After Rewatching the meeting, I think the board BROKE Roberts Rules of Order & “THEIR own board policy” on rules of running a meeting. Which I don’t know if that means the adoption in favor is null/void???
*Because Vice President MULVIHILL made a MOTION and got a proper SECOND to VOTE on “postponing the adoption of the bill to further discuss” which WAS accepted by the Chairwoman and properly seconded. ….According to “Robert’s Rules of Order” and the “BOARDS own policy on governance” the CHAIR must IMMEDIATELY ask if there is any discussion/debate and then move to a VOTE on HIS motion that was properly seconded and approved by the chair.* INSTEAD of calling for discussion/debate or a VOTE of HIS motion on the table the CHAIR MADE A MOTION OF HER OWN TO GO INTO “EXECUTIVE SESSION” which was seconded and she immediately called for a VOTE by VOICE in which only ONE unknown member voted “YAY”….and they all went into executive session for 45 mins!!! This broke many rules/procedures in which I believe CAN be challenged.
The FIRST motion that was already PROPERLY on the table needed to be addressed BEFORE her “NEW MOTION” which didn’t even ask for discussion/debate but instead just went IMMEDIATELY into a roll call VOICE vote. In order to go into Executive Session you MUST have a vote with a FULL MAJORITY in the affirmative. This did NOT happen and was an improper MOTION/ORDER to begin with.*
(It will be interesting to see if the board meeting MINUTES will properly reflect the record)
**my point is I thought under “Roberts Rules of Order” once a motion was made and properly seconded the chair COULDN’T entertain ANOTHER motion before voting on the ORIGINAL motion on the table!!! For the record, there wasn’t a “substitute motion/amended motion” on his original motion. Instead the CHAIR TOTALLY broke the rules and didn’t allow HIS motion to be voted on!! In fact HER motion NEVER got a RECORDED MAJORITY vote in favor to enter into Executive Session.*
***In Addition- when the chair broke the rules by putting HER OWN MOTION to go into “executive session” which was followed by a second…..a FULL MAJORITY RECORDED VOTE not a “voice voice” is needed in order to properly go into an Executive Session. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN!! ***
****Furthermore, the CHAIR is being instructed on how to RUN the meeting by ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER named “Arcelio Aponte”. He is acting as the “unofficial FACILITATOR” by whispering to THE CHAIRWOMAN on how to run the meeting & what she should say!!! This is evident as u can hear HIM on “HOT MIC” following President Goldenberg’s yes vote. He seems to have a distain for members of the Public in the audience and instructs the President Golfenberg repeatedly on what to say. I found his comments to be Isela serving and intimidating.
(board member Aponte can he heard starting at the 4:48:09 min mark in the video until the very end)
I know the chair CAN receive guidance by someone on how to run the meeting BUT I didn’t think it could be done by another “bias” Board Member. Is board member Aponte the designated FACILITATOR?? Usually guidance is given to the chair/president by an ATTORNEY and/or a properly appointed FACILITATOR?!? ****
🤬I’m gonna try and do some more research and fact finding because this is insanity!!! 🤬
✔️ISSUE #2
Does anyone know if the board has provided the public an understanding as to WHY many Board Members are still ABLE to participate at monthly meetings REMOTELY?!?! This is insanity & needs to be stopped!!!! The State Board of Education only has ONE meeting each month. It’s not that big of an ask to demand all voting members be REQUIRED to be IN PERSON ONCE a MONTH in order for their vote to count. In addition, all members VOTED in FAVOR of the dates and times of their FUTURE meetings in which members agreed to the schedule and was adopted by ALL Board Members. That being said, there is no circumstance that I can see as to why half of the members are unable to attend these dates and times for the meetings IN PERSON being that they have proper advanced notice and in fact voted in favor of the meetings dates and times!! It’s a DISGRACE and it needs to be changed! Depending on if the board even has an a policy already regarding this matter, Maybe the Board needs to pass a new policy requiring members to be PRESENT to ALL MONTHLY MEETINGS!!! I’m sure they are going to say we agreed to a “hybrid” schedule but I would further point out a need for a proper QUORUM in order to legally run a meeting. How does one define a QUORUM in a hybrid type meeting?
✔️ISSUE #3
Does anyone know if the board has a policy on attendance to the meetings regarding board members? If not, the board needs to answer as to why this board, as POWERFUL as they are, doesn’t have such a policy. If they DO in fact have a policy on board member attendance, what is it?
