Pat Demarest’s resignation from the Matawan Aberdeen School Board marks the end of an era. On the school board, it’s the end of Barza, a political machine that corrupted the school district. Come January, the entire town council will be a group of rookies.
Will the new era mark an improvement? I believe we’re already seeing the changes taking effect despite their glacial pace. From improved budgets to greater transparency to more responsive service, the town is slowly getting better. In the school district, we’ve seen smaller tax increases and improved programs. I just hope they quicken the pace.
Whatever reasons Demarest had for returning to the board, things plainly didn’t pan out as she had planned.
In January of last year, during her run for the school board, she submitted an affidavit on Wayne Spell’s behalf, stating “I believe it is reasonable to interpret Board Policy 4117.51 as being applicable to . . . increment withholdings related to school administrators.”
(Mr. Spell’s salary increment withholding resulted from his failure to properly administer the TERRA NOVA exams, which resulted in the entire district failing the exam.)
Her stand against the school district was so egregious, she wasn’t allowed to participate in or be privy to any board deliberations regarding the matter.
On April 21, 2011, the Commissioner of Education rejected Demarest’s position and stated, “the Commissioner found that several due process safeguards articulated in Policy 4117.51 were provided to petitioner, notwithstanding that they appeared on their face to be intended for the protection of teachers.”
(The sad thing is that the board was prepared to settle with Mr. Spells and reinstate his increment. However, Mr. Spells never offered an apology to the board and we had a slam dunk case to prove we were taking a hard line with the unions.)
Ms. Demarest also lost her two allies on the board, Rubino and Ruprecht, when they both chose to not seek reelection.
To add insult to injury, Ms. Demarest was seated directly across from Ken Aitken, one of her least favorite people. (That’s an old trick. Majority, in coordination with the administration, determines the initial seating order. All board members are free to move their seats but nobody ever does.)
Following Aitken’s election, Demarest stopped attending most of the board meetings. She held on for the opportunity to present her son a diploma at graduation.
Finally, it’s become easy, even vogue, to resign from the school board in recent years; so many of us have done it.
As for the challenges that lie ahead, it’s nice to know that, despite their differences, everybody on the school board is fighting, first and foremost, for the children and the community. >>> Read more!
Thursday, August 18, 2011
And Then There Were None
Thursday, April 8, 2010
The School Board's Three-Legged Race
On April 20th, three candidates will vie for two seats on the Matawan-Aberdeen school board – Incumbent John (Jeff) Delaney, former board president Patricia Demarest, and Reverend Thelma Gattis. Only one will lose. Tragically, the booby prize will likely go to Rev. Gattis; a comeback for Demarest is a setback for the rest of us.
Historically, voters unfamiliar with the candidates tend to vote for those at the top of the list and Rev. Gattis will appear last on the ballot. Worse, Rev. Gattis is little known beyond the Cliffwood community, where she has been pastor of the St. Mark A.M.E. Zion Church since 2004. Additionally, voters may be wary of supporting someone who only changed her legal residence to Aberdeen in 2007, has had minimal involvement with the school district, and doesn’t pay property taxes. Nor is there any indication of Reverend Gattis running a strong campaign.
A Gattis victory would require very high negatives for her two opponents, which simply don’t exist beyond this blog.
Dr. Delaney’s main negative is his friendship with me. (Full Disclosure: Although I have not participated in any campaign meetings or made any campaign contributions, I do intend to support him.) Delaney is a highly credentialed longtime resident with an amazing personal story who’s been deeply involved in our school district for several years. During the past year alone, Delaney co-authored two of the board’s three goals and got our school policies in compliance with state law. (Our district scored 100% on QSAC.) Although he did not vote for Dr. O’Malley’s raise, last year, Delaney has been a strong supporter of our superintendent.
Ms. Demarest is presenting herself as the “everywoman” candidate. If you like Dr. O’Malley, she can point to her work with him during her term as president. If you don’t like him, she can point to her vote against his appointment. If you want low taxes, Demarest can point to the small tax increases during the “O’Malley” years. If you want more spending, she can point to her earlier years of large spending hikes.
Unfortunately, a Demarest victory would send a terrible message that our community is either oblivious to what happens on the school board or just doesn’t care. Here is the Demarest record:
A vote for Demarest is a vote against everything our district has achieved under Dr. O’Malley’s administration. Writing programs have been integrated with class curricula. For the first time, every school made AYP (adequate yearly progress) under No Child Left Behind. We’re now above average in state testing for our District Factor Group in over half of the exams. Spending levels are falling. We’ve reduced out-district placements by 10%.
