeah, I had a question about number nine. Um the uh business administrator's author, it's a
authorization to pay uh claims or demands uh that are in the best interest to pay of the board to pay promptly. Would that include a bill that was previously voted down?
If a bill came to us and we had voted it down, >> could it then be paid under this provision anyway? No. Do you want me to take it? You can take it. >> Yeah. So the answer is no. So the reason for that is again best interest of the board if a bill comes due. But if the
board has indicated its intent by voting down a bill that supersedes this um this number, right? So if the board has made its intent clear to its administration by via vote, then the administration would follow that over number nine. I just
>> an example of why why boards pass um resolutions like this? >> Why boards pass resolutions like this? You want to take that might be better suited for you, but I'm happy to answer if you'd like. But I assume it's because some bills come due and if you don't pay them, interest and the like occurs,
>> right? And penalties that are substantial or you miss the boat on getting a deal on a program that could cost thousands. So um >> also I think the big one is payroll right like most of the time we have a meeting in for payroll but not always
right >> and payroll do does need to go out and sometimes we do approve it after the payroll went out right and that's why this is on there >> right right >> debt services as well I think comes up as well >> isn't really to take away our control right the point is to be able to pay
bills so we don't end up with other >> continuum yeah >> well yeah because there is a uh a gap between June 25th to August 27th more than 30 days. So, we might need to pay a bill right
>> in that, >> right? >> Because a lot of these things have some of these have uh 30-day requirements, right? >> So, it's it's a safety measure especially for that that big gap in the summer.
So my only question was um it says the resolution says the business administrator to audit approve and direct prepayment of claims prior to presentation of the board for debt service payroll fixed charges any other
claim. So my my question was are any other claim or demand? So I know we have some litigation where there could be a presentation made. So this language is very broad. So what does that mean?
>> I all at this point we've uh set it up so that any representation that we have um that is an insurance matter is paid directly through the insurance company. It won't go to our it doesn't go to our accounts payable. >> No no my my question is fixed charges
any other claim or demand which could be in the best interest. So let's say there is um we're not talking about insurance, we talking about any any impending settlements or any claims. This language here in this resolution
says there is a direct prepayment of claims prior to presentation to the board for debt service which is fine. Payroll, perfect. Okay. Fixed charges, that's also fine. the the problem I have is any other claim or demand which would
be in the best interest of the board to pay promptly. So let's say we are in the middle of a particular negotiation with somebody on a settlement amount and this comes between the June to August. So the
board is not meeting and we are aware of you know maybe going back and forth on the amount or whatever. Will that be paid? That's so >> so settlement demands cannot be >> right >> because that requires a signature of the board president with approval of
>> the board. So something like that cannot be claimed. That's different than if you have a contractual >> okay >> demand saying like you're late on this payment and therefore we're going to sue you unless you pay X. That might be different because that's contractual, right? The board has already approved that agreement but may not have approved
the payment. that might be in the best interest of the district because a contract's already been approved by the board to make that payment. >> Okay, >> I brought my copy of Robert's rules of order. This pertains to uh number four, adoption of Robert's rules of order.
Um exact title is Robert's rules of order revised. Um it's a revision of the classic 1915 edition. Um, so I would suggest that we refer to it as Robert's rules of order revised
that we're adopting. If we don't do that, then we're adopting the 1915 edition. >> You want to make a motion? >> Yeah, I'll I'll move to add the word revised in uh >> four. Do you want to put the version? >> Yes. Oh, revi. No, I don't want to have
a particular version. It's around 11 or 12. Something like that. >> I think it's 12. 12. >> Anyone want to second that motion? I'll second it. >> Can we just revise the policy instead
so we can get it right? Um >> um >> we already have a second. >> Well, we we have discussion how it works. Uh well, are you saying that the policy
uh if somebody could look up 0164? I didn't double check. Does it say it doesn't have revised in the policy? >> I'm saying can we just bring that to the policy committee? >> No, I don't want to do that. I want to get we want to get this done tonight. >> I know, but you don't even know what version you're asking.
>> No, I'm not I'm not putting a particular version in. I'm just saying that the exact title is Robert's rules of order revised. So your sorry I have your policy right here. So your policy says Robert's rules of order newly revised shall govern the board of education it celebration acts in all cases in which the in which is inconsistent with
statute of the state of Jersey rules of the state board or these bylaws >> so that your policy calls it Robert's rules of order neither revised. >> You want to be consistent in this motion? You could just amend neither revised >> so that it's consistent with the with the policy 164.
>> Everybody I'd like to know if everybody will vote for it that way. >> We have to vote on the first movement first. >> Yeah. >> Have something that's clear instead of saying the revised version because that could be any of the 12 revised versions, right? So, >> if it says the newly revised in the
policy, I'm happy with that. >> I I I just want to take a second to point out that number 13 is a readoption of all current policies that the board has, which would supersede. So, if policy 164 already says newly revised and the resolution says in
accordance with policy 164, does it >> make a difference? >> I'm just trying to get it right. That's all >> like it's still it's still the newly revised. >> I I'm comfortable either way. I think if you say revise it as newly revised, I
think that would be accurate. Um if you don't, I think you would refer to bylaw anyway and go to the newly revised version. So, whatever the board feel comfortable with, I am comfortable with either way. >> We still have a motion on the table, so we'd have to vote on that first. >> Okay. >> And then we can make another motion to
do what you're asking. Does that make sense? >> What's the motion? >> Yeah. What's the motion? Like motion. >> If you want, I'll I'll give you a proper motion. Okay. This is the way things are supposed to be done according to Robert's rules. >> Which version?
>> Yeah. which we almost >> Thank you. I felt good about that. >> I I move to insert the word revised after Robert's rules of order. >> Revi revised >> I would re So do you want to do it as newly revised to match the policy?
>> I will move to insert the words newly revised after the after the Roberts rules the border. >> No, I think it so I think if I understand this correctly, you're clarifying what your original motion should say. >> Yes. correctly. Yes. So I think the mo the >> if I'm understanding Dr. Forer
correctly, the current motion the board will be voting on would to change in number four from Robert's rules of order to Robert's rule of order newly revised which would reflect, if I'm getting the intent of the board, version 12 because that is the newest version of Robert's rule. Is that the intent of the motion? >> That's correct.
>> Yes. >> And then we does the second stand or do we have to get another second now that we clarified it? >> Um who was the second? >> Mrs. Aerry. I assume your second stands. >> Second roll call. Okay. So, this is to move to change the verbiage to Robert's
rules ruly newly revised version 12. >> Uh, so it say Robert's rule of order newly revised which is the language in bylaw 0164 as criminal >> language. >> So, it's just consistent if you >> Okay. All right. >> Newly devised.
>> It's a lot of words. All right. Uh, Mrs. Aeri. >> Yes. >> Dr. Forger. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dylan. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Jolly. >> Yes. >> Mr. Morales. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Stanley. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Terrero.
>> Yes. >> Miss Brad. Miss Bradford. >> Yes. >> Motion passes. >> Now, I have a comment on number five, designation of serer, which I just noticed. Um,
it says superintendent and or treasurer. I don't know if there's a veral missing with that andor. And the other thing is I don't think we have a treasurer anymore. Is that correct?
>> Jen is the treasurer. >> Oh, you also have that title. Okay. Uh >> for a lot of >> uh so you sign as board secretary and as treasurer.
Okay. Now what about that andor? I don't know what that means. Superintendent and or treasurer. >> Looks like a typo. Jen, >> are are we asking for both? Yes. >> What are we asking for here? >> It's just missing a slash. Hold on. I I
I don't think it it matters because she's >> she's the board secretary and treasurer. So I don't think it >> No, no. I I'm trying to understand what it's saying. >> Superintendent and So are we requiring superintendent and treasurer?
>> David, do you want to explain >> it would allow right now as written with the intent? It would allow multiple individuals to sign. So your >> board secretary and superintendent can sign it. >> Yeah. >> As two individuals or any individual, it
only requires one individual to sign it. Uh if you're asking if you if the board's unclear with that. So I think you know if a warrant comes in multiple people want to sign it or it's they're required to sign it. This gives the authority. The or then would signify that or just one individual could sign
it. So it gives you leeway both way. Technically, I guess there should be a slash in there or a hyphen or however you want to, you know, backslash a and slash or meaning that two people can sign it. The board's giving consent to that or one person can sign it depending on what comes in and what's required.
>> Okay. So, we are requiring board secretary for sure, board president for sure, and then a choice superintendent or treasurer. So you're not requiring, you're authorizing them to be able to sign. >> So just one of all this list is that
>> four options, right? >> It depends on what actually comes in. Um at the end of the summer, we had a a list that was approved and there are different numbers of signature, different people who are required to sign different things.
