Former South Brunswick BOE President Violated Ethics Act, Judge Rules In Preliminary Decision

SOUTH BRUNSWICK, NJ — A judge overseeing an ethics complaint against former South Brunswick Board of Education President Joyce Mehta found her actions violated the ethics acts, agreeing with the board's concerns on all counts.

According to the preliminary decision, Mehta violated the School Ethics Act by publicly disclosing confidential board information related to union negotiations, misrepresenting her communications with the board attorney, and publicly accusing the Superintendent of bullying and harassment.

Despite repeated warnings, Mehta’s actions compromised the board’s negotiating leverage, potentially costing the district millions, the ruling said.

Her defenses, including claims of transparency and free speech, were rejected as insufficient.

The complaint was filed with the School Ethics Commission (SEC) on April 29, 2022, by board members Mike Mitchell, Deepa Karthik, Raja Krishna, Ray Kuehner, Barry Nathanson, Dr. Smitha Raj, Lisa Rodgers, and Joseph Scaletti.

According to the complaint, around September 2021, the school district formed the Transportation/School Start Time Committee (Committee) to address the national driver shortage and rising costs.

There were eight unions representing the District’s employees, all eight of which had contracts that were expiring at the end of the 2021-22 school year.

“Due to the timing and the sensitive nature of the topic,” Superintendent Scott Feder “warned Committee members that they should not publicly release information that may damage the Board’s position during negotiations, as doing so could jeopardize the Board’s position” as it related to negotiations over instructional time, the complaint said.

However, Mehta “did not agree” with Feder’s position, as she felt the main aim was “to save costs by converting a two-tier system to a three-tier system, so that all staff would be fully aware of changes due to the new bus route,” the complaint said.

Feder sent a letter to Mehta on Jan. 11, 2022, describing his concerns. He explained that, despite giving her three specific warnings not to divulge that information, Mehta willfully did so, showing “complete disregard” for the effect it could have on the Board, the complaint said.

“I am not sure what else to tell you other than continuing to willfully violate Board confidentiality and putting this Board in a compromised position will only do more harm than has already been done,” Feder told Mehta in his letter.

He then asked the former BOE president to recuse herself from the matter.

After receiving Feder’s letter, Mehta contacted the Board’s attorney, Kerri A. Wright, Esq., forwarding several documents to her that were related to the interaction with Feder.

Subsequently, the Board received an invoice from Wright, which included two entries- a 54 minute telephone conference with Mehta and related document review on Jan 12, 2022; and a 20-minute telephone conference with Mehta on Jan. 13, 2022.

The invoices were added to the BOE’s discussion agenda for March 3, 2022.

When questioned during a retreat meeting, “Mehta refused to provide the Board with any information related to either” of the calls, asserting her belief that the conversations were confidential, though she later learned that was incorrect and “apologized for her initial evasiveness,” the complaint said.

During the March 3 meeting, Mehta was again reluctant to share the substance of her conversations with Wright, at one point indicating that she thought they had discussed a reorganization meeting that occurred on Jan. 6, 2022, and that “Robert’s Rules may have been the topic of discussion.”

“It is now known that during their phone conversations, Wright told Mehta that she had the right to seek legal advice, but that Wright’s client was the Board as an entity, not respondent herself,” the judge’s preliminary ruling said.

“Thus, it was explained to Mehta that the Board would have the right to know about the substance of any conversations Mehta had with Wright.”

During a March 10 meeting, Wright said she stood by her invoices and billing entries and expressed regret that Mehta had not been more forthcoming with the Board in the matter and that it had called into question her and her firm’s billing practices.

Before the March 15 special meeting, Mehta sent a letter to BOE members via her attorney that she would not step down from her position as Board President despite “recent negative press and some very concerning threats from individuals whom I will not identify in this letter.”

During the meeting Feder emphasized that “the issue dealt with Ms. Mehta misrepresenting to the Board and the public during the March 3, 2022 Board retreat the existence and substance of her conversations with the Board attorney, resulting in the inaccurate representation that [Wright] improperly charged the Board.”

He also emphasized the need for school officials to act with integrity, honesty, transparency, and an absolute willingness to accept accountability, the complaint said.

During her public statement Mehta admitted that confronted by other BOE members about conversations with [Wright], I was not forthcoming.”

She concluded by addressing Feder’s accusations against her, saying that “I will not be bullied by anyone[,] including [the] Superintendent[,] who is our employee and not our boss. This bullying, intimidation, and harassment has continued for some time, but it is time for it to end today,” the complaint said.

The judge ruled that Mehta violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(e) and the confidential information prong of subsection (g) when she intentionally divulged confidential information to the public despite being warned on multiple occasions that she should avoid doing so because it would very likely harm the board financially.

“Mehta’s blatant conduct was the precise kind of rogue, individual decision-making by a board member that N.J.S.A. 18A-12-24.1(e) contemplates and for which sanctions are made available,” the ruling said.

“Mehta’s decision to repeatedly ignore Feder’s explicit advice not to mention at public Committee meetings that the District/Board was considering later start times and reduced instructional time almost certainly harmed the Board’s negotiating position with the teachers’ union.”

The judge also ruled that Mehta violated the inaccurate information prong of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(g) when she misrepresented to the Board and public the existence and nature of her communications with the Board’s attorney, Wright, following Feder’s letter to her”

“In this case, there is no doubt that Mehta shared inaccurate information with the Board. Despite being an attorney herself and explicitly being told by Wright that the attorney-client privilege belonged to the Board as an entity and not to her personally, Mehta still somehow thought she could claim the privilege when questioned about what she and Wright had discussed over the phone,” the ruling said.

The preliminary ruling also said that Mehta violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(i) when she publicly accused Feder of pursuing the ethics investigation against her in an attempt to bully, harass, and intimidate her into resigning from her position as Board president.

“As previously noted, it must be asked whether there was deliberate action taken by the Mehta that undermines, opposes, harms, or compromises a school official’s ability to properly do their job,” the ruling said.

The judge also noted that Joyce's first amendment rights do not save her from punishment or consequences.

Overall, the judge granted the relief sought by the board members - namely a public censure.

The judge’s preliminary ruling will now be sent to the school Ethics Commission, the SEC, who may agree or disagree with the judge's decision or recommendations.

“You'll note on the last page of the decision that the judge walked through the reasons why the Board wants a public censure, specifically to hold Ms. Mehta accountable and to set the record straight on the improper nature of her actions that were all taken in public,” BOE President Laura Hernandez said in a public statement.

Hernandez further said the BOE will keep the public informed about all future developments on the case.

The full 28-page ruling can be found on the school district website. Click here.

Have a correction or news tip? Email sarah.salvadore@patch.com