John’s Notes on the 06/26/2025 BHPSNJ BOE Agenda

Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this article indicated that the BA Salary was prorated – that was incorrect.  The salary listed is the annual salary.

On June 26th, the Berkeley Heights Board of Education is set to hold one of its most packed — and least transparent — meetings of the year. And unless you’re watching closely, you might not even realize what’s about to get pushed through.

In one meeting, the Board plans to:

• Start the process for a full-scale district-wide referendum by submitting nearly 20 separate facility projects to the state.

• Approve the Business Administrator’s new contract — quietly hiring a critical position to oversee district finances.

• Push through dozens of personnel moves, stipends, summer curriculum contracts, special education placements, vendor renewals, legal agreements, and outside counsel contracts.

The Referendum Moves Forward — With Zero Financial Disclosure

The referendum authorization covers nearly every possible project across the district: STEM lab renovations, security upgrades, new roofs, parking lots, drainage work, media center renovations — you name it.

What’s not being shared? Any price tag. Not a single dollar amount. No tax impact estimates. No public discussion about which projects are actually needed versus which are nice to have. The Board plans to approve submitting the full package to the state for review — quietly moving the referendum forward — without offering any real details to the community.

This is how referendums often work in New Jersey: start quietly, push the paperwork forward behind closed doors, and engage the public later — once most of the decisions are already baked in.

Security Upgrades? Media Centers? Everything, Everywhere, All at Once.

A closer look at the referendum list shows the same pattern repeated building after building. Every single school — from the high school to the early childhood center — is listed for “Security/Technology Upgrades” and “Media Center Renovations.”

That’s six separate security upgrade projects. Six separate media center renovations. But absolutely no information about what any of it actually means. What “security upgrades” are we talking about? New locks? Entry systems? Cameras? Full building redesigns? And for the media centers — is this new furniture or full-scale construction? The district hasn’t said.

Voters are being asked to simply trust that every school somehow needs both security and media center work at the same time — with no explanation of why, how much, or whether any of it is even necessary.

No Scope. No Explanation. Just Vague Labels.

Beyond listing which buildings are being included, the referendum submission provides no specifics about what these projects actually involve. “Security upgrades” could mean anything from replacing locks to multi-million dollar building modifications. “Media center renovations” might mean updated furniture — or full structural rebuilds. The district offers no description, no justification, and no documentation of why these upgrades are being proposed for every building at once.

For a referendum that will ultimately be funded by taxpayers, the lack of any defined scope raises obvious questions about how decisions are being made behind closed doors — and how much of this work is truly necessary versus simply opportunistic.

The Business Administrator Contract: No Discussion, No Review

Also on the agenda is a new contract for the district’s incoming Business Administrator. The agenda lists a salary of $135,000, starting August 18th.

Like much of the agenda, the contract is being presented with no public discussion.

And this isn’t a minor detail.

The Business Administrator plays a central role in managing district finances and will directly oversee much of the upcoming referendum process. Yet this contract — like so many others — is being quietly approved without any public review or accountability.

Last week, Shauna wrote the Board asking that the open the decision on the Business Administrator to the public for input-

but it appears the decision had already been made.

This is particularly concerning given the district’s recent track record. Over the past several years, Berkeley Heights has cycled through multiple Business Administrators — both of whom created significant problems: inaccurate financial information given to both the Board and the public, repeated stonewalling of basic budget requests, and an openly hostile approach toward legal public records requests. OPRA requests for budget data have repeatedly been met with improper denials or heavy redactions, making it nearly impossible for the public to independently verify what’s going on with district spending.

Despite years of these transparency failures, the Board is now preparing to rubber-stamp another business office contract — while simultaneously preparing to hand that office control over millions of dollars in potential referendum spending.

Outside Counsel Continues Handling Transparency Disputes

The agenda also quietly re-authorizes multiple legal services contracts for 2025-26, keeping outside law firms on retainer alongside the Board’s regular counsel. The Board is continuing agreements with Porzio, Bromberg & Newman at $235/hour, Busch Law Group at $185/hour, and Chaudry Law at $165/hour for special education legal work.

Busch Law Group, in particular, has regularly handled legal challenges tied to public records access, OPRA disputes, and transparency-related litigation — often defending the district’s improper denial of financial records and other public documents. These services are routinely handled behind closed doors, with the public seeing none of the legal arguments made on the district’s behalf and the arguments that are made often come across as fantastical.

One Meeting. No Public Engagement. Full Speed Ahead.

In one night, the Board of Education is preparing to:

• Launch a major referendum process without revealing the costs.

• Approve a major administrative contract with no public discussion.

• Expand outside legal contracts with no public oversight.

• Move forward on dozens of personnel and vendor contracts.

• Lock down key financial and policy decisions before summer break.

The timing isn’t subtle. These kinds of meetings are deliberately packed into late June — when families are distracted, schools are closing out the year, and most people aren’t paying attention. It allows major business to move forward while avoiding public debate.

Source Documentation

Read All Articles on BOE Agendas and Meetings

Subscribe to NJ21st For Free

Our Commitment to Ethical Journalism