One notable issue raised during the meeting was the involuntary reassignment of high school guidance counselor Dena DeSantis, which sparked significant public and board member opposition. DeSantis, identified as the most senior member of the high school guidance department, voiced her objections, emphasizing her extensive experience and the perceived lack of transparency and rationale behind the transfer. She was informed of her reassignment only two days before the end of the school year, with no prior discussion from her direct supervisor, Mrs. Gupta. Instead, Mrs. DeFranco communicated the decision, citing DeSantis’s relevant certification as the reason for the move.

DeSantis highlighted that her reassignment contradicted policy 4130, which governs the assignment and transfer of support staff based on qualifications and operational needs. She argued that her successful tenure as a high school guidance counselor should have been factored into the decision. The reassignment meant that the high school counseling department would be staffed by four new hires with less experience and training, raising concerns about operational efficiency and student support.

Several members of the public, including students and parents, expressed their support for DeSantis during the meeting. One parent, Cindy Jo Binbush, described DeSantis as a nurturing presence for her children and stressed that the reassignment would negatively impact students. Another speaker, Troy Newon, underscored the importance of guidance counselors during the college application process, urging immediate communication to families about changes in the guidance counseling staff.

In response to these concerns, Superintendent Dr. Rui Dionisio acknowledged the issues raised and assured the community that the administration would look into the matter. However, the board did not provide a definitive resolution during the meeting.

The meeting also addressed budget constraints due to a substantial reduction in federal funding, exceeding $250,000. This shortfall necessitated difficult decisions regarding personnel, with the board managing to eliminate only one ancillary position by not appointing replacements for two vacancies and restructuring the ancillary model for student assessments. Board members emphasized the importance of balancing the budget while minimizing the impact on students, with the possibility of reevaluating student needs and returning to the board if more services were required in the future.

Concerns about transparency in hiring practices were also raised during the meeting. A board member questioned whether the district had policies requiring job positions to be advertised before being filled. The district’s attorney clarified that New Jersey law does not mandate the posting of open positions, allowing discretion to the superintendent and board regarding transfers and filling vacancies.

Additionally, the board discussed the district goals for the upcoming year, with some members voicing opposition to the goals, stating they mirrored those from the previous year and lacked changes. Specific suggestions included incorporating additional language programs and enhancing resources to improve state test scores. A focus on Career and Technical Education (CTE) was highlighted, with a member advocating for a structured four-year coding program to equip students with relevant skills.

The board also addressed community feedback on school lunches and food services, with plans to expand feedback opportunities for students, parents, and staff regarding food choices. The administrative team is reviewing cell phone policies within schools and plans to present recommendations to the board in September.

Another topic discussed was the performance and growth of multilingual learners (MLs) within the district. The assistant superintendent for education, Dr. Lactina, presented data from the ACCESS for ELLs assessment, which evaluates English language proficiency among multilingual learners. The district achieved a 97.5% participation rate in the assessments, surpassing the required 95%. The presentation highlighted the correlation between the number of years students spend in the district and their language proficiency, with students who remain for five years or more generally exhibiting higher proficiency levels.

The meeting also included updates on the district logo rebranding process, with feedback from community surveys indicating varied preferences regarding the current logo. One-third of respondents favored no change, while another third supported an update or complete redesign. The district is committed to engaging the community throughout the rebranding process and plans to collect further feedback in the coming months.