>> Yeah. Read the statute. I think that will make it clear >> you just did. >> So for example, um so the statute talks about how the president the secretary can sign or the super uh and the superintendent or the
treasurer of school monies as appropriate. So the statute in some instances indicates that the president and board secretaries should sign or in some instances just the treasur of school monies could sign. So this kind of covers each instance. If I'm reading the statute correctly where in some instances if multiple people know to
sign they'll sign. If in some instances an individual can sign that individual can sign depending on if it's debt services audit or the like. If I'm reading the statute 18A19-1 expenditure of fund on warrant only which is poorly written I will be
>> the statute is poorly written. >> It's not the first one. It won't be the last one. >> I accept your assurance >> of that. >> Anything else or can we move forward with the vote? >> Okay. Roll call. Okay.
So this is the roll call on resolutions 1 through 14. >> Mrs. Akiri, >> yes. >> Dr. Forger, >> yes. >> Mr. Dylan, >> no to three.
>> Yes. To all others. >> Mrs. Jolly. Yes, >> Mr. Morales. >> Yes, >> Mrs. Stanley. >> No to three and yes. Everything else, >> Miss Bradford?
>> Uh, no to three and yes on everything else. >> Mrs. Terrarero, >> yes. >> Resolution pass. >> Comments from the public on any topic. During this portion of the meeting, district residents and staff are invited to address the board of education on any
items. The board request that individuals state their name and town of residents or school of attendance for the record. Additionally, all inerson public commenters are asked to please sign in. All comments should be directed to the board president and depending upon the nature and complexity of the question, it may or may not be answered
during the meeting by the administration. If so, the response would occur after the public portion of the meeting has concluded. Although the board may not respond to all items raised during the public forum, all public comments will be considered. The board asks that members of the public be
courteous and mindful of the rights of other individuals when speaking. Specifically specifically comments regarding personnel item personnel matters are discouraged and cannot be responded to by the board. Students and employees have specific legal rights
afforded by the laws of New Jersey. The board bears no responsibility nor will be liable for any comments made by members of the public. Please note that if any member of the public becomes disruptive during the meeting, the board president may terminate the participant statement. Continued disruptions may
result in removal from andor adjournment of the meeting. Each speaker statement is limited to three minutes in duration. They have do I have anybody in person? I do not. Do we have anybody online?
Okay. Can you please >> I don't have >> Okay. Um, can you promote that person? >> Can you guys hear me? >> Good evening. >> Can you guys hear me? >> Yes. >> Happy New Year. Uh, it's John McGuirez,
Berkeley Heights, uh, New Jersey. Man, I am so happy the decision on the president is not going to the county this year. So, that is uh what a really big relief. Um it was good to see uh us being able to pick our own leadership uh
coming from, you know, a local decision. I I want to really just you know um make a comment on like moving forward how critical this year is and and the primary role of the board of education
as you all know is the budget uh and making sure that the schools run effectively and meet and meet its constitutional mandate. And I I gave you guys some information in terms of uh where money was going uh with regard to
instruction. And from in that data according to what I looked at uh between 23 to 25, there was a reduction in despite the cost per pupil going up and enrollment going down,
dollars to instruction went down. And then when you took athletics out of the picture which for some reason is bundled in with instruction uh we actually instruction itself actually lost dollars about 36k not a lot but you know everything else every
other district that we compared it to sort of increased and it's an issue of priorities. I really would ask the board to re-examine the money it's pumping into schools, the money it's pumping into athletics, the money it's pumping into and discussions and time it's pumping
into all these other things. New Jerseyy's education system is in trouble. It just is, as is the rest of the country. We have a problem and the money is going to places. It's not following the kids. And I'm I I really would hope that the board this year
takes a radical approach to the budget and puts students first. And after the budget, I was really happy to see a policy finally holding instruction accountable from the board this year. And I hope the board continues that when
it comes to proficiency and and making sure that there are standards and numbers that this district abides by or or excuse me, reaches for with regard to achievement. Like, you know, this was a really great meeting to see everybody sort of get
behind and and vote. My hope is that we really put students first this year. We avoid debates about turf fields and card scanners and putting 15 cops in every school and we and we focus on what schools are about. All right, good luck,
guys. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, at this time, do we have anybody else? Okay, then I'm going to close public comment. Moving on to new business. Um, do I read what you have here?
>> Okay. The board may choose here to adopt a resolution to assign committees. If they do, uh, we must use the worksheet provided. >> I have sheets. I actually So, um, >> Debbie, >> just a quick question. So, the new
business according to our policy has to be added 48 hours in advance. So, this came in like at 5 or 6. I I just saw it after I came here. And so, are we
going to allow we we don't allow anything to be added without a 48 hour notice. And actually, this this time's agenda came within 24 hours. We got the agenda for the reorg yesterday. So
>> I think the um the idea was not not to necessarily pass anything but to have a discussion to get a head start on um creating committees like because you know I know Mrs. Bradford collected some information as to preferences. Um, so
this would be just like a first >> I'm not opposed to it, Natasha. I'm just saying like normally if we want to talk talk or bring up any topic, we are always held by that 48 hour rule, >> right? So are we going to do something
different? I know I know the intent of it. I know this was work that was pre-done, but >> I guess we can vote on it in this particular instance or we can save it for the next meeting. It's just I
we are ahead. we are further ahead this year than we were last year and so just wanted to you know with the budget in mind see if we can um you know and we may not agree today either so you know but just if folks are willing to stay to
have that discussion >> maybe as a board we can vote >> I'll just make a comment I don't know how it could be saying we're willing to meet four extra times a year but yet not be willing to assign committees or work through committees on the initial day. So
>> I'm not saying I'm not willing, Bill. Don't get me wrong. I'm just asking a basic question based on our own policies and our principles. We are told as a board that if you want to discuss about adequacy, you want to discuss about special education or anything. Oops, you
missed a deadline. This is what it has been. So, and this time our agenda came within 24 hours and like little over 24 hours and then we didn't add this ahead of time. So,
that's what I'm I'm questioning. >> I think >> yeah, >> I I think uh given that we were actually able to come to agreement on president and vice president, it's not going to go to the county. So there's not going to
be much delay here. Uh we could be and then we have our next meeting I think uh what was it the 22nd. We could do the whole thing on the 22nd and you could come up with your the policy is the board president is supposed to nominate people and we can consider the whole
thing on the 22nd. I'd rather do that. >> Okay. >> You could do that. I mean I >> Is it okay with you guys to at least have an open discussion about it? you guys want to have a discussion. If you don't want to vote on it, that's fair. >> I'm saying you can have a discussion, do
whatever you please. I'm just saying in future if we want to discuss something, please don't say like, you know, you have a 48 hour rule, right? That's our policy. >> I think what she's saying is that if you do this, she's going to break the 48 rule another time, right? And I think that's a problem, right? Because I think
having a discussion on committees at the reorg meeting should not be like, oh, we're bringing new business, right? New business is one person bringing something that they want to discuss with the full board, right? That needs 48 hour notice. This discussion should be
considered different. But if you're not going to consider it different, then no, we should not break the 48 hour rule because I don't want to see other people break that 48 hour rule because it's not fair to board members to come unprepared to meetings to discuss things that one board member put on the agenda. Right? That's why the 48 hour rule was put in
there. Unfortunately though, right, we have we did have this prior, right? We did know we have to make committees. So, I don't see this breaking the 48 hour rule, but if people are going to compare it to the 48 hour rule, then we can't break it because we're not going to I'm not going to start down that road again.
That's why we put that policy in place. Um so um I I do believe we need to um keep to process and so if people are uncomfortable with because it was not put in then we should leave it but I do
want to um not lose sight of um the budget. Um so is it so if we don't have committees um new committees right that we had agreed upon is there um can there be agreement that if um budget like so
what's our plan for the budget for January I know we were supposed to have the individual meetings like do we need a finance and facilities committee meeting um with respect to the budget if we're having the individual um you know twoerson meetings
So finance and facilities for January um we've gotten some of the preliminary insurance estimates in and the insurance companies have agreed to come in and talk to the finance committee meeting. So that's the only thing I mean that can
be pushed off to do an explanation. Um that's, you know, just going over regular agenda items definitely makes the meeting go uh faster and it makes it more adequate to be able to have a committee that understands the agenda items before the
meeting. But >> so also I just want to make one comment to the new president and the vice president. I think at the reor let's just start a fresh and let's not make any personal comments or on what other board members
intent is what Mrs. Stanley just did is oh she intends to break the rule nobody can read my mind and please don't make such comments I I really don't appreciate that as as a president if you can keep the decorum and what we are here to do is to work for it's a
voluntary role we are all working with in addition to what our personal commitments are so let's not make any personal comments I my intent was not to stop the discussion my I'm very much open to having a discussion I do have a hard stop. I worked pretty much like all night last night, which is what I'm
planning to do later. But that's my personal issue. I'm just saying the and the 48 hour rule was put in because this very board moved an ethics violation with the board attorney's instance, you
know, support during a new business with no advanced notice. It was not put in because you didn't want to be surprised. And that that happened to me in the auditorium. So, let's not kid anybody here. And I'm not trying to stop the discussion. We can have the discussion.
