Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Ethics Recusal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board member announces recusal, says tort notice filed after 2023 ethics probe
Summary
A board member at Hunterdon Central publicly alleged improper 2023 ethics proceedings, said an administrative-law judge found no evidence linking them to the allegations, announced they filed a tort notice last week and will recuse from deliberations and votes while pursuing claims.
An unidentified board member used the public floor to accuse members of the 2023 board and district leadership of an improper ethics process and announced they had filed a tort notice and would recuse from deliberative and action items for the remainder of their term.
“I denied and continue to deny all charges against me,” the board member said, and later stated, “Last week, I filed notice. Therefore, I will be recusing myself from further participation in deliberative or action items.” The speaker told the board the Office of Administrative Law had “vindicated” parts of their account and that an administrative-law judge had found “no evidence in the record connecting me to the allegations this board brought against me.”
During the 12-minute statement the speaker named previous board leaders and district staff they said were involved in the 2023 investigation, alleged the board'appointed attorney ignored defense counsel and excluded their lawyer from an executive-session adjudication, and said the board considered punishments including censure and declarations of no confidence. The speaker also accused a current board member of trying twice to limit their voting ability by contacting the school ethics commission; they said those concerns were found unfounded by the commission.
Board counsel confirmed receipt of a tort notice and said the issue would be addressed in executive session later in the evening. The president noted the board would discuss attorney-client matters in closed session and that no action would follow the executive session.
The board member's announcement did not include the details of the tort filing beyond the fact that notice had been served within the 90-day statutory period the speaker cited. The speaker said they were not resigning and that they intended to pursue claims to expose alleged malfeasance. The board did not respond to the allegations during the public statement beyond noting the procedural next steps and the presence of the notice in the district's records.
What happens next: the board moved into executive session and expect to address the tort notice and related attorney-client matters there; the member's recusal will remove them from votes and deliberations while their filing proceeds.
