REHIRE MRS. BASKERVILLE
School Board Must Take a Vote
From dahiller.com
Hurden-Looker PTA president dropped a bombshell at the April 30 meeting of the Hillside Board of Education.
Armed with her steadfast determination and a copy of a New Jersey state statute, she declared that the board had NOT FOLLOWED THE LAW when it fired Charlene Baskerville without a vote.
And she's right.
Title 18A: Chapter 25-6 reads:
“The superintendent of schools may, with the approval of the president or presidents of the board or boards employing him, suspend any assistant superintendent, principal or teaching staff member, and shall report such a suspension to the board forthwith.
“The board or boards, each by a RECORDED ROLL CALL MAJORITY VOTE of its membership, shall take such action for the RESTORATION OR REMOVAL of such person as it shall deem proper...” [Emphasis added].
The superintendent fired Baskerville without the board’s vote. When Saffold and other residents questioned the board about this law and asked the board’s attorney to comment on it, Board President Dennis Kobitz would not allow the attorney to interpret it. Kobitz also stated that the law allows principals to be fired without a recorded vote – which is not true.
We believe that the Board attempted to sneak its way out of actually firing Baskerville and tainting their reputation in the process since Dennis Kobitz, John O'Shea and Elbert Smith are up for reelection next April. So instead, they took a lesson from the corrupt brand of tried and true politics and attempted to keep it all secret.
The Superintendent claims to have been misinformed by the board’s labor relations’ counsel, Saffold says.
If that is true, then the Board of Education should fire this attorney. After all, why should taxpayers pay thousands of dollars to an attorney who can’t even read a simple portion of a statute?
Even a student at the Hurden-Looker elementary school could see that the board needed to vote before removing the principal.
The Board should also do something about the attorney who sits at board meetings. This attorney is supposed to be able to inform the school board on matters pertaining to the law, yet he almost never speaks a word. And if he does say anything, it is to explain how he has not “had the chance to review” something.
Boy, is he useful or what?
It will be interesting to see how individual board members will vote and how the public will react. This will be a board meeting anticipated by many.