My intent was never to spring a surprise and say, "Hey, you did it at Reorg, so we're going to do it again." I'm I'm perfectly open to having a discussion. I'm just saying our principle is and I wanted I almost texted Dr. Feltry on Friday saying, "Hey, do we have an agenda?" But it was the break and I did
not want to text anybody or disturb anyone. But I'm just saying that's about it. We can have a discussion if you want but >> Okay. So, um first I think thank you for your comment with that. >> Go ahead.
>> Um uh policy 0155 says the appointments are made by the president. We didn't have a president until just you know an hour or so ago. So in terms of the 48 hour rule it's it's kind of moot with that without a president. The establishment of
committees and liaison is important. We have already have a head start now with a vice president and a president and we have negotiations coming up. We have budget coming up. We have referendum coming up. I feel the importance of having discussions and establishing committees and liaison as soon as
possible. >> Go ahead Dr. >> Well, actually this is kind of interesting. Um there's nothing in our policies that say when these committees expire. Uh so we
could just as well say the committee expires at the time that you appoint a new one. So we Excuse me. I have the floor. If you want the floor, you have to raise your hand. Um Robert's rules, you have to be recognized by the chairman. So, the
committees don't actually expire until they're I tell you what, you make your comment and then I'll finish mine. >> Go ahead, >> Dr. Forger. Please go ahead. >> All right. The committee actually it's nothing that says a committee expires.
It could expire at the time you appoint a new one. So, we I was actually planning on holding a finance and facility meeting soon as I can get with the existing committee. And if you want to start a new committee next uh the 22nd, that's fine, you know,
but I'll I can have a report for you on the 22nd about whatever we did talk about. >> So the problem though, one second. The problem is we don't have diputy >> because she's gone. So we don't have your full committee. Otherwise, I would
>> she's not on the committees. >> But she don't we don't have that much. >> But she's not on the other committee, right? And we have a new board. >> Well, yes, you would have a problem with personnel and I don't know what else she was on, but uh personnel personnel is
the main one that I can think. >> So, your policy, if I'm looking at correctly, limited to a one-year term. So, there appears to be an end date of one year if I'm reading it correctly, at least for your standing committees. >> Yeah. One year from when? >> I assume when the appointment is made.
Also, the intent of our policy is that the new board members get put onto committees, which I think >> yeah, a one-year >> right now trying to play with commas, right? And I I think I don't know why we're going to spend all this time on commas when we can just make a decision
on whether or not we're going to discuss committees today or if you're just going to do it through email and then next next meeting in January, right? What is it? 22nd, Deb will come with her recommendations and then you have to be prepared to vote yes or no, right? Let me just minute conversation.
>> Hold on. Let's just stop for a second. Okay, let's everybody please respect each other >> this year. I'm not going to do this. >> Listen, I'm being respectful, but I'm also going to say accurate information, right? We're talking about when we should be talking about commit.
>> Do I need to adjourn the meeting? Because I will. >> I'm Can you please stop anywhere? >> Stop. >> Let's get somewhere. >> Now, I will tell you I have actually sat down. I've come up with potential
assignments. I know Miss Bradford worked hard on one as well. My intent this evening was to share with you it so that we could have an open conversation. If people are not comfortable with actually voting on it, that's fine, but I do think it's important for the
administration to have as much of a jump start as possible. >> What? >> One more comment. >> Go ahead. So under the policy and again this is a broad term. So it says absent a bonafide e circumstance. I I don't
that is for the board to determine in my opinion when a bonafide the question is for this board. Um I agree the 48 hour rule probably stands because this is new business but committees are incredibly important. Uh it's they're important for your board to function. They're
important for your board to move items forward. is up to this board and obviously I would take weight from your administration on what that means is how important it is to have that discussion with committees and how important it is to have them in place. I could see an argument being made for this board.
Again, I'll leave it to your administration to comment how important it is. Maybe it is, maybe they can wait, maybe they can't, whether moving certain business forward without these committees would be an issue where there be an e circumstance. So that I think the 48 hour rule does come into play.
Whether it's an emergent circumstance in that you feel as an abort it's important to move this forward tonight. That's up to you. >> And I'd like to make a motion to adjourn because I don't think this is an emergency circumstance and I feel that I don't want to play with the 48 hour rule because I've I've been on the receiving end of that where people just throw
stuff on the agenda and make motions. So I'm going to make a motion to adjurnn. >> Is there a second? >> Do you want me to speak? >> No second. >> Okay. So, in terms of um emergent circumstances, given that I didn't have
committees until April of last year, I can't in good conscience say that doing it tonight is an egent circumstance. Does it hold up the process? Absolutely it does. Um but um we do have January 22nd that's coming up. It will have to
be more communicative on the front side. You know, >> I I I um I want to point out a couple of things. We do have negotiations that we are working on. We have some people without a contract for a year and a half now. >> We have other negotiations coming up
that are extremely important this year with the with the education association we really have to start working on um and collaborating on. We have our budget. We have referendum coming up this year. Um, I think that, uh, since
the board has been able to elect a president and a vice president, it would be wonderful if we could have committees to start getting our work together. And that's the opinion of just the business administrator here. >> Go ahead.
>> I'll I'll just add one that everybody seems to be omitting. You have an expiring send receive contract with Mountain Side. That continues to be an issue, right? My current seventh graders don't know where the hell they're going to high school. So, we're going to adjourn early tonight, go home, and not do committees, and we're going to waste
another couple of days. This is just part for the course here. We're just we're inefficient with our time. >> Mrs. True. >> I think it's best that we try to move forward and at least talk about it tonight. >> I agree. I was going to mention too that we do have that send receive agreement
and it's ongoing and we are working with Mountainside. We do not want to just stop in the middle of this. >> So then let's actually have the discussion and stop talking about cost. >> Dr. Forer, >> um I'll just repeat. I mean if it's a
one-year life for a committee and they weren't appointed until what was it? I don't know was it March last year? April. April. So as far as I'm concerned >> the committee started in April. you approved the appointment on February 27th at that meeting.
>> So I my position is these committees continue until February 22nd. >> Keep in mind that we have a new member on the board that wouldn't be able to participate for two months. >> So we're talking today is January like at the end of the day Debbie. I know we
have to do this and I'm open to having the discussion but the next meeting is on the 22nd and whatever you have made your recommendations if there is something emergent the negotiations the finance you want to first of all I don't even know when the date of these
committee meetings is being planned for if you want to go ahead as a president you can ask and then whoever is available can attend nobody's stopping that and if you want to discuss your Yeah, >> I think can does somebody want to make a
motion to actually discuss this? >> Mr. Terrell, >> um, as president, you can go ahead with the ad hoc committees. The ad hoc committee for Mountainside is is the send receive is an ad hoc committee. So, you have the ability to do that and get that committee still going.
>> I mean, one of the things that I was going to suggest this evening was there are two active um, negotiations right now. one is with the custodians and one is with the Mountainside send and receive. And I um felt that I wanted to
continue with the ad hoc committee and folks that were assigned um to the Mountainside send and receive to continue for this coming year. And I also feel that it's important for those that have been involved in the custodians negotiations to remain um on
an ad hoc committee to continue that particular negotiation. So um I would hope do I have to actually make a motion or do I just make a decision? >> So it's by the board president can do it by action. Uh I can create in charge at
any time of the president or by you have the ability to do it. You can move forward. >> So I can just appoint >> Okay. So I would like to appoint that that for the mountainside send and receive ad hoc committee that Gail
Bradford, myself and Natasha Jolly will continue with that as an ad hoc committee. And I also would like to appoint for I'd like to make the um negotiations for the custodians negotiation the contract um I'd like to
appoint um Gail Bradford, Dr. Forger and Sai Kerry um to continue with those negotiations as an ad hoc committee. >> The hit with that because we've had a year and a half of that same committee not getting anywhere right. I do feel
that that should go under regular negotiations committee and not an ad hoc um because I don't like that would be normal negotiations. It hasn't gone anywhere in a year and a half with those members and I feel like we need we need a change. We need to get somewhere with this
>> be the the decision on what we are off like you know I know some of these cannot be discussed publicly the delay is not from the committee and I will have doc Mrs. Bradford speak to that. >> Well, the current can let the security >> the current delay, but let we also have
to be accurate, right? When we put information out there, it has to be accurate. >> The security has >> I know but as board president, you need to make sure that the the information going out to the public is accurate. >> Please continue. >> So
that is why I asked Mrs. Bradford who was the chair to speak to the accuracy. What I can say and I think m with Mr. Dysler who was also there at this committee pretty much 90% of these meetings the delay is not from the committee the delay is and the
administration can speak to it where offers have been made and we have not heard back for like months. So it's not the committee that is causing the delay and if that's the impression and at least one board member seems to know everything like you know like a mind
reader here. >> Wait wait wait wait. Didn't you just say there should be no personal right attacks? But yet when I say accurate information, that's a personal attack, but then when they actually personally attack me, it's not a personal attack. We got to have
like some kind of like level ground here, right? So if if if we want me right to not personally attack anybody because supposedly that's all I do right then we can't let others just do whatever they want
>> right let's let's hold everybody accountable not just one >> point of order I'd like to know who has the floor here >> I know the car had the floor first it is true we are waiting on their response So
>> can we just talk or not talk committees because otherwise I want to go and you just re reiterate the mountainside committee for me. Re re please negotiate. >> Yeah. Okay. Just please reiterate the mountainside committee with the members
>> current members from last year >> were Gail Bradford myself and Dipy Kana. Dipy had stepped away. Yeah. and Natasha Jolly filled in for her. Oh, >> okay. >> So, the ask was that she continue on
that committee moving forward. >> So, I I don't think I ever participated in it, but if in the mountain okay perhaps, but I will be more than happy to step in now. I still >> I'm okay with it. Those two at committees. >> Okay.
>> I'm okay with the mountain side one. I I already said my piece on the other one, >> but the the I'll just share with you the conversation I just had with the attorney just so that everybody understands what we were discussing. He had concerns about whether or not we could actually create an ad hoc
committee for negotiations. So just so you guys know what we were talking about over here and dubious dubious, >> right? Which is why I think that one should go under whoever you appoint as the actual negotiation. The thought process so you guys understand why is
because the contract with the BHEA is going to be heavy. There's going to be conversations multiple times a month and I don't want that committee to be bogged down with other negotiations and well as well and that was why the thought
process was there especially because you have current sitting members that have been negotiating on that contract. They're very knowledgeable about what's been going on and they very well might not end up on that negotiations committee and so you're going to be
dealing with a whole new group of people in that particular scenario and I don't think it's wise to do that. Not when you're in an active especially if it's been a year long. Um I think it's something that um we can watch closely
and if we need to kind of engage to help it move forward I'm happy to do that. Wasn't Wasn't the Mountainside Committee ad hoc to begin with? >> Know that it should be negotiation. >> We were talking that we were kind of talking about that. That was what he he
didn't he wasn't sure. >> I I would say that one has always fallen under negotiations into making an ad hoc, right? Because it's not a special situation. >> Can I ask I guess and this may be a question for your B superintendent if you there may be some committees that
you don't need on an emergent basis. I am a slightly concerned with your negotiations committee that you have your PHA contract coming up. Um do you want to on an emergent basis discuss that committee at least tonight? And I don't know if there are other
communities that you may need right away because that one I am slightly concerned about not having that in place if I mean that kind you you want to get moving on that and so you want to >> can we just I I don't get it. It's all or done
either. we're doing committees and it and it falls under the new business in 48 hours or it doesn't. We're not prioritizing in and there's no significant emergency, right, that would say this one's more of a priority over that one. We got to be consistent like either we're going to either we're doing the committees in my opinion or we're
not doing committees. >> And again, we're this would have been helpful a half hour ago. >> So, all right. I'll I'll make a motion to discuss committees. >> Second. Who seconded?
Roll call. Miss Kerry. >> Pass. Dr. Forever. >> Yes. >> Pass. >> Wait. If we're following Robert's rules of order, there is no pass in Robert's rules of order. I'm just saying it. So
>> there there's a yes, no, or abstain. >> So you just abstain and state the reason. No, that is in >> this is for >> No, you No, it's not your >> Do you just want me to circle back around? >> Is that what you want? Okay. >> Pass back. >> Start in that cuz that >> talk committee. >> Yeah. To talk
>> Let's talk committee. >> Yeah. No, but Javier, just let let me be clarified. This pass is basically come back to me later. That's all I'm saying. >> That's it. Yeah. >> Yeah. Again, that doesn't go to Robert's rules of order, which is what I'm saying. >> All right. Let me just start roll call
over again. All right. All right. Let's just try this again. Mr. Airi has Dr. Forger. >> Yes. >> Yes. To talk about >> Hold on. >> Not yet. >> Mr. Dylan,
>> there's no I I don't What is the What is the methodology? >> I have no idea, but I'm just following the little chart. Yes. Okay. All right. Um, so sorry if that's confusing. >> Clockwise, counterclockwise. >> Mrs. Jolly. >> Yes. Uh, Mr. Morales.
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Mrs. Stanley. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Ms. Bradford. >> Yes. >> Did I get you? >> Okay. Mrs. Terrarero. >> Yes.
>> All right. Motion passes. >> So, I'd like to share with you guys something that I put together. >> Yeah. Were you able to print out yours, too? >> I did not print. >> Okay. I guess >> it is whatever you put out, not what I
had. >> Um, let me just pass this around. I know. Okay. Um, so let me just kind of explain to you how I came up with this. And I tried my best to give everybody that had
actually submitted to Miss Bradford at least two of their preferences. There were some folks that uh were not able to share their choices. So I tried best from either memory about what they had selected in the past or things that I
thought might be uh appealing to them. Um, and so what I did is I actually put a list of what the different current committees are for the policy, the recommended members and the particular chairs. I made sure every
person got a chair. I listed the last year's members and then I also put an alternate so that we have an assigned alternate. >> Right. >> Anybody have any comments? No, >> that was my I was supposed to whisper. Sorry.
>> So, one quick comment. Uh Debbie, if you're going to have alternates, like you should have at least two. What if that particular alternate is not available? >> Sure. >> Right. So, that was my only thing. And um
I don't know >> quick piece of feedback, right? Is that is that we're doing now? Feedback. Yeah. Um I don't think it's it's I I think it's wrong for me to be the chair of personnel. Um just knowing the type of things that come through that
committee. Um the number of buildings that are here and the number of employees that I'm allowed to truly have meaningful discussions on. >> Okay. >> Um will be a minority of it. Right. Uh I enjoyed my time there. I I think I add
value there. to chair. Okay. >> There'll be too many things I may be conflicted with. >> Okay. >> U but a member of the committee uh I'd continue that as well. >> Okay. >> So, being that we have um Miss Bradford and Mr. Would either of
you two, if if this was something you're interested in, be interested in sitting as the chair for that committee. First of all, I I prefer a different committee. Debbie, honestly, like that's not my,
you know, so if that's the only option. So, we can give you feedback, right? We're not making the appointments today, right? >> Let's talk about it. Yeah. >> Yeah. I would see my area of interest is more on curriculum. >> Okay. And I have been asking for it for quite many years and the only time I was
there was for one year and um you know I how I feel about special education and the collaborative consultative model. So I don't yeah um I can I was on curriculum last um last year so I can be
an alternate if we just swap >> do that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Be on personnel. I've never been on personnel. >> So being that that would be the case. So then we what commit? So you would want to be off of personnel?
>> No, I can be on personnel. I don't want to be the chair for personnel. I would rather get in chair for curriculum or something. >> Okay. So if we moved you to curriculum on the committee, then that would put you on four committees. So then what?
take me off of uh >> policy. >> So then Natasha, would we just basically swap the two of you? >> Sure. Um >> would we put you as an alternate >> on policy? Yeah, I can come back to policy, but I you can also kick me out
if somebody else wants to join. >> Miss Bradford, >> uh I would like to advocate to be on negotiations committee. Um, I have the experience of past negotiations uh on the BHEA side for years. I know
there's been concern that I have a prejudice. Uh, but I do not think that's true. It's an implied prejudice. It is not actual. And the fact that I have experience, I have historical knowledge on past negotiations and on the contract of why it's in there and why it wasn't
in there. I have knowledge of the um procedure, the process that goes on it and the fact that if if I'm considered prejudice in support of the teachers, I would hope that everybody on this board is prejudice in support of our teachers.
