BOE POTPOURRI NEW

Back to the real world!

Yesterday three blogs caught my attention. I will comment on Bernice's and Dan's reports on the HPC in the next day or so. Education is the real news today and first my attention is locally and the next hone will be on the State. Meanwhile read the complete Ledger article and editorial. All that glitters is not gold.

Marie's posting of the emails pertaining to the phantom emergency BOE meeting although incomplete is a must read for every citizen interested in honesty in government. Perhaps the phrase "honesty in government' is an oxymoron.

There are several ethical matters that are outstanding. Some I called attention to at the time, including the Board's Counsel email warning of potential suits if they attended the meeting. I considered that to be a threat since one of the items was the discharging that firm as the BOE's legal representative. Hamlin's statement that there was a problem because he as the board's lawyer had not been advised of the meting is just bull. His firm is only a consultant not a voting member of the Board.

I find that Logan-Leach correspondence with Mark A, Tabakin of Weiner Lesniak suggestive of a premeditated plan to sandbag the Board members who seemed unaware that there was a plan to hire that firm. From these few emails there does not seem to be evidence of due diligence although I am sure the motions may have been done. Since there have been in the past talk of that firm's rumored overcharging the city for legal work with a subsequent adjustment that it would be even be considered without investigation if there was truth to those "reports".I am sure that these investigation reports will be made available if requested. Perhaps the BOE leadership may have been influenced by one of Weiner Lesniak's principles being the acknowledged political leader of Union County .

I would suggest that the BOE reexamine the continued employment of both firms in an legal capacity.

The emails from other board members that they would not attend again indicates that they put their own interests ahead of the fiduciary responsibility they sought when they ran for office. Shame, in the USA being at a meeting doesn't placed one in jeopardy. Only one's action at the meeting merits accountability. If they were afraid of Hamlin suing them as individuals all they had to do was vote no or abstain.

The BOE must openly prove that they are qualified to be entrusted with the operations largest financial burden.

9:AM; I may have erroneously inferred that Weisner Lesniak were the new BOE lawyers. I have been corrected by email and I am happy to post it. " I want to let you know that it appears in your post that Weisner Lesniak works for the district, they don't. They weren't renewed awhile back but they did send a letter of interest when the BOE recently advertised their need for a new law firm. This happened after the May 7th aborted meeting. The lawyers that were hired instead are Pickett and Craig of Roselle."

I apologize for the false information. However the fact remains that a member of that firm was advising, although unofficially by email, the President of the BOE prior to the May 7th meeting.