The New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) 10:4-7 clearly states:

Legislative Findings and Declaration:

“The Legislature finds and declares that the right of the public to be present at all meetings of public bodies, and to witness in full detail all phases of the deliberation, policy formulation, and decision-making processes of public bodies, is vital to the enhancement and proper functioning of the democratic process. Secrecy in public affairs undermines public trust in government and diminishes the public’s effectiveness in fulfilling its role in a democratic society. Therefore, it is the public policy of this State to ensure that citizens have adequate advance notice of, and the right to attend, all meetings of public bodies at which any business affecting the public is discussed or acted upon—except in specific circumstances where public interest or individual privacy rights would be clearly endangered by disclosure.”

At its core, OPMA embodies a fundamental democratic principle: government business should be transparent, accessible, and conducted openly. Citizens should never be left guessing about the actions or intentions of their elected or appointed officials. OPMA explicitly forbids governing bodies from holding secret or undisclosed meetings.

Given this clear mandate, attempts by officials to circumvent OPMA’s transparency requirements should raise serious questions about the motives and integrity of those involved.

On April 10, 2025, the Berkeley Heights Recreation Commission Director sent an email inviting:

• Berkeley Heights Board of Education Members
• BHPS Superintendent
• BHPS Athletic Director
• Berkeley Heights Town Council Members
• Berkeley Heights Mayor
• Berkeley Heights Township Administrator
• Three Berkeley Heights Recreation Commission Members

to attend a private tour of Lower Columbia Park, explicitly urging attendance “as BH residents” to discuss completed projects and future plans.

Red flags, anyone?

Alarmingly, while the Township Administrator and several Council members eagerly embraced and commended the Recreation Director’s initiative, only one official demonstrated a clear understanding of OPMA’s requirements. Ms. Joly astutely recognized this proposed “tour” as a likely violation of OPMA—specifically noting that no public notice had been provided despite the involvement of multiple government agencies.

Ms. Joly further emphasized crucial unresolved issues:

1. The absence of finalized written agreements concerning the Columbia Park lease, noting the Board of Education had yet to review even a draft.
2. The necessity for a well-publicized official acknowledgment and apology from the Township regarding prior actions.
3. Her concern that this event appeared to be another calculated political effort designed to rehabilitate the Township’s public image rather than genuinely inform the community.

Why wasn’t this tour openly advertised to the entire community?

Had the Recreation Director simply included public notice, the ethical integrity and transparency of this meeting wouldn’t be questioned today.

Unfortunately, episodes like these erode public trust. Actions that skirt transparency create lasting doubt about the moral and ethical compass guiding our local officials. The trust once placed in our Township’s leadership has, regrettably, been severely compromised.

Full Email Exchange

Our Commitment to Ethical Journalism