They are our front line and our rock and our solid and this negotiations is important and having somebody with experience um would be valuable. I think we could say that we all support our teachers, but a negotiation has two sides.
Um, so, right. And so I think that um it it would behoove um to have to, you know, as I think about let's say Mrs. Terrarero, right, who has been PTO president and has relationships with
both the parents and the teachers. So I think that would be perhaps a better fit for the negotiation and understanding both sides of the equation. >> The negotiation process is complicated. It takes into account all the teaching hours and why they're there for such
point. The work days, sick days, there is so much involved and someone who's been 22 years involved in that I think would be valuable. And I disregard any prejudice that I have. I support both all our teachers and now
my role is as a board member and that is my role now not as a teacher as a board member to work and negotiate the best contract for the board of education. >> Mr. Kerry >> see again let's not get into personal
comments on you know what your inference is. Let's discuss on what we going to so if you're going to talk about experience Mrs. Bradford we can say Dr. Forager and me were on the previous teachers union contract. Um we were also we've been I think sitting here at the table the most
experience on negotiations has been Dr. Forager and me but I personally am okay not to be on it but it is what it is. Let's not get into personal uh you know opinions on why who is not this is something that you have proposed and we're discussing it and I would
rather not be on policy and I would rather get curriculum chair if I can but it's up to everybody and are we making the appointments we're just discussing it today correct >> see where we go with it >> see where we go with it >> in talking about experience with
negotiations you've been on one I've been on Three. >> Were you on the last teachers union contract? >> No, but I've been on three previous since the year 2000. >> But you were on it on the BHA side, >> but the process >> is the same and I understand. And now I
am a board member. From what I see, I think personnel needs a chair and policy needs an alternate. >> The policy alternate would be Mr. Carrie. Miss Jolly and and Mr. Carrie are going to swap. Okay.
>> As far as the curriculum and I know that Mrs. Auri wants to be the chair of curriculum. Um I know Miss Bradford wants to be do you want to be the chair of curriculum also? >> If Mrs. Airi wants to be the chair that's fine.
>> Then you could chair the personnel. >> I could chair personnel. Would I could I chair then strategic planning instead of Miss Airi? >> Why have her twice? >> Well, she will be chair twice now that
she's going to be curriculum chair. >> I got >> Okay. >> Did I not give you a chair? >> No, I am a chair of policy. >> So, who does not have a chair right now? >> No, he has just athletics. Everybody has
Yeah. >> Do you care? >> Care. >> Would you like Do you want to be a chair of anything? >> I I don't I don't. No. No. It's not important. >> Okay. >> I I mean I would It's not a matter of not wanting to work. I mean, I was on
the athletics. I'd do it again. I think it'd be a great experience. You know, Mr. Morales to do it as well. So, I don't want to take that away. Um so, no, I'm I'm I'm okay. >> Okay. Mr. Morales, I I I want you to know >> I'm on two boards, so I got a lot of work. be very actively involved the BH
with the PAL program. I think that's what I heard. That's why I actually put you on there. Um I also felt for policy it would be good for you as a new board member to get to understand policy. Um actually that was triggered by a lovely
BA who had sent an email about how important policy is. Um and then I thought strategic planning would be really good because this is kind of a turnover year with all that stuff. Okay. Um, so
Mr. Car, are you comfortable with Mrs. Stanley taking strategic planning as a chair? >> So that makes two, right? Like that's the same thing like she's getting >> Well, I'm more concerned about getting meetings in because I know we've had trouble in the past actually scheduling
meetings um and the minutes, right? And I think that's that that's really the chair's job. The chair's job is to make meetings, right? The timing of meetings and to get the agenda and to get the minutes out, right? When you struggle with those three things, the committee doesn't do well. I mean, the strategic planning committee is a very light
carry. It's a very important committee. It is a very light carry because most of the leg work has already happened. It's just a matter of the committee reviewing what was presented by New Jersey school
boards. um based on the results, the data they collected. >> Actually, take me off of strategic planning. If somebody else wants it, that's fine. >> So, uh Debbie, um can we just have a brief conversation because I think the strategic planning committee
>> is more than just the review, right? Like this is where the action plans are going to be reviewed with the actual like specific metrics and targets and all of that. So I think that is you know very um important because like the broad
goals have been set but it's really the detail. So I think it is very important to come to an agreement because both I think the board and the administration will need to agree what is measurable like because maybe I want something but they're like well we can't really
measure that or get there or what have you. So this will be a little negotiation in in of itself. >> Yeah. This is the year that I think strategic planning will actually be in use, right? Like many years the committee does not even really do much because there there isn't anything to do. I think this year is the year that
it's going to be in use >> and most of what um the admin the action plan is actually the action plan is actually written by the administration. So the the committee itself would
actually be kind of working hand inand with her on that stuff. So Debbie, we we are looking at what I we we can't see what you know I wasn't able to respond to Mrs. Bradford's chair. So I'm saying this is what you're proposing. We've had the discussion. Can
we make the appointments at the next meeting? Whichever ones are emergent, you can you know if it's finance and facility whatever we have agreement on you can go go ahead and make the appointments. The remaining ones we can do it on the 22nd. >> So I think we have everything except for maybe strategic planning and chair in
strategic planning. Otherwise, I think everything looks good. >> Yeah. >> Um could you go over policy because um >> Mrs. Zakiri is off of policy and so we just have Mrs. Stanley and Mr. Morales. >> See, >> I jump back in.
>> M. >> Oh, okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. Unless you would like to join it. >> Uh sure. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, >> is that okay? I just want to think maybe
somebody else is wellrounded with with >> you know wellrounded in that >> I do want to say that policy is a really good place for a new board member to start planning as far as like is there any teachers that that's more of a uh
>> no but it's also up to the person's interest right have you gen like I I understand your perspective what what if he's not in he that's what he's saying right so >> so understanding the policies of the district kind of filter into everything else. So a lot of boards and the boards
that I've had experience with do start board members out on policy. >> Yeah. But it also it's a volunteer position. So you have to have some interest otherwise you're just Yeah. So >> Mr. Morales, do you do you >> think the policy strategic planning is
any I feel like that's you >> do you understand what the strategic planning is? Okay. So I think maybe that is where it's important to bring him in on what is involved. Do you want to talk to him a little bit about that? >> Well, not not not right now. I mean, >> it's a it's just so you understand it's
it's how the community is looking for the district to move forward over the next like five years. >> Okay. So what happened last year is that we had three separate sessions with the community and they worked on various
things and I didn't attend this so you know but they worked on various things to come up with um a plan moving forward to kind of tell us what they want us to do. And so now that that data has been collected by those
different groups, um that has been brought back to the to the board and that's where you guys would review some of it and work with the administration to put an action plan in place to make that happen. >> Okay.
>> So Debbie, um I think that um if uh I think Sai you said you wanted to be off strategic planning so and since Mrs. Bradford is going to take on policy. I can step into strategic planning. >> Yeah, you can be the chair.
>> Okay. So, wait a >> year policy. >> I could share that if waited. Did we Excuse me. I had Mrs. Stanley's chairing strategic planning, but she's chairing policy. So, can we get a
clarification on that please? >> So, so Mr. Dylan is not going to chair anything. So, we're going to have one board member have to take on the chair responsibly twice >> and Miss Stanley was gracious enough to offer to to do that
>> unless somebody else No, but Deb, we can give Dylan >> No, it it's okay. I didn't have it written down. I as long as I'm in the meeting, it's fine. No, I don't care. >> I'm saying Dylan can be the chair for athletics, right? He has that >> and Mr. Morales would then
not chair something unless we had him. >> Right. If Mr. Kerry was saying if if we gave Mr. Dylan the chair to athletics, >> would you want to chair the strategic planning? >> Yeah. Give it to Natasha. I'll stick to
let me stick to >> so Okay. >> And the athletics are mostly online too, Mr. Morales. >> Yeah, we can do those remotely. >> Yes. >> I mean really any of the committees can be handled online. >> They all have Google.
