Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates timing of search for new district attorney while extending interim counsel
Summary
Trustees discussed why the district opened a request-for-proposals for legal services now and whether to extend Schneck, Price, Smith & King on a one-month interim contract while interviews proceed; board members pressed for clarity about the process and continuity for special-education work.
The Hardyston Township School District Board of Education spent a large portion of its meeting debating the timing and rationale for a request-for-proposals to replace the district's general counsel and whether to extend an interim contract for the current firm.
A motion to accept action items that included a one-month extension of Schneck, Price, Smith & King for Aug. 1—31 prompted multiple trustees to ask why the RFQ process was being run now rather than during the usual hiring cycle. A board member who asked to be identified by role as Committee member (speaker 3) said the timing was confusing and asked "why are we shopping around for a new attorney?" and urged the board to explain the origins of the change to the public.
Another trustee (Committee member, speaker 1) said the RFQ was initiated because the existing contract ended and because of prior concerns raised in executive session about the quality of legal service. "I initiated the RFQ," that speaker said, adding the decision followed instances the speaker described as "unfair to the board" and not related to cost. The same speaker said that although legal fees are not the district's largest expense, service and personnel decisions prompted the board to seek alternatives.
Staff clarified the RFQ covers three areas: general counsel, labor negotiations and special-education specialists. A staff member (speaker 6) summarized the list of candidate teams that had replied to the solicitation and reminded trustees that statutory timelines limit how quickly the district can compress the procurement process.
Trustees also discussed continuity for special-education work and whether a district could hire a different firm for general counsel and for special-education representation; one board member warned that moving special-education cases to a new provider could require substantial staff time for handover and litigation continuity.
Board members agreed to review the proposals and to schedule interviews; staff said they would confirm availability and send dates to trustees. The board agreed to pursue a special meeting to ensure full participation for interviews of shortlisted firms.
Next steps: trustees directed staff to collect availability and to prepare interviews; the RFQ and interim extension will proceed while the district schedules interviews and completes the procurement process.
