The proposal to reduce the time allowed for public comments to three minutes per speaker was met with vocal opposition from members of the community. Andrew Lewis, president of the Old Bridge Education Association, expressed disappointment, arguing that such changes could erode public access and transparency. He criticized the board for previously ceasing to record committee meetings and altering the agenda posting schedule unfavorably. Lewis advocated for increased public involvement, stating that the community deserves more access to the decision-making process, not less.

Kelly Ellis Foster, a resident of Old Bridge, echoed these sentiments, urging the board to maintain the current five-minute period. Foster emphasized that reducing speaking time undermines the principles of representative governance and noted that public comments often include emotional appeals from parents and students. She argued that these should not be dismissed as they are essential components of civic discourse. Foster described public comment as a moment of accountability, insisting that the board should allow all voices to be heard.

In response to these concerns, a board member explained that the proposed policy changes were carefully considered and that public participation would still be encouraged through various channels, such as emails and committee meetings. The rationale for the time reduction was to manage meetings more efficiently, allowing for two public comment periods each totaling six minutes. Another member pointed out that informal settings, like committee meetings, could foster more dialogue without the constraint of time limits.

Despite the board’s explanations, some residents remained skeptical, questioning whether the time limits would apply universally or if exceptions could be made for more issues, such as the superintendent search or redistricting. The board’s legal advisor clarified that while the three-minute limit would be standard, the board could choose to extend speaking time in critical situations at their discretion. This issue is set to be revisited in two weeks, allowing for further discussion and potential adjustments.

Another topic discussed was the selection of a new food vendor, Palmonian Food Service Management, for the 2025-2026 school year, with options for four one-year extensions. The decision followed a formal competitive contracting procedure, including a pre-proposal conference and food sampling session. A humorous anecdote from a board member about enjoying the food samples added a light-hearted touch to the otherwise procedural discussion. The board confirmed that the current prices for lunch and breakfast were used as a basis for the Request for Proposal, though future increases were hinted at, sparking concerns about budget management within the district.

In matters of character education, the district received accolades from Dr. Hoker and Lauri Kleti of the New Jersey Alliance for Social Emotional and Character Development. Old Bridge Township Schools were recognized as one of three National Districts of Character in the nation, with a commendation for having the most schools of character in New Jersey for 2025. The board celebrated with recognitions for individual contributions, including students and teachers who excelled in service-learning projects and art contests.

The meeting also addressed practical concerns, such as the approval of finance items related to transportation facilities and workers’ compensation settlements. One board member highlighted the necessity of renting space for the transportation division to maintain the bus fleet and expressed the importance of balancing benefits in shared service arrangements. Discussions touched on the district’s self-insurance status, with clarifications promised for future meetings.