>> Yeah. So they can be remote if it's >> identify that, right? That would be helpful for >> Okay. So, does anybody have a preference to be in person or would everybody prefer to be remote? Because I think
that's typically the option. >> Does anybody want to be in person? >> I kind of like >> or which committee you think? Huh? >> Any >> do you prefer to be in person? Ideally,
I see only when you have a conflict or >> it's >> I think all committees should have the option to be in person especially when we're looking at data and curriculum we're looking at you know stuff finance we are looking at Excel spreadsheets we're looking at so but there are times
that having that flexibility and which was always built in that all these meeting invites according to Dr. Feltry had a Google meet back in 2022 which was my first year. Um we always had negotiations which went on for a long time. They had joy requested that we
have a cadence and then you know we have a meeting invite set up. So if somebody is running late and they cannot make it. Ideally for me I would rather be in person than be online. But there are certain times like >> but do we make every meeting in person
and online available? Well, they were in the past, but there were several meetings that I was told that traditionally they met virtually. So, I made sure that I knew that upfront. >> So, I I told Mr. Morales when you handed this out like athletics has always been
virtual since I've been here. >> Um, personnel has always been virtual and policy has always been virtual. Um the other ones have been a little bit back and forth depending on the the topic and who needs to attend. Um but
otherwise they're usually in person. >> Think curriculum has typically been in person and in in finance I think I prefer to be in person. >> Yeah. >> And negotiations, right? Usually you do have to be in person to meet the attorney. >> And then strategic planning. I I I've
never had a meeting that I was actually in attendance. Um, technology and communication I think is usually in person this last year. Oh, you were all virtual. >> Listen, I don't care. >> But it might be easier when you have >> when you have right the technology, it
might be better to be virtual for that one, right? So >> I think I just want to put two cents into this one too because as finance and facilities there are times when we're having people come in to give presentations and if at the last minute people are deciding that they can't make
it in person and then we have these people sitting in there it makes it it would make it a little awkward. So, just to maybe have a determination of if if it's hybrid or if it's in person or if it's all virtual uh ahead of time so
we're not making somebody travel an hour to get to us to talk to a bunch of people online would be really a good consideration to make. >> Yeah, always is. >> Okay. So Debbie, would you be able to kind of read
through now that we've kind of gone back and forth? Um, just so make sure that everyone has the same notes as to who's currently sitting where. >> I just say, say, uh, Dylan, if you want a chair, you're you're well, listen, I'm okay with that. Either way,
okay, >> he's on two boards. I He's like, don't give me more minutes if I don't need them. Right. Do you have one? >> Take the chair. >> Great. I don't Yeah, that's fine. >> Fine. As long as I'm with
>> You want to take a break? >> You want to take a break and not do it? Not be the chair. >> No, no. I'm the chair. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. So, this is what I have right now. And if somebody has something different, let me know. Okay. So right
now I have for athletics and co-curricular I have Morales, Dylan and Terrarero and I have Dylan as the chair. For curriculum I have Bradford Borger and Akiri as Akira is the chair. Um oh let me back up a little bit. I
apologize. For athletics um we have Bradford as the alternate. For curriculum we have Jolly as the alternate. >> For finance and facilities we have Jolly as the chair. We have Forer and Stanley. And then we have Bradford as the alternate. >> Oh,
>> you're going too fast. >> Okay, let me go back to curriculum, please. >> You need to change it because Jolly is on the committee and she cannot you if I'm the chair for curriculum, I need to get off from the alternate. >> Yeah. Yeah, that's what we said. Yeah.
Okay, let me back up. Let me back up. Okay, I'll go slower. >> Just go slow. So for athletics and co-curricular I have Morales, Dylan and Terrarero. And Dylan is the chair.
As the alternate we have Bradford. >> Good. >> Good. >> Are we doing two alternates or no? >> I mean >> I don't think Let her get through. Just let her get through. >> Okay. For curriculum, >> I have Bradford
Borger and Akira with Auri as the chair and I have Jolly as the alternate. Okay. For finance and facilities, I have Jolly
as the chair, Vorer and Stanley, and I have Bradford as the alternate. For negotiations, I have Terrarero as the chair, Jolly and Stanley, and I have Forager as
the alternate. For personnel, I have Dylan Bradford as the chair and Airi and Morales as the alternate. Is everyone up to speed or do you want me to slow down?
>> Just restate personnel again. >> Personnel is Dylan, Bradford as the chair and Airai and I have Morales as the alternate Dylan Bradford and Airi.
Okay. And I have Bradford as the chair for policy. I have Stanley as the chair, Morales and Bradford with Airai as the alternate
for strategic planning. I have Jolly Morales and Stanley as the chair and I have Terrarero as the alternate. Are we good? Is everyone good so far? >> Say it again.
>> Okay. For strategic planning, I have Jolly >> Morales and Stanley as the chair and I have Terrarero as the alternate. You don't even want to be an alternate on policy. Somebody want
>> Yeah. Put my name there. >> You are on policy. >> You're on it. Oh, no you're not. >> I'm not. >> Okay, that's >> for technology. >> Are is everyone good so far? Okay, for
technology, I have Borger as the chair, Bradford, and Terrarero, and I have Dylan as the alternate. Does anybody need me to go over anything again? >> Yeah, just policy.
>> Okay, policy. I have Stanley as the chair, Morales and Bradford, and I have Jolly as the alternate. Now, the only other thing that we have to discuss and we can talk about this
and I'm open to it is for the ad hoc committee. Um, I I want to continue that particular committee. I want the mountainside send and receive negotiations because we have a meeting scheduled either like next week. Um,
currently Miss Bradford sits as the chair of that from last year and then um, Miss Jolly and myself um, on that current negotiation and we are scheduled for something within the next week. So I I think we need to keep that as an ad
hoc committee like I said and you're telling me I can't do this. But this one is enough. >> I feel uncomfortable. concern with that because Okay, so the other concern Okay, so um just to kind of catch you up like we
were talking about this before is that um the board attorney is voicing a concern about the fact that because there would be an current negotiations committee that creating an ad hoc committee for the custodian negotiations
would not be correct. So you're asking >> so my concern is so the board during the last policy update was very clear that this committee process for your standing committees would be by based on board approval. My concern is when it relates
to your standing committee. So that's not the mountain side because that was previously an ad hoc. My concern is that because the board showed its intent by requiring standing committees be by voted on by the board. My concern is that if the president then could just get around that by creating an ad hoc
committee that would do in place of a negotiations committee, it would defeat the purpose of that change last year by the board. >> So it would look kind of underhanded. >> That would be my concern. Not related to that's obviously not your intent. I'm very concerned. I'm just concerned that the president set that a board president
can then just use ad hoc committees to get around a standing committee would be my concern. Again, very different than mound side which has always been an adhoc committee even though that's negotiations. that different than custodians which has always fallen under negotiations. >> All right. So I think we need to discuss this because I do have a concern and I
know you know Miss Stanley has voiced her opinion but I do think the three members that have been involved in the custodian negotiations wouldn't be serving under the new negotiations committee and so there would be some knowledge base that would
be lost if we didn't do something like that. >> See what you're saying. You want just to stay at >> right because the current what we have as negotiations right now is Terrarero, Jolly and Stanley, right? You the custodian negotiation folks were
Bradford, Borger and Auri. So there's no overlap. >> So can I can I just ask the administration how they feel because I right we can't talk negotiations um openly right in public session. So, but if they could just let us know if they feel that moving forward would be an
issue because I I I feel like we were at a point that it wasn't >> right. >> I'm no problem with that. Can I just make a legally what or under policy I am fine with the creation of a separate negotiations custodian if approved by the full board. My concern was only that
the president appoint the committee because you have a standing committee. But if the board is comfortable with those three individuals approving. Now again, if your administration says it's not a problem, it's not unusual for a negotiations committee to change members. >> It's like if we were in the middle of maybe a teaching uh teaching contract
where we were still like going back and forth, right? Like I could see that being an issue, but I don't feel like that this one's in that same position personally, but maybe I'm wrong because I wasn't on that committee. So if the administration could just talk about >> Yeah, I have no comment. Mine is just I want my my comfort would be board
approval rather than just an ad hoc being created by >> Yeah. >> So you you can correct me you you can have different negotiating teams based on the cont each contract right >> yeah that I'm comfortable with that it's just the again because the policy
changes last report approval required coach but that's completely fine if you want to create a separate one for custodian completely comfortable with that or you don't have a negotiations committee right you have you assign a team for each, >> right? You remove the official policy
when we vote whenever we're going to vote. Kind of how we do at Mountainside is you then appoint the three best people because you may or may not I mean and the way the board is constructed now you don't have any existing teachers so you have no conflict. So sometimes you have to depending on the type of
contract you're doing one person could be able to negotiate against custodians but not against administrators whatever the case may be right. So you're almost putting yourself in a little bit more of a bind by having a negotiations committee rather than just assigning a negotiation team to each individual contract. Just something >> that would have to be a policy change
though, right? To 155. >> Yeah, we would need to amend the policy to remove negotiations. >> So maybe that's something that the policy committee if we vote on these guys that we can do is remove a the negotiations committee as a formal committee and then just create ad hocs
like you're saying. >> I just I would always like to see that you're using the best resources that we have amongst the eight of us to combat whatever contract we're we're facing, right? Instead of just assigning three generic fit in the box of who's got enough and
chairs and so and so, >> right? Okay. >> And there could be overlap, right? But it just gives you flexibility, >> right? So in terms of negotiation committees, it really comes down to um whether or not the board feels that they
can transfer the information from the one to the other or that the the what' you call it uh institutional knowledge or whatever of of the one committee the longevity um that's that's a communication piece.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, right. So, I think that though, as Mr. Distler said, we can have the the custodian as long as we vote on it. >> Yeah. >> Um I feel on the custodians negotiation that um similar to previous comments
that we could pass on information institutionally to others. And I'm sorry I can't go into it more. >> So as to the question of how what the administrators think about this, um I'm okay with
continuing as we are. Um I think that because of the size of the negotiations that we're actually doing and that we're facing um that it's it's a I think to have the continuum would be beneficial. Um, and also the BHEA is going to be a
large negotiation and it's a lot for that committee to take on in itself aside from two additional negotiations that they'd have to jump midway into. >> I think maybe the the goal would be then just kind of hearing everybody that and
I I actually like Mr. Dylan's idea. I think maybe that we could because we have a policy in place right now with those particular and this was actually something I wrote I wrote on here. I think because we have a policy in place with 155
um we would have to re we'd have to change that before we can actually eliminate it. So my recommendation would be let's let's have the ad hoc committee. Let's try to vote for the ad hoc committee for those
that are standing now and then >> once the policy committee is able to update it then we can um maybe like realign those or you know >> so you're going to make an ad hoc just for custodians.
