“The fact that the BOE members let this go to a legal matter is shameful on the part of the entire Board. This started off as a perfectly lawful request that they decided not to respond to, which in-turn forced the lawsuit. I’m sure they were hoping that Dani would let sleeping dogs lie. They made a strategic blunder. When a Board does not respond to a perfectly lawful request under the laws of the state, and then they are forced to respond by way of a lawsuit, the Board should resign. The court’s decision shows that they wasted time, money, and ran afoul of the law, specifically the Open Public Records Act (OPRA), which used to be called “Right To Know Law”, which governs the public’s access to government records in New Jersey. So, they were holding back on every citizens “right to know”. Time, money, and public records, is what they are there to provide oversight over, and be good stewards over. If they cannot do that for themselves, they cannot be expected to provide financial oversight and governance over a school system. It’s total irresponsibility of their roles as board members, and the board speaks with one voice, a resolution for the entire BOE to step down is in order.”
The answer to original OPRA request was easy and simple. Just a screenshot.
Now the board members have to give a written certification. If they lie in this certificate, they will be doomed.
Their certification will now lead to a trail of bread crumbs, and what the public will likely find is that they have been using personal email for Board business, and whether it’s inadvertent or intentional makes no difference. It’s a violation of Open Meeting Laws, and those are very serious. Board’s simply cannot conduct school business outside of the public’s view, it’s not a hard concept, and it’s not difficult to comply. When a Board conduct’s business in personal email, or at Starbucks, they are hiding that business from the public, and the reason can only be…for no good reason. This is why judges instruct juries with adverse inference instructions when they go to deliberate, if a defendant in a matter is found to have hid something, or destroy something, like deleting emails, the judge can literally tell the jury that they can and should construe those actions to be that they were hiding something intentionally that would damage their case. An adverse jury instruction is the kiss of death in a legal trial, that is how serious conducting business outside of the public view and hiding things are. And many judges in matters for not-for-profit Boards, would likely impose financial penalties on each board member to teach them a lesson, set an example for future board members, and convey the seriousness of their actions. That is if someone takes the matter back up through the court system. And they would not be covered by their D&O insurance, since insurance companies tend to drop you when you break the law. A clean sweep should be on the mind of each Board member.
Ridgewood needs Dani! He’s running circles around the current Board and leaves no stone unturned.
Menawhile, Dan Creed and Mohammed canoodling the guilty Board.