from all eight towns to
Dec. 2 mediation session
Orders representatives
from all eight towns to
Dec. 2 mediation session
By dave benjamin
Staff Writer
A lawsuit filed by Marlboro has temporarily tied the hands of the Freehold Regional High School District Board of Education.
Meeting with the board on Nov. 18, FRHSD attorney Nathanya Simon told the members of the panel that U.S. District Court Judge Garrett E. Brown, sitting in Trenton, had determined that since any reapportionment of the board’s voting system will have a direct effect on all eight municipalities in the district, all of them need to appear before him to state their views on the matter.
Until that happens in early December, the judge ruled, the board may not vote on any substantive issues except financial matters that occur in the normal course of business and the board cannot do anything further to implement a student redistricting plan that was approved on Sept. 9.
In its lawsuit filed against the FRHSD board, Monmouth County Superintendent of Schools Michael Maddaluna and New Jersey Commissioner of Education William Librera, Marlboro’s representatives claimed that the results of the 2000 census require the board’s nine-point voting system to be recalculated.
Marlboro has specifically objected to the redistricting plan approved by the board in September that would assign some residents of Marlboro to Colts Neck High School effective September 2003.
Brown "indicated that the one-person, one-vote rule was as a matter of constitutional law from the Supreme Court (and) will require some apportionment based on the 2000 federal census as well as prior federal court action which was ruled upon by Judge (Alfred M.) Wolin (in 1998)," Simon said. "At this point we are under a temporary restraint."
Brown ordered that representatives of all eight towns proceed to mediation before federal magistrate Judge John J. Hughes on Dec. 2 to see if a constitutional resolution can be made.
Barring some type of agreement on Dec. 2, the parties are expected to appear before Brown on Dec. 5 at which time the judge will determine if the injunction he issued on Nov. 18 will be continued or be modified.
Simon said she thought Brown, in his action taken on Nov. 18, was very sensitive to the fact that the Freehold Regional High School District is very large and that there are a multitude of issues that need to be addressed on a regular monthly basis.
"Any type of restraint on us moving forward, based on this constitutional argument, is a very difficult one," the attorney said. "But on the other hand, he is very conscious of the constitutional require-ments for the way in which we operate. There will be plans submitted from all parties who wish to do so including the office of the Attorney General who is representing the county superintendent of schools and the commissioner of education."
Simon said that prior to the Nov. 18 board meeting she met informally with Superintendent of Schools James Wasser and board Vice President Marlene Caruso to discuss the judge’s ruling. She said Wasser agreed that unless something was a matter of absolute necessity such as appointing a person to a vacancy or appointing teachers to cover classes, or a financial matter that was truly necessary, the board would not vote on regular items of business.
Simon noted that representatives of Colts Neck, the Colts Neck Board of Education and Freehold Township attended the Nov. 18 court proceedings in Trenton with attorneys.
Reacting to the judge’s ruling on Nov. 18 to restrain the FRHSD board from voting on items of business or moving forward with the redistricting plan, Marlboro Councilman Barry Denkensohn said he was gratified with Brown’s decision "to enjoin any future action of the Freehold Regional High School District until equitable voting apportionment is modified for all of the sending towns."
Denkensohn said the school district should have reapportioned the voting points based on the 2000 census.
"It’s apparent based on the census of 2000 that not only was Marlboro’s population increased, but other townships. Marlboro’s was proportionately increased by a substantial margin percentage-wise, higher than any other town. There were other towns that were increased and some reduced as well. The regional board should have modified the voting apportionment on the board and they failed to do it."
Lance J. Kalik, the attorney representing Marlboro in the matter, said that in ordering the injunction on Nov. 18, "the court indicated that Marlboro likely has a reasonable probability of success on the merits of its lawsuit. The court also ordered Marlboro to name all of the constituent municipalities as parties to the lawsuit. We are pleased so far, but we need to ensure that a remedy is imposed that affords Marlboro citizens, and the citizens of other under-represented towns, their fair share of votes according to their population."
Under the board’s present nine-point voting system, the nine members of the board (two from Howell and one each from the other seven towns) cast votes with the following values: Howell, 2 points (1 point each); Marlboro, 1.4 points; Manalapan, 1.4 points; Freehold Township, 1.4 points; Freehold Borough, 0.9 points; Colts Neck, 0.9 points; Eng-lishtown, 0.5 points; and Farmingdale, 0.5 points.
In August, Kalik wrote to Maddaluna and suggested that based on the results of the 2000 census, those voting points should be changed to: Howell, 2.3 points; Marlboro, 1.7 points; Manalapan, 1.6 points; Freehold Township, 1.5 points; Colts Neck, 0.6 points; Freehold Borough, 0.5 points; Englishtown, 0.4 points; and Farmingdale, 0.4 points.
Maddaluna subsequently directed the board to make two changes — raising Marlboro’s vote from 1.4 to 1.5 points and reducing Freehold Borough’s vote from 0.9 to 0.8 points.
Brown’s ruling on Nov. 18 put that directive on hold and sent the entire matter to the Dec. 2 mediation session with representatives of all eight FRHSD communities.
Students from Howell attend the six schools in the Freehold Regional High School District.