THE QUORUM QUIZ

The last BOE meeting on 9/22 was unusual in many ways including how it concluded. Or did it conclude?

Ms. Pamela Stanley continued to read her prepared speech even though the Board president and the Board attorney reminded her that the content of her speech did not follow the allowed agenda items. Two members of the board walked out when the president and attorney were unable to bring order to the meeting. After the speech concluded, it became clear that there was no quorum for Berkeley Heights only items with only four members from Berkeley Heights present.

Policy 0163 indicates that a quorum shall consist of five Board members and no business shall be conducted in the absence of a quorum, except when the Doctrine of Necessity is invoked.

After the last roll call, Robert Cianciulli also walked out before the meeting was adjourned. That left only four Board members at the table and did not meet the quorum requirements. The Board attorney present did not call out the fact that clearly the board could not proceed given the quorum was not met.

Typically a Board member makes a motion to adjourn the meeting and another seconds it and they conclude the session. Policy 163 also states that in case quorum is not met, the members present may adjourn the meeting to a later date within seven days.

Given that they did not have a quorum to make the motion and the remaining members did not adjourn the meeting to a later date within seven days, it is a mystery if the 9/22 BOE meeting ever concluded!

This raises a single question – what is the advantage of having a lawyer at $165/hr to sit through BOE meetings if we don’t adhere to basic requirements such as having the quorum to run these meetings?

Dipti Khanna

Related Articles

BILLS, BILLS, BILLS; NOT THE SONG FROM DESTINY’S CHILD

DR. VARLEY, HIGH PRICED ATTORNEYS AND THE ANGRY SIX VS. SAI AKIRI

CONCERNS OVER GROWING LEGAL BILLS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED