Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Superintendent topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawnside board submits superintendent contract to county review after public comment
Summary
After a public-comment period in which many residents praised Superintendent Dr. Ronn H. Johnson while others pressed for student-achievement data and transparency, the Lawnside Board of Education recorded a motion to submit the superintendent’s contract to the county for review; the motion was carried and the meeting adjourned.
The Lawnside Board of Education voted to submit Superintendent Dr. Ronn H. Johnson’s contract to the county for review after a public-comment session in which residents both praised Johnson’s long service and raised concerns about student achievement and process transparency.
Board President Forrest called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. on Sept. 26, and the agenda entered a motion "for superintendent contract submission for county review and approval," moved by Ms. Cauthorne and seconded by Ms. Kittles. The motion was recorded on the agenda and taken up after public remarks.
Dozens of public speakers offered statements during the allotted comment period. Read Hawkens, identified in the record as president of the South Jersey Chapter of The Links, Inc., and Mark Pease, interim superintendent of the Palmyra School District, urged the board to retain Dr. Johnson, citing his long partnership with the community and mentorship to other educators. Several alumni, parents and alumni-association leaders — including Sharon Hopson of the Morgan State South Jersey Alumni Association and Lavita Muhammad — also expressed support for Johnson, describing his dedication to students and families.
Other commenters pressed the board for data and transparency. Melva Higgs commended extracurricular efforts but said Lawnside students "have not met state standards for a decade," asserting that about 20% of students meet state benchmarks in reading, English language arts and math; Higgs said she had been told by "Ms. Miller" that the district showed "70% growth," but she said no supporting data was provided in the meeting record. Fatima Hayes reminded the board that state law requires a public hearing for a superintendent’s contract and urged clear legal compliance and transparency in the renewal process.
Board members recorded roll-call votes later in the meeting. The transcript records a roll call that reads: Forrest — Y; Hayes — N; Arterbridge — N; Catlett — Y; Cauthorne — (dash); Harper — Abstain; Kittles — Y; Still — Y, followed by the notation, "Vote: Yes Motion Carried." The record shows a separate motion to adjourn (moved by Ms. Still and seconded by Ms. Kittles) and a subsequent roll call recorded with affirmative votes noted for the attending members; the meeting then concluded and the minutes were certified by Karen Willis, business administrator and board secretary.
What the record shows and what remains unanswered: multiple community members offered testimony both in support of and calling for scrutiny of Dr. Johnson’s leadership; specific performance figures were asserted from the floor (the 20% proficiency figure and an alleged "70% growth" claim) but the board did not enter supporting student-achievement data into the public minutes at this meeting. The transcript also records that the board placed the superintendent’s contract into the county review process, consistent with the motion made at the meeting.
The board did not announce a public date for final action on the contract in the posted minutes. The district’s posted meeting extract is certified by the board secretary and will be forwarded to the county for review, per the motion recorded on the Sept. 26 agenda.