>> Yes. and the keep what you have for negotiations to start the new BHEA. >> Yes. >> Okay. And but then work on policy to make it an ad hoc >> nor committee just it's a negotiation team on the individual contract. So I get I
don't I don't know the the terms and what how important those are but I know on our board we it's it's a requirement because we have school administrators on our board. We have school teachers on our board. we you know so that not every your traditional team can't address all
of them so we have to mix and match however legally we do that >> what you're saying is in negotiations all of these people so in negotiations technically under negotiations there will be like six people three of them Terrero jolly and Stanley will be
handling the BHA negotiation uh the mountainside piece will be handling led by Bradford, Jolly and Terrero. The head custodian negotiations is going to be handled by the existing team. >> A little bit different than what you said only because I said there wouldn't be six people under the committee because I think we'd have a problem with
that, right? So there just isn't a negotiation committee there. There are individual teams that are assigned as these things come up >> like ad hoc committees. Yeah. So don't see I think calling ad hoc is a problem. So negotiations teacher negotiations come. >> That's why we have negotiation teams, right? Yeah. >> That's it. Yeah.
And then when you're a negotiation team um usually you're going through the ground rules and those ground rules for each negotiation may be a bit different. So you you're familiar with okay this these are the rules of engagement for this group and it may be different the rules of engagement for this group right
so um we just don't for whatever reason we don't call them committees. >> So would you call it a negotiation team where would that fall like what policy would that fall? we would need to amend. So I think >> policy maybe >> if you're asking logistically I think
the way you did it was I think the way it was explained was you'd have to amend your current policy because you have eight standing committees you'd have to amend that to move remove this negotiations committee whether you call that a team or the like I think then the board president would have the authority
to appoint members to the team ad hoc committee however you want to phrase it but it would pull it out of this what we're doing here where the board pre where you're all voting on specific committ because it wouldn't be one of your eight standing and then the board president have the ability to appoint based on contract. >> It gives you the it gives you the just
the flexibility to you have three major negotiations going on just to >> it's a law. >> Yeah. Divvy up the work because you know that that is going to be a lot of div you know a lot of a lot of meetings, right? >> Yeah. >> It's a lot. Yeah. Um okay. So, the only other thing that I want to kind of point
out, um, as we're talking about 155 is, um, I know that Mountainid's been asking for a long time for a committee, um, specifically because there's a lot of crossover with various things. And so
I would ask that the policy committee revisit that and maybe consider putting a a committee together specifically as it relates to Mountain Side. We used to have one. >> I would just say this per the contract, right? It's not it's not an ask. It's
it's legally binding, right? You're their committee is supposed to be in place and you're supposed to meet once a quarter, three times a year, >> right? So all I ask is you guys review the existing send and receive contract that we're currently under, right? And uh and follow that.
>> So okay, so if we're in a holding pattern, we're not following the contract and we're kind of in a holding pattern with policy, should we then create an ad hoc committee spec an ad hoc committee specifically as it relates to Mount
Side? >> How do you guys feel about that? you have current policy that you're not enforcing, right? You're saying, >> "Oh, I I think the way we're getting around it right now is we have a negotiation team and the Mountain Side Board of Ed doesn't I don't care what you call it, right? You have you have a
member that's meeting with us on a frequent basis. Right now, a majority of those meetings are about how do we extend our send receive, which is what they should be. But once we get beyond that, right, we've got to get back to the policy where there's a formal committee in place that has a goal to
meet and foster those relationships and and continue to build on that. That's the piece that we got to get to. Uh in the interim, I would say that the existing um ad hoc committee, which is was new and when we first came on board, we didn't have that. So that was added midway throughish once we got through
everything. Um that just gonna continue. So whatever you guys are terming as whatever you're using as term ad hoc this committee of people that meet with the mountain side people that are responsible for building a relationship with Berkeley Heights can't go away just once the negotiations are are >> I think the cons the confusion I for me
at least is that my understanding of that ad hoc committee was solely the contract. So if it's more than that, was that what the intent was when you developed it? >> We had a mountainside committee going before negotiations, but it wasn't
officially in the policy. >> And back in, if I remember, um, this is my fourth or fifth year. >> We used to 202122, we used to have a mountainside committee. 2023, I remember seeing a mountainside, I think somewhere between 2022 and 20, it dropped. And the
intent, what Gail is saying is true. This was not just for the negotiation. It was just like a mountain. So we used to they used to meet and then it was like a on >> you and I brought it before I joined this board. >> Yes. >> So does that mean this ad hoc committee
for the send and that we're calling the send and receive is not just that contract. It's to build the relationship with Mount S. >> If that's the board wishes I it but it seems like that's the primary thing that's being done with it
right now. though other topics may filter in but once the you know the the contract is done then you you need a committee >> to continue the relationship >> I'll tell you what we just did mountain side is uh prior to this year
>> we had a send and receive committee right which included Berkeley Heights and all the other schools we're we're talking to and we had a Berkeley Heights committee that was >> primarily about keeping the current relationship and building upon on and making sure that calendar invites and
just keeping the the role of communication because this year will most likely ramp up significantly with send receive. Um we kind of merge those into into one because the the communication between both groups will be just so tight given where we're at
with the deadline approaching us. >> Okay. So then we should redefine this current ad hoc committee. Okay. So can I just do that? Okay. So I'll redefine then have it just that particular Miss Jolly, Miss Bradford and
myself although we are focused right now on the send and receive contract that the goal of that particular committee is also to work on the relationship >> between I'd say adherent to >> the contract that's currently >> in the contract. Okay. >> Yeah.