Yet, Demarest opposed O’Malley’s appointment and still does. And for those who don’t think there’s reason to be afraid, remember this – One year ago, Demarest represented the majority.
Those who forget Pat Demarest’s history may doom our community to repeat it. And those who want Dr. O’Malley to stay shouldn’t be giving him reasons to leave. >>> Read more!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
The Union Elite
Where’s the outrage?
Two years ago, the Matawan Regional Teachers Association (MRTA), was outraged. Over two hundred teachers stormed a board of education meeting at Strathmore Elementary, wearing buttons that read “I CARE about our kids”. They picketed in front of board members’ homes and stuck placards in their car windshields when parking at the schools.
At the time, MRTA President Carl Kosmyna said "Tonight is about making a statement and about making the public aware that things are not what they seem in the district. We also want the board to see that we are standing here united."
Why was the union so outraged? Their salary guides hadn’t increased 4.5%.
Today, the school district is on the verge of terminating 73 employees. The union response? A flyer. Kosmyna’s only public comments, made literally minutes before a board vote on the budget, was a suggestion for the school board to recommend raising taxes as high as possible to avoid personnel cuts.
The union leaders are willing to beat the war drums for a raise but not to save scores of employees’ livelihoods? It doesn’t make sense unless, and this is just a theory, the union leaders were never fighting for their union. Maybe, just maybe, the union leaders were fighting for themselves. After all, even without increases to the salary guide, everybody but the highest paid teachers were still slated to receive a raise.
In 2008, the school board and MRTA ratified a memorandum calling for salary increases and retroactive pay in exchange for a change to the state health care plan, NJ Direct 10.
However, the exact language of the contract still needed to be negotiated, the biggest of which was the salary guide. The memorandum only refers to the total increase to the salary guide, not how that increase is distributed.
In an astonishing act of malfeasance, Board President Pat Demarest outsourced the writing of the salary guides to the teachers union and Joel Glastein, director of personnel. The salary guides were never reviewed by any third party or even by the school board prior to Ms. Demarest signing the contract.
While a district wants to increase salaries at the lower levels to attract the best teachers, unions want raises at the higher levels to boost pension income. With Demarest’s blessing, the union got what it wanted.
The below tables show what the union officers received from the revised salary guides. Comparing salary guides, our senior teachers earn over $3,000 more than their peers in most wealthy “I” districts in Monmouth County (p. 22), which explains the top-line’s slow growth rate – it can only grow so fast without appearing obscene.
However, the real story is the extraordinary spurt in income for those union officers that hadn’t yet reached the top rungs on the salary guides. To use an extreme example, Margaret De Be Voise, a building rep for the middle school, got a 62.30% salary increase over three years plus a five-thousand dollar check for retroactive pay. In fact, a third of union officers got about five-thousand dollars in retroactive pay.
Furthermore, among the officers, only Kathleen Vergaretti (32.35% raise) is earning below $84,000.
In other words, due to seniority, the union officers ain’t afraid of losing their jobs. Nor are they willing to sacrifice any raises to save jobs.
Let’s assume there’s $1.5 million budgeted for increases to the salary guide. The teachers could also shift to NJ Direct 15 for a 5% savings, or about $300,000. Additionally, the legislature looks likely to pass a requirement for all staff to contribute 1.5% of salary towards health benefits – another $500,000. That’s a total of $2.3 million savings. The terminations are saving the district $2.8 million. That still leaves a deficit of $500,000 but one that is far more manageable. Five more retirements could close the gap.
Absent union concessions, 73 staff members will lose their jobs and the district will begin looking for additional places to cut next year. Everybody but the most senior teachers and administrators will be at risk of losing their jobs.
Does the union leadership care? I’m guessing their membership does.
| Name of Employee | 2006-2007 | 2007-2008 | 2008-2009 | 2009-2010 | 3-yr Increase |
| Carl Kosmyna | 80,580.00 | 82,330.00 | 85,220.00 | 87,080.00 | 8.07% |
| C. Marshall Gorman | 69,330.00 | 71,900.00 | 86,540.00 | 87,900.00 | 26.78% |
| Patricia Mattern | 82,960.00 | 84,650.00 | 87,540.00 | 89,400.00 | 7.76% |
| Janet Breslin | 82,960.00 | 84,650.00 | 87,540.00 | 89,400.00 | 7.76% |
| Edward Kornberg | 78,450.00 | 80,150.00 | 83,040.00 | 84,900.00 | 8.22% |
| Janette Caufield | 65,998.40 | 69,750.00 | 76,110.00 | 84,350.00 | 27.81% |
| Rose Marie Turley | 73,730.00 | 81,580.00 | 84,220.00 | 85,580.00 | 16.07% |
| Margaret De Be Voise | 54,160.00 | 61,640.00 | 74,700.00 | 87,900.00 | 62.30% |
| Kathleen Vergaretti | 51,560.00 | 54,440.00 | 62,070.00 | 68,240.00 | 32.35% |
| Suzanne Serden | 78,450.00 | 80,150.00 | 83,040.00 | 84,900.00 | 8.22% |
| Barbara Lyttle | 82,610.00 | 84,300.00 | 87,140.00 | 89,400.00 | 8.22% |
| Wenona Dubrowsky | 64,070.00 | 71,900.00 | 86,540.00 | 87,900.00 | 37.19% |
| Name of Employee | Retro Pay | 3-yr Increase |
| Carl Kosmyna | 1168.00 | 6,500.00 |
| C. Marshall Gorman | 5120.00 | 18,570.00 |
| Patricia Mattern | 1168.00 | 6,440.00 |
| Janet Breslin | 1168.00 | 6,440.00 |
| Edward Kornberg | 1168.00 | 6,450.00 |
| Janette Caufield | 4954.49 | 18,351.60 |
| Rose Marie Turley | 1091.66 | 11,850.00 |
| Margaret De Be Voise | 5088.00 | 33,740.00 |
| Kathleen Vergaretti | 2104.00 | 16,680.00 |
| Suzanne Serden | 1168.00 | 6,450.00 |
| Barbara Lyttle | 1128.00 | 6,790.00 |
| Wenona Dubrowsky | 5120.00 | 23,830.00 |
>>> Read more!
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Return of the Demarest
The last time we saw Pat Demarest, she used the race card in an amateurish power play and publicly humiliated Revered Gattis of the St. Mark A.M.E. Zion Church. At the time, Zavorskas had resigned and both Demarest and Barbato declared they would not be seeking reelection. At her last board meeting, Demarest secretly invited Reverend Gattis to petition for the open seat. The non-Barza wing predictably objected to the surprise petition and insisted upon upholding the past practice of interviewing all interested candidates. Why Demarest would subject the reverend to such embarrassment or risk inflaming racial tensions is anybody’s guess.
Apparently, Demarest hasn’t learned anything because she’s playing racial politics again in a selfish bid to regain her spot on the Matawan-Aberdeen school board. Most employee grievance issues remain confidential and Demarest obviously relied upon that confidentiality in her latest gambit to win support from the African American community. Unfortunately for her, Demarest’s latest attacks against the school district have become public record.
Patricia Demarest has volunteered to testify against the school district in a grievance hearing involving the district’s senior African American, Wayne Spells. By stitching her affidavit to the school board minutes, it’s easy to see what happened and what she’s doing.
November 19th, 2007 - Shortly after Quinn’s departure, the school board voted unanimously to conduct a “Hearing and Investigation in the Terra Nova Test matter”. Every student in the district had “failed” the exam and the school board wanted to know what went wrong.
April 23rd, 2008 - Demarest is elected president of the school board at the re-organization meeting.
May 19th, 2008 – At Demarest’s first school board meeting since becoming president (i.e. her first opportunity to set the board agenda), the full board votes to “approve withholding of a salary increment for the following tenured staff member” – Employee 4496.
From Demarest’s affidavit, we now know that Employee 4496 was Wayne Spells, the Director of Special Programs, and that his increment withholding was “related to the administration of the 9th grade Terra Nova test in 2007”.
We also know that, as expected, the union filed a grievance on Mr. Spell’s behalf.
January 22nd, 2010 - I post an article about a “former school board member" who voted against Dr. O’Malley’s appointment and intended to run in the school board election.
January 29th, 2010 – One week after the blog post, Demarest files an affidavit on Mr. Spell’s behalf against the school district. Not only has she volunteered to testify against the school district, she also throws Dr. O’Malley under the bus by blaming him for failing “to inform [her] of the existence of relevant Board policies”.
