Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Date Change topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garfield board approves moving school election from April to November after appellate stay
Summary
At a Feb. 12 special meeting the Garfield Board of Education voted to change its annual election date from April to November after an appellate court granted a stay allowing the vote; the meeting drew contested points of order and public comment opposing the change.
The Garfield Board of Education voted Feb. 12 to change its annual board election date from April to November after the Appellate Division granted an emergent stay that, the board's attorney said, cleared the way for the vote.
Board President Ramos said the board held a special meeting limited to one agenda item, item 10.1, on the election date. "This is my legal opinion, and this is what the board chooses to take action according to my opinion," Board attorney Geisler told trustees during a dispute over whether the board could lawfully act at a meeting advertised for a single item.
The vote followed heated exchanges among trustees and public commenters. Board member Folcarino urged trustees to keep the April date, saying the April election allows the community to "have a voice on the issues affecting our schools" and warning that November elections dilute school questions among higher-profile races. "I'm going to urge our trustees to go against this resolution," Folcarino said.
Board attorney Geisler told the board the Appellate Division had granted a stay of the lower-court injunction earlier that day and that the order "stayed the injunction, meaning they allowed us to vote, and it's clear and explicit in the order." Geisler said oral argument and further briefing would follow before the appellate court.
Trustee Malayo moved to place item 10.1 on the floor; the motion proceeded to a roll-call vote. The transcript records the following votes: Trustee Focarino — no; Trustee Garber — yes; Trustee Maleo — yes; Trustee Sanchez — yes; President Ramos — yes. The transcript does not record the votes of other trustees by name. The board attorney referenced the appellate stay as the legal basis allowing the vote.
Public commenters questioned the timing and legality of the action while others urged respect for existing election timing. Longtime meeting attendee Joe Delaney told the board that, in his view, the board had the procedural ability to rescind a prior action if it chose: "You need 1 motion and 1 second to rescind that resolution. You could do it. It's been done," he said.
The meeting moved directly from the vote to the public-comment period. Several speakers focused on unrelated concerns — most prominently the board's recent decision concerning employee health benefits — but many also returned to the election question during public comment.
The board cited the Open Public Meetings Act (N.J.S.A. 10:4-6) at the start of the meeting when announcing the special meeting notice; board counsel repeatedly framed the limits of what could lawfully be acted on at a meeting advertised for a single item.
The board did not provide an itemized roll-call tally for every member in the portion of the transcript provided; the recorded votes above reflect only those votes spoken aloud during the roll call in the meeting transcript.
