Whether it was directed at the school board attorney, the board or simply in utter anger and frustration, Highlands resident Gina Melnyk blurted out an F-bomb before she left the podium at last week’s meeting of the Henry Hudson Regional Board of Education.
She further turned to the residents attending the meeting to let them know the board attorney receives $90 an hour to attend meetings and to let everyone in general know “You’ll see me November 5.”
No one from the board responded in any manner to the loud outburst but routine business which included an adjournment the meeting minutes later for a brief and scheduled executive session. Nothing was said about the outburst when the board returned after the executive session to continue the meeting.
An estimated 30 residents were at the meeting, most of them parents complaining and seeking further information on the proceedings for determining students for the pre-school program and the need for a waiting list in order to have a child received into the program.
But Melnyk, who is a former member of the Highlands Board of Education, rose during the scheduled first of two public portions to ask three questions, two concerning, the payment of bills and a consultant’s pay for specific work, and the third on the school’s policy on firearms.
Each of her questions was based on information on the agenda indicating payments made, whether the business administrator received additional compensation for work at the Highlands school, and a change in policy that included a first reading for revisions of several policies, including one on firearms and weapons.
Melnyk simply asked for board members’ opinions on the firearms policy change.
But the outspoken Highlands resident was thwarted in all her attempts to get responses, including no one from the board table advising her on the board policy, or if there is one, on when to stand or sit until her questions were answered.
During the public portion, Melnyk was recognized to go to the podium, identified herself and said she had three questions. She expressed the three questions, then sat down in anticipation of the responses.
When the first response was given, it prompted a question for further explanation, so Melnyk once again rose, apologized for not knowing she had to go back to the podium, and asked that question.
She then returned to her seat awaiting the answer to the next two questions, then again going to the podium for more explanation.
It was while she was at the podium the third time, that the board attorney, Jonathan Busch, not a board member or the chairman, began telling the resident her time was up, she had been there more than three minutes, she was asking too many questions, that wasn’t the policy, and the board would not be answering any more questions from her.
Melnyk continued talking from the podium, the board continued with the agenda item that called for a a brief statement from the business administrator on her certification, then a motion to adjourn, also scheduled on agenda, for an executive session before a resumption of the open meeting minutes later.
Melnyk continued to talk as the board members left the table for their executive session, telling the residents about Busch’s hourly rate, the lack of information she was receiving, and her assurance she would see them November 5. The Highlands resident is expected to be a candidate for one of the five Highlands seats on the board to be decided in the November election.
There were no further actions, disruptions, or references to Melnyk’s questions when the meeting resumed.
She never received any response to her question about a change in policy related to firearms.
Questioned on that policy change and the procedure for first and second readings of amendments to policy, Dr. Beams told this reporter, in response to written questions for more information:
“The public does not have a say in policy,” explaining that is the function of the board elected by the public and this is their primary responsibility. She added “the district must follow all applicable laws and administrative statutes that govern the state of NJ. The policies are derived from all applicable laws. The policy advises the Board’s and school district how to implement those laws as they pertain to schools.” She also pointed out the public would be able to see the policy once it is approved and part of the policy manual. It becomes part of the manual once it has passed first and second readings by board members, not in public, and voted on when any amendments after both readings are approved.
In answer to further questions about whether anyone on school property is permitted to carry weapons , Dr. Beams said that “currently, no staff or students are permitted to carry firearms with the exception of our school security officers who are licensed and trained and our class III police officers.”
Asked why the agenda indicates the policy revisions came with her recommendation, rather than stating they were submitted under the Strauss Esmay Policy, Dr. Beams explained “this is how Board of Education agendas work. The Superintendent in all districts collaborates with the Board committees, the administration or other staff members to make the appropriate recommendations for the various required approvals by the Board of Education.”
Other revisions in the policy, expected to be approved at the August meeting, after a second reading, include the board members term, staff physical examinations, service animals , attendance, as well as student suicide prevention, emergency and crisis situations and volunteer coaches and advisors. Abolished under the first reading approval, which was unanimous, is “remote public board meetings during a declared emergency “and gifts from vendors.
More Stories on the Board HERE
From NJ.gov-“proposed policies are open to public input”
State and Local Policy
Not only are districts regulated by statute, code and decisional law, but they also must follow state and local policy. Local board of education members are the school district’s policy makers. In fact, while the state establishes the broader framework within which school districts must operate, local boards of education set many of the policies and procedures that most directly affect students and staff. Districts have manuals that contain written policies adopted by vote of the board. Parents should be familiar with these policies; Requests can be made to see the policies at the school district’s administration building. Parents can affect local policy by attending board meetings and participating in the process. Proposed policies are open for public input. For instance, parents often write to the Commissioner about the fall cut-off date set for a child’s entrance to school in their district but that date is governed by local policy.
Local policies generally are considered valid as long as they do not conflict with provisions of federal or state statutes and regulations. Disputes that arise from local board decisions can be brought before the Commissioner of Education for a legal determination when they involve questions of education law. However, local board decisions cannot be voided by the Commissioner unless they are found to be in violation of state law. The Commissioner’s judgment cannot be substituted for that of the local board.
Comments are closed.