So, let’s get this straight. Sitting at the table, we have a board president with five years experience on the school board, Mr. Gross, the board attorney for nearly a generation who probably wrote or reviewed every board policy, and Mr. Glastein, the former acting superintendent who’s been with the district for over 30 years, and Demarest blames O’Malley, who’s only been working full-time in the district for one month.
Are we to believe Demarest never questioned Mr. Gross or Mr. Glastein regarding procedures for withholding an increment? Maybe. After all, Demarest claimed, as board president, that she was not accountable for anything but her board votes.
Moreover, she’s a liar. As board president, Demarest was intimately familiar with Spell’s grievance filing, with his argument that the district did not comply with a particular policy, and the district’s position that that policy only applies to teachers, not administrators. Only now, over a year and a half later, after she’s decided to run for the school board, does Demarest claim she suddenly discovered this "obscure" policy and reversed position.
Does she really believe the public is so stupid to believe this? Yes, she does. That’s why she has such low expectations for our students.
So, to recap, Demarest votes against O’Malley’s appointment, then throws him under the bus when she volunteers to testify against the school district in her bid to regain African American support after she publicly humiliates Reverend Gattis. How ironic that Mr. Spell’s grievance only becomes exposed through Demarest’s efforts to undo the damage she inflicted upon herself the first time she played racial politics.
Demarest is still strongly linked to Barza. Her candidate’s petition has four signatures from the Barbato household and it will be interesting to see whether this linkage proves a boom or a bust for the Demarest campaign.
If only these were Demarest’s sole “indiscretions” but there’s more to come. Demarest has a history and she intends to make it our future. >>> Read more!
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
A Public Apology to Reverend Gattis
Dear Reverend Gattis,
As a presumptive school board member-elect, I hope you will accept my apology on behalf of the Matawan-Aberdeen School Board. Though I was absent from last night’s meeting due to the Purim holiday, I have spoken with several people in attendance and have heard how you were treated wretchedly and shamelessly. You presented yourself with the honorable intention to serve on our school board only to discover that you had been used and abused by a spiteful troll who would rather watch our community burn than grow under the leadership of those she hates. Reverend Gattis, I and my friends on the board are very sorry for your treatment last night.
As the pastor of St. Mark AM.E. Zion Church, I’m sure you can appreciate the school board has established policies for appointing board members to a vacated seat. First, the board officially recognizes the seat has been vacated and then announces a process for community members to apply. All applicants are interviewed by selected board members and considered by the entire board.
Given the current board is split 4-4, it is highly unlikely that any appointments will be made prior to the reorganization meeting following the April 21st election.
Had Ms. Demarest truly desired your appointment, she would have consulted with all members of the board or, at the very least, secured a majority of votes prior to inviting you to the board meeting. She would have discussed your appointment with Dr. O’Malley and advised you to contact other board members. But your appointment was never Ms. Demarest’s goal.
Ms. Demarest knew the other board members were already discussing community members who had expressed an interest to serve. She knew the board rarely takes action at a Committee of the Whole meeting and never without prior notification that action may be taken. She knew my friends on the board would never appoint anyone without first consulting Liz Loud-Hayward and myself.
Instead, she used you to inflame racial tensions in our community and defame her fellow board members. She cared not one whit that you and your church would be embarrassed by having your offer publicly rejected. Ms. Demarest forced a vote knowing you lacked a majority. She wanted you shamed and then to lay the blame on a school board she has repeatedly failed and ultimately chose to abandon.
But Ms. Demarest only succeeded in shaming herself and those who once supported her.
Reverend Gattis, you are one of the most respected members of our community and I sincerely hope you will consider applying for the open seat once the board has announced the application process. I assure you Ms. Demarest’s nefarious actions will not taint your application.
Should you choose to not pursue the seat, I hope you will be open to working with the school district in a private capacity to improve education for all our students.
Sincerely yours,
Joey Warren >>> Read more!
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Ms. Demarest’s Theory of (Zero) Accountability
Last night, the Board of Education finally acknowledged that Ms. Rappaport had been a director of special education services during the 2007-08 school year and had been paid as such. Nor did the board attempt to explain why she held a position for which she lacked certification. The kicker, however, was when Ms. Demarest stated that, as a board member, she was only accountable for her board votes and nothing else. By her logic, she never voted for out-of-control spending, poor academic performance, or to retain unqualified personnel. No, she’s not the slightest bit accountable for any of that. How pathetic.
Let’s review some of the things for which Ms. Demarest, President of the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District Board of Education is not accountable.
How reassuring that Ms. Demarest isn’t accountable for any of that.