>> Is that good? That make you guys that solve everything? >> I think that puts us in legal compliance. >> Okay. >> Which is always a good thing. Deputy, are you making a motion to officially rename the Do you need a motion to officially rename it or
>> Okay. Okay, I can just do it. >> Okay, good. Okay. Um the only other thing um to share with the policy committee um if we vote for tonight is that there's two liaison that are on the 155 that need to
be removed. one is the diversity diversity committee that's already embedded in the district and number two is the truth community healing and inclusion um and that's because that's absorbed at the town council level so it's not
needed anymore so when you guys are looking at that commit at that policy that's probably something else to look at just notes that I have on here >> so we haven't discussed the liaison yet um no we haven't and there's There are several members that I don't even have on here because I don't even know what
your wishes are. Everybody that's on this list got what their choices were. However, we have three members that didn't share some of the choices that they wanted. And so I wanted to make sure that you guys had an opportunity
to throw your hat in the ring if you want to be a liaison to any of those. >> So maybe in the interest of time, right? Um since I think the committees right are likely more important is there
appetite like to have a vote I know we talked about you know given that we've gone through the list and I think everyone sort of we shifted ourselves around a bit and I think for the most part not 100% but for the most part comfortable is is there appetite of the
board to have uh to vote and establish what's on paper >> um can we do the committees and do the leazison at the next meeting. Is that okay? >> Yeah. >> Sorry. Sorry. Can you just say that louder? >> I said can can we do the committees today tonight and then in the essence of
time and then do the liaison at the next meeting by then we can Yeah. >> Yeah. I would be in favor of that. >> There are liazison committees that are meeting tomorrow night that we need to have representation at. >> Well, the Union County um educational
commission is on Wednesday night. So there are where we pay money into that. We need to have representation at the table. So I disagree. I think we should just hash out the liaison committees and just go for the whole thing. >> Yeah. I think the leaison are really
easy. >> Yeah. Everybody kind of get what they want. >> If there's something that you want just >> I mean the other option is guys that we can pass this now and then when you guys have a chance to look at some of the choices that you might want to do, we can certainly modify it. I would be open
to that, right? If if it's in an effort of time, this Bradford. >> Yes. Because educator of the year is not a liaison, right? So it's but we have it on here because we we need it. So this is where we have to uh work with policy
155. >> Yeah, that's a that was Thank you for bringing that up. So educator of the year is technically not a leazison position. >> I mean we we did right like we did fix this but it didn't pass. I know there was other things in there, but even the
mountain side one, right? Like now you're adding another committee, right? So that we're instead of getting rid of committees, we're adding committee. So I just want everybody to be aware that policy will look at this. It's just it's going to be tough because now >> you getting rid of one
>> like can you >> negotiations >> if we know that this is one piece that we want to do but we're arguing over the actual number of committees, can we break it up? So can you bring us a certain subgroup of changes first. I mean I know
>> I mean like that's what I'm saying is right like we can obviously right we can get rid of some of these less on positions that's easy but right some of these other ones like what are we doing about negotiations because if we're doing ad hoc then that doesn't fall under the vote right and that was a big
problem last time so it's going to be a huge discussion and then when it comes to the board the board oftentimes has different opinions on it than the committee so I'm just making everybody aware that policy will obviously if I become chair Right. We'll definitely look at it again. It's just I want you
to be aware that these things are going to take time because everybody has a different opinion. >> So, uh, policy does have a lot to do this year in looking at all this. So, we're going to look at the whole thing and see and it may not be until next reorg that we come to final consensus.
>> All right. So, to kind of get back to what Mrs. Jolly's question was, "What's the appetite of everybody to vote on these committees tonight? Where's everybody's head at?" >> I'd like to vote. >> I'd like to vote. >> Y >> I'd like to vote as long as we hold the
48 hour rule, right? Like that we are not getting rid of that, right? And I I think we need to be all on the same page on that. >> I'm on that page. Mr. quarter.
>> And so just to be clear, we're vote if everyone's agreed to vote, we are also looking at the liaison as well, just so we can get some folks out to the ones that are dated, but then right because I definitely want to do see changes that
I'm like on too many. So let's so if we can vote on both and then for those who haven't had a chance to really digest the liaison piece let's revisit it because as far as I'm concerned whatever people want to be on as a liaison they
should be able to do. I agree with that and you know voting on what you have given us already would get us started and then if we need to make substitutions or switches you know we're all volunteers you know you know one committee may meet on a a day that we cannot meet if you have a working
schedule so I think we can be flexible with the liaison but this voting on it and getting it started I think is important >> would you be comfortable with that Mr. car. >> Yeah, just add me to legislation and environmental commission >> actually. Just legislation. That's about
it. >> Is environmental commission still around? >> It is. >> It is. Okay. >> Don't add >> diversity for the district and then truth and healing at the town. >> I don't know. Just add me to >> No, I don't need any. Just get add me to
legislation. I was on special ed. I never got called. >> You know the reasons why. Do you want to be on it anyway? >> If I'm if it's going to be an actual I have never been invited like I was on special ed last time but I didn't.
>> So I believe last year they didn't have meetings set up. I think that was their issue. >> I mean who you want it. If you want to do it >> that's a town thing. Who who would invite you? I'm I'm >> No, it's school. >> Se pack.
>> They meet the CPAG. community organization. >> No, no, no. I think the CPAC and the special ed department conducts two or three events and usually the liaison are invited. I've seen but okay
>> I've never heard anything. >> I I think I I mean we there may be some coordination with some of the mountainside stuff too given the fact that these kids are coming up here. >> Yeah. >> Um whoever's on this committee may be something that or liaison stuff. >> Yeah. >> I can see if there's any interest. Do
you have a CPAC group? That would be great. >> I >> mountain side. >> I think so. We definitely have advocacy groups at the younger ages that connect with our teachers and and our community. It'd be great to >> Yeah. >> aligned with some of the stuff we're talking around around the differences
once we get up here and what we're used to and what we're not. I think that's >> if this leazison stuff happens, I I'll try to connect the dots. >> Okay. So, Dr. Velry is going to talk to both parents. >> Okay. I'll hook you >> to make that happen. >> Back to you guys.
>> Um, hey, >> I'm so sorry. >> Oh, sorry. Um, just since if we're gonna just make some quick changes, like if I um I I can be an alternate for the Union County Educational Services Commission and I don't need to be on HIP.
>> Okay. Um I just want to point out that the Union County School Board Association, there's Mrs. Stanley, Dr. Forger and myself, that is open to everybody because at those that you can get uh board credit for going to that and they have really good information. So although there's
only three leazison that is for the whole board to attend and they usually have a Wednesday night, they have a dinner um and you can also join that virtually, but you're earning credit toward board certification. >> Um is there anything that has of any interest in you.
>> That's fine. >> So, take a look at it and digest it on edge. Um, Mr. Dylan, I don't have you either on anything. I mean, I know you've already got enough >> Heights related, but yeah, if you want to put me on one that's more not town government,
>> it's up to you guys. But you could you could be on the Union County Education uh sorry the Union County School Board Association and come and go and then still get your board credit for Mountain Side. >> I've already I already do that. >> Yeah. >> Put you as an alternate. >> I get the Yeah, >> I'll put you as an alternate.
>> That's fine. >> Um >> All right. Let's um I think we need to >> I'm just going to put myself under the environmental commission so we have representation for everything >> unless somebody wants to do it. >> Right. So, um I'd like to make a motion uh to vote on the committee's structure
as we discussed and um as last read by Deb. Um I don't know if we need to read that again, but I'm making a motion to vote on the committee and leazison appointments. >> Second that. >> I'm just going to read through the liaison just to make sure everybody has
that because I know we're good on the other. So for the liaison the only changes I have is for the environmental commission I've put myself down Terrarero. For HIB I've removed Mrs. Jolly. So it's now just Stanley and Forer. For legislation it's Forger and Akira.
>> For special education it's Bradford Stanley and Airi. For Union County School Board Association I have Mr. Dylan as an alternate for Union County Educational Services Commission. I've removed Mrs. Jolly as a member as a as a
primary and I've moved her to alternate. Is there any other change that anybody has? Dr. Burgerer. >> I I don't know if I want to make a change. I just don't know what legislation committee is a leazison. >> What is it?
>> I don't know. We've never done anything. We just >> Has anybody ever gone to this? >> Dr. Miss Bradford, >> that's the that's the New Jersey uh uh school board associate the legislation that they have at those legal forums that you've been to. Um and then they
have the less on to those >> gave an update once we went to the legal forum and then Okay. >> Yes, that's the one and I think that's important. >> That's law forum. >> So what should they be attending the Union County School Boards and reporting back on the legislation? Because I
thought that was state. Do they have to attend the state board meetings? the state board meetings. I think that's what you attended before. >> So, so there was a forum and then that um where we vote from I think you can be a delegate or a voting person and then we reported back on that. Yeah.
>> And what is NJSBA? What is that? What is that? >> So that's not the Union County School Board Association. It's the New Jersey School Board Association. So they only have like two meetings a year. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Two a year. >> Correct. >> And where are they? >> Uh there's one in March and there's one
in the fall. >> No. Oh, don't know. >> So, Dr. Maher is going to actually get pull some information together for everybody so that they we all know what we're doing. >> Dr. Ferg, I believe that they rotate
throughout the state. One in north, one in central, one in south. So, it's not it's not consistent based on what I remember. >> Distance >> possibly. >> And if you can't do it, you can't do it. And then I think there's probably one kind of get together at the uh Atlantic
City convention. They usually try to build one around there. >> Okay. So there's a motion on the floor. If there's no other discussion, can we do a roll call? >> Maybe. >> Mr. Carrie?
>> Yes. Dr. Forger, >> yes. >> Mr. Dylan, >> yes. >> Mrs. Jolly, >> yes. >> Mr. Morales, >> yes. >> Mrs. Stanley, >> yes. >> Miss Bradford, >> yes.
>> Mrs. Terrarero, >> yes. >> Motion pass. May I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? >> Yes. >> So move. >> So moved. >> Second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> I. >> Thank you.