I have many questions as it relates to a particular the board member’s attendance………
*Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins* has been ABSENT for 6 out of the 8 last meetings. (ie) absent 75% of 2023 board meetings. The public needs to know how this member can ETHICALLY serve on this board and vote on matters so crucial with this attendance record!?! NO member who took an oath to serve on this board can ethically or in good faith believe they are fulfilling those obligations with only being PRESENT in meetings 25% of the 2023 session. Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins was ABSENT for every meeting EXCEPT -
*May 3, 2023
*August 2, 2023 (the last meeting in which the vote was so close and she voted YES) ⤵️
————————————————
January 11, 2023 - Absent ❌
February 1, 2023 - Absent ❌
March 1, 2023 - Absent ❌
April 5, 2023 - Absent ❌
*May 3, 2023 - Present * ✅
June 7, 2023 - Absent ❌
July 12, 2023 - Absent ❌
*August 2, 2023 - Present* ✅
How is this acceptable? It is my position that the Board needs to inform the public about their attendance policy. In addition, I personally think the public is deserving as to the reasons for her absences. I have many ethical concerns of the fact PATTERNS regarding this members attendance and being able to do the people’s work she was sworn to do in good faith.*
—————————————-
ISSUE #3 (Part 2)
** The State Board of Education also has different committee meetings and chairs. **
-According to the Board’s website…..
*Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins* is the “CHAIR” of the “Social and Emotional Learning Commitee.”
-According to the Board’s website…..
SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING COMMITTEE-
This COMMITTEE will explore the issue of student safety and security in education with Department staff within the context of Topics such as EQUITY, early childhood learning, CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM, student suspension and special education and make RECOMMENDATIONS to the State Board and the Commissioner regarding POLICY CHANGES and REGULATORY CHANGES to the Administrative Code.
⁉️🤨 I am seeking more information on this particular Committee given the scope and purpose of the committee aligning with the NEW POLICY AND GUIDELINES that passed by Majority vote on August 2, 2023 and what ROLE
Mrs.Fatimah Burnam-Watkins as CHAIR of this committee had. Given her attendance or “lack there of” to regularly scheduled monthly State Board of Education Meetings and in particular her recorded votes of YES to the new policy/guidelines I am concerned. Does anyone know where to obtain the different COMMITTEE meetings agendas/attendance/minutes?
*Based on the facts available to the public I believe more information needs to be provided as to Mrs.Fatimah Burnam-Watkins role on any committee and what assistance she provided with regards to the New Policy and Guidelines adopted at August 2, 2023.*🤔
🗣️🗣️I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but as a concerned constituent I wanted to provide MY input, personal thoughts, and outstanding questions regarding what took place at August 2, 2023 New Jersey State Board of Education meeting. 🗣️🗣️
Let me add the NJ government has very sick people inside and corrupt!
Meanwhile https://open.substack.com/pub/frederickrsmith/p/nude-jersey-shore
#HomeschoolNow
Sounds like Hitler and his regime. Vote Red people!
✔️ISSUE #1
After Rewatching the meeting, I think the board BROKE Roberts Rules of Order & “THEIR own board policy” on rules of running a meeting. Which I don’t know if that means the adoption in favor is null/void???
*Because Vice President MULVIHILL made a MOTION and got a proper SECOND to VOTE on “postponing the adoption of the bill to further discuss” which WAS accepted by the Chairwoman and properly seconded. ….According to “Robert’s Rules of Order” and the “BOARDS own policy on governance” the CHAIR must IMMEDIATELY ask if there is any discussion/debate and then move to a VOTE on HIS motion that was properly seconded and approved by the chair.* INSTEAD of calling for discussion/debate or a VOTE of HIS motion on the table the CHAIR MADE A MOTION OF HER OWN TO GO INTO “EXECUTIVE SESSION” which was seconded and she immediately called for a VOTE by VOICE in which only ONE unknown member voted “YAY”….and they all went into executive session for 45 mins!!! This broke many rules/procedures in which I believe CAN be challenged.
The FIRST motion that was already PROPERLY on the table needed to be addressed BEFORE her “NEW MOTION” which didn’t even ask for discussion/debate but instead just went IMMEDIATELY into a roll call VOICE vote. In order to go into Executive Session you MUST have a vote with a FULL MAJORITY in the affirmative. This did NOT happen and was an improper MOTION/ORDER to begin with.*
(It will be interesting to see if the board meeting MINUTES will properly reflect the record)
**my point is I thought under “Roberts Rules of Order” once a motion was made and properly seconded the chair COULDN’T entertain ANOTHER motion before voting on the ORIGINAL motion on the table!!! For the record, there wasn’t a “substitute motion/amended motion” on his original motion. Instead the CHAIR TOTALLY broke the rules and didn’t allow HIS motion to be voted on!! In fact HER motion NEVER got a RECORDED MAJORITY vote in favor to enter into Executive Session.*
***In Addition- when the chair broke the rules by putting HER OWN MOTION to go into “executive session” which was followed by a second…..a FULL MAJORITY RECORDED VOTE not a “voice voice” is needed in order to properly go into an Executive Session. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN!! ***
****Furthermore, the CHAIR is being instructed on how to RUN the meeting by ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER named “Arcelio Aponte”. He is acting as the “unofficial FACILITATOR” by whispering to THE CHAIRWOMAN on how to run the meeting & what she should say!!! This is evident as u can hear HIM on “HOT MIC” following President Goldenberg’s yes vote. He seems to have a distain for members of the Public in the audience and instructs the President Golfenberg repeatedly on what to say. I found his comments to be Isela serving and intimidating.