During the meeting, Ms. Demarest said she’d make herself available for any questions I had regarding her voting record. So, following the meeting I took advantage of her offer. She patiently listened to my questions, declared she wouldn’t answer any of them, and then launched into personal attacks against me. (Though the attacks were made publicly, they were not intended to be part of the public record.)
Using the “Demarest Method” of accountability, let’s review her voting record.
Oh, let’s not forget the thousands she spent (including program fees) to attend the annual NJ School Board Association conferences in Atlantic City. Undoubtedly, the benefits to the district have been well worth the expense. Next time a student’s extra curricular activity lacks funding, just remember that Ms. Demarest considers it more important for her to attend “enrichment” programs in AC.
This coming April, don’t forget Ms. Demarest’s motto – High taxes, poor academics, I didn’t vote for any of those things. I’m not accountable. >>> Read more!
Friday, January 9, 2009
Questions for Quinn and Co.
IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED THAT A DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES DOES REQUIRE A DIRECTOR'S CERTIFICATION. PLEASE READ MARSD, WE HAVE A PROBLEM FOR MORE DETAILS.
I have to give Matawan-Aberdeen school board attorney, Michael Gross, his dues. After receiving conflicting information from the county, state, and special education attorneys, I finally contacted Dr. Robert Higgins, the Director of the New Jersey Department of Education’s Office of Licensure and Credentials. His response confirmed Gross’s positions regarding a Supervisor of Special Services (Education) and Director of Technology. Does that mean everyone else is guilt-free? Hardly. But at least the district’s attorney is proving his mettle. As for the rest of the school board and former Superintendent Quinn, in particular, there are still many unanswered questions.
Regarding the question of having a Director of Technology who was previously a secretary that only completed high school, Dr. Higgins said the position only required certification if it managed people who were certificated, exactly the answer Gross provided in private discussion; the DoT’s job description specifically excludes certificated personnel from oversight.
At the last board meeting, Gross claimed that changing Ms. Rappaport’s position from a director to supervisor was not a demotion because, at the time, they had the same salary guidelines and responsibilities. That is true as well.
As for whether a supervisor can oversee all child study teams throughout the district, Dr. Higgins has stated the law is unclear on this point but that his office would not oppose such an appointment unless the courts rule otherwise. (It also explains why Ms. Rappaport never pursued a director’s certification. The job description only requires a supervisor’s certification.)
Unfortunately, there are still a number of unanswered questions.
Was Ms. Rappaport’s position ever changed from director to supervisor?
In December 2003, the school board voted to change Ms. Rappaport’s position from a director to supervisor. By law, Superintendent Quinn was required to implement the board’s directive yet the only evidence that he did so is the matrix report listing her as a supervisor and submitted to the state. All other evidence points to the fact her position was never changed. Ms. Rappaport retained the title of director, signed a sworn affidavit attesting to her being a director, and was paid a director’s salary (even when subsequent salary guidelines differentiated between the two positions).
Plus, the school district doesn’t have a job description for a Supervisor of Special Services. Ms. Rappaport always worked under the job description for a director, even after the board vote. (At the same December 15th, 2003, BOE meeting, Ms. Caroline Pond was reassigned from Director of Testing and Special Programs to Supervisor Planning/Research and Evaluation (Testing). The school district does not have a job description of that supervisor position either.)
Why did Quinn recommend changing Rappaport’s title?
If Ms. Rappaport was going to perform the same duties for the same pay, why bother changing her title? Why was it so important to change her title on the matrix report?
Was there collusion between Quinn and Rappaport?
Surely, Ms. Rappaport, one of the most senior and longest serving members of the school administration knew her position was being changed yet she happily retained the same title and benefits.
One curious point is the MRAA contract. Why were supervisors and directors on the same pay scale? Ms. Rappaport’s signature is on the contract which was ratified only five months before the board voted to change her position. Did she have foreknowledge of the position change?
Also, Rappaport’s relationship with Quinn is well known. Quinn’s wife worked under Rappaport and is one of her biggest supporters.
What was the school board’s role?
The board voted to change Ms. Rappaport’s position. As one of the most prominent members of the administration, it was no secret that her position was never changed. Why did the board acquiesce? Was the board also aware that Quinn never intended to change Ms. Rappaport’s position? What was the board’s rationale behind the vote?
Were funds misappropriated?
