The January 2012 issue of the NJASA Legal Research Publication Program is now available online to subscribers. This month’s Administrative Guide is the fifth part of a five-part series exploring the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). Part One reviewed the history of the OPMA, as well as the effect of recent rulings of the Appellate Division related to the use of electronic and telephonic communication in the conduct of board business. Part Two focused on closed or executive session board discussions, and what board members should do if they believe the OPMA has been violated. Part Three reviewed OPMA compliance issues, including the contents and taking of board meeting minutes, as well as the public comment period permitted during board meetings. In also discussed lawsuits to challenge board actions taken at meetings which are alleged to have occurred in violation of the OPMA. Part Four reviewed the legal questions presented under the OPMA as a result of board member use of electronic communications.  This final part of the series will offer guidance to school officials on how to correct procedural deficiencies.

In addition, the School News Briefs reviews two new decisions. In one case, teachers who received stipends as content specialists were entitled to receive stipends for pension credit.  In another case, the Commissioner ruled that  the Executive County Superintendent does not have authority to resolve a dispute between boards of education over a joint purchasing agreement.

The January  2012  Special Education Bulletin reviews four recent cases including one case in which a board was obligated to continue the out-of-district placement of a child under the “stay put” provision despite the parent’s revocation of consent to that placement.