(board member Aponte can he heard starting at the 4:48:09 min mark in the video until the very end)
I know the chair CAN receive guidance by someone on how to run the meeting BUT I didn’t think it could be done by another “bias” Board Member. Is board member Aponte the designated FACILITATOR?? Usually guidance is given to the chair/president by an ATTORNEY and/or a properly appointed FACILITATOR?!? ****
🤬I’m gonna try and do some more research and fact finding because this is insanity!!! 🤬
✔️ISSUE #2
Does anyone know if the board has provided the public an understanding as to WHY many Board Members are still ABLE to participate at monthly meetings REMOTELY?!?! This is insanity & needs to be stopped!!!! The State Board of Education only has ONE meeting each month. It’s not that big of an ask to demand all voting members be REQUIRED to be IN PERSON ONCE a MONTH in order for their vote to count. In addition, all members VOTED in FAVOR of the dates and times of their FUTURE meetings in which members agreed to the schedule and was adopted by ALL Board Members. That being said, there is no circumstance that I can see as to why half of the members are unable to attend these dates and times for the meetings IN PERSON being that they have proper advanced notice and in fact voted in favor of the meetings dates and times!! It’s a DISGRACE and it needs to be changed! Depending on if the board even has an a policy already regarding this matter, Maybe the Board needs to pass a new policy requiring members to be PRESENT to ALL MONTHLY MEETINGS!!! I’m sure they are going to say we agreed to a “hybrid” schedule but I would further point out a need for a proper QUORUM in order to legally run a meeting. How does one define a QUORUM in a hybrid type meeting?
✔️ISSUE #3
Does anyone know if the board has a policy on attendance to the meetings regarding board members? If not, the board needs to answer as to why this board, as POWERFUL as they are, doesn’t have such a policy. If they DO in fact have a policy on board member attendance, what is it?
I have many questions as it relates to a particular the board member’s attendance………
*Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins* has been ABSENT for 6 out of the 8 last meetings. (ie) absent 75% of 2023 board meetings. The public needs to know how this member can ETHICALLY serve on this board and vote on matters so crucial with this attendance record!?! NO member who took an oath to serve on this board can ethically or in good faith believe they are fulfilling those obligations with only being PRESENT in meetings 25% of the 2023 session. Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins was ABSENT for every meeting EXCEPT -
*May 3, 2023
*August 2, 2023 (the last meeting in which the vote was so close and she voted YES) ⤵️
————————————————
January 11, 2023 - Absent ❌
February 1, 2023 - Absent ❌
March 1, 2023 - Absent ❌
April 5, 2023 - Absent ❌
*May 3, 2023 - Present * ✅
June 7, 2023 - Absent ❌
July 12, 2023 - Absent ❌
*August 2, 2023 - Present* ✅
How is this acceptable? It is my position that the Board needs to inform the public about their attendance policy. In addition, I personally think the public is deserving as to the reasons for her absences. I have many ethical concerns of the fact PATTERNS regarding this members attendance and being able to do the people’s work she was sworn to do in good faith.*
—————————————-
ISSUE #3 (Part 2)
** The State Board of Education also has different committee meetings and chairs. **
-According to the Board’s website…..
*Mrs. Fatimah Burnam-Watkins* is the “CHAIR” of the “Social and Emotional Learning Commitee.”
-According to the Board’s website…..
SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING COMMITTEE-
This COMMITTEE will explore the issue of student safety and security in education with Department staff within the context of Topics such as EQUITY, early childhood learning, CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM, student suspension and special education and make RECOMMENDATIONS to the State Board and the Commissioner regarding POLICY CHANGES and REGULATORY CHANGES to the Administrative Code.
⁉️🤨 I am seeking more information on this particular Committee given the scope and purpose of the committee aligning with the NEW POLICY AND GUIDELINES that passed by Majority vote on August 2, 2023 and what ROLE
Mrs.Fatimah Burnam-Watkins as CHAIR of this committee had. Given her attendance or “lack there of” to regularly scheduled monthly State Board of Education Meetings and in particular her recorded votes of YES to the new policy/guidelines I am concerned. Does anyone know where to obtain the different COMMITTEE meetings agendas/attendance/minutes?
*Based on the facts available to the public I believe more information needs to be provided as to Mrs.Fatimah Burnam-Watkins role on any committee and what assistance she provided with regards to the New Policy and Guidelines adopted at August 2, 2023.*🤔
🗣️🗣️I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but as a concerned constituent I wanted to provide MY input, personal thoughts, and outstanding questions regarding what took place at August 2, 2023 New Jersey State Board of Education meeting. 🗣️🗣️
Warm Wishes-
Jess ❤️
done