From 2005-2008, Ms. Rappaport was paid at the higher salary of a director. Since she should have been paid a supervisor’s salary, who’s responsible for the overpayment? Why was her salary not commensurate with her title as reported to the state in the matrix report?
Regarding other positions –
Why did the school board believe that Ms. Cholewa, Quinn’s former secretary and a high school graduate, was the best candidate to become Director of Technology?
Some of the qualifications for a DoT include:
Ms. Cholewa undoubtedly had experience with computers, as does every reader of this blog, but that alone isn’t qualification to become a Director of Technology.
Ms. Rappaport and Ms. Pond were reassigned to positions that lacked job descriptions. Is it common practice to assign staff to positions for which no job description exists?
As was evident at the last board meeting, BOE President Demarest, one of this blog’s most avid readers, has assumed the role of Sgt. Schultz in “Hogan’s Heroes” – “I know nothing!” Thank goodness for Dr. O’Malley. Plainly, none of these issues concern our board leadership. >>> Read more!
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Of Mice and Men (and Women)
According to an old army rule, you never look at your enemy’s family photos because, the moment you do, you realize he’s a family man, too. Though I have been a consistent and harsh critic of the Matawan-Aberdeen Board of Education and the Aberdeen Township Council, this past week I was taught a bit of humility.
Last Friday, at the prompting of some readers, I sent an email to James Lauro, Aberdeen’s acting town manager, regarding sewers in Freneau and seawall development. I was greatly, and pleasantly, surprised to receive a phone call from Mayor Sobel in response to the email; it was the first time we ever spoke.
Mayor Sobel was very generous with his time and patiently answered my questions. Regarding the seawall, he explained the township won $262,000 in matching grants, meaning the money will be released when the township allocates matching funds. CME Associates, the township engineer, is presently developing plans to widen the seawall and provide beach access as part of an overall plan to promote the shore. My guess is we’ll hear more about the project in time for next year’s election (there are no matching funds in this year’s budget).
Regarding Freneau, he explained that sewers would cost millions of dollars and the money isn’t there absent development in Aberdeen Forge. I asked about scaling back the road improvement program and using some of that money towards the sewers. The Mayor said he didn’t believe the sewers had sufficient community support to warrant the massive investment, that his understanding was many, if not most, homeowners were content with their septic tanks.
The conversation then segued into other development projects. He explained that the Anchor Glass Area was purchased by Somerset Development but that he was unaware of any real progress. He also warned against relying too heavily on proposed development plans as these projects often result in something very different from the original vision.
I told Mayor Sobel that I was very concerned with the selection of Silver Oak Properties as the primary developer for the Transit Village Project. Not only does Silver Oak have no experience with large-scale development, the owner, William Bocra, is a convicted felon, having gone to prison for three years after attempting to bribe an IRS auditor. I expressed that, given the large number of local developers arrested on bribery charges, including the original Aberdeen Forge developer, Anthony Spalliero, appearances matter.
Mayor Sobel said he understood my concerns but felt the point had become moot. He said it was his understanding that the township no longer has any standing relationship with Silver Oak Properties and that he’s not had any recent discussions with them. He further assured me that “not one shovel” would hit the transit area until the roadways were first expanded, at an estimated cost of $125 million, to handle the increased traffic. Sure enough, a cursory review of payments to the township attorney, Daniel McCarthy, reveals only a few inconsequential payments regarding Silver Oak.
My biggest surprise was Mayor Sobel expressing he had no strong opposition to merging the township with Matawan.
We ended the conversation on good terms and he offered to make himself available for future discussions.
Also last week, Patricia Demarest became President of the district’s Board of Education. We have always been on good terms since I first began attending board meetings but I had become concerned, following the heated election, that our relationship would become strained. Not so. She’s been as warm and open as ever. Though I don’t care for her allies on the school board, I have always admired her for her integrity and desire to help the students of our district. When nobody else on her side of the aisle appeared at Meet the Candidates night, she was there.
When she was elected president, I was the first to applaud her.
I mention Mayor Sobel and Board President Demarest because it takes great character to reach out to one of your harshest and most vocal critics. And I contrast their actions against School Board Member Barbato who retained legal counsel to issue me a cease and desist letter that accused me of committing “liable” [sic].
Although I will likely continue to criticize and dissent, I intend to give every opportunity to the opposition to express their viewpoints. I’m a strong believer in lively debate and I welcome any courtesy the opposition extends towards me.
Mayor Sobel and Board President Demarest, thank you for your time and patience. I look forward to speaking with you in the future. >>> Read more!