Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Ethics And Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident accuses trustees of attending political summit; trustees deny ethics violation
Summary
A resident urged the Old Bridge board to explain why three trustees attended a New Jersey Family Policy Center summit and whether they support the group's policies; trustees who attended responded that they attended as private citizens to learn about parental-rights topics and denied signing pledges or endorsing exclusionary policies.
During the hearing of residents at the Feb. 17 Old Bridge Township Board of Education meeting, resident Alexis said she was concerned that three named trustees' Christina Mazone, Brooke Richards Patterson and Karen Venotes' attended a summit hosted by the New Jersey Family Policy Center and asked whether that attendance violated the board members' ethical duties.
Alexis told the board she had seen photos of their attendance on the group's social media and called the organization "a known political and lobbying group promoting extremist positions in schools," including restrictions on curriculum and anti-LGBTQ policies. She asked two direct questions: "What were your goals for attending this event? Do you support the New Jersey Family Policy Center's policies? And how will you uphold your obligation to represent a diverse public school community if you also support the goals and policies of this political organization?" (public comment recorded in the transcript).
Three trustees who had attended answered from the dais. Christina Mazone said she attended on personal time, that she "never heard of the New Jersey policy group" before and that the summit she attended focused on parental-rights materials and a recent "bill of rights" in a neighboring district. "I didn't sign any pledge when we attended the meeting or to sign up. I didn't pay to attend a meeting. I went on my own personal time because that's what I wanted to attend," she said.
Brooke Richards Patterson and the third trustee added similar explanations: they said they attended as private citizens and that no pledge was proposed or signed at the event, and they denied that discussions there included exclusionary or anti-LGBTQ policy-making. One trustee called the social-media accusations "clickbait rhetoric" and said the claims were inaccurate.
What happened next: board members asked the resident to sign in and the board closed the public-comment segment after the exchange; the transcript records the resident's allegations and the trustees' denials but does not record any follow-up investigation, ethics opinion or formal finding.
Why it matters: public trust and perceived impartiality matter for boards that oversee diverse student populations. The New Jersey code of ethics for board members was cited by the resident (ethics provision F was read into the record), and Alexis requested transparency and responses that the trustees provided at the meeting.
What remains unresolved: the transcript contains assertions and denials but does not show any independent review or a determination about whether attendance at the summit created an ethics violation. The board did not announce any next steps to investigate the claims during the public meeting.
