SEA ISLE CITY — When money is involved, the state’s top court says the removal of a school board member for suing the board is appropriate.

After arguing the case on May 5, the New Jersey Supreme Court July 21 handed down a unanimous ruling that stated former board president William Kennedy was appropriately removed from office due to litigation he initiated against the board regarding his autistic son Matthew’s education.

The court found that because Kennedy’s lawsuit requested reimbursement of costs and attorney fees of nearly $100,000, he was justly relieved of his post.

“When a due process claim includes a request for specific monetary relief, we believe that a line has been crossed and a substantial conflict between the board member and the board can be found to exist,” the court’s ruling stated.

Kennedy was originally elected to the Sea Isle City Board of Education in 2001 and resigned in June 2003.

After he resigned, Kennedy and his wife Phyllis filed a request in 2003 with the state Department of Education for a due process hearing regarding their son’s individualized educational program (IEP), which refers to the educational program to be provided to a child with a disability.

According to court documents, the Kennedy’s entered into a settlement agreement with the board in April 2004 at which time Kennedy was again elected to the board for another three-year term.

Then, in March 2005 the Kennedy’s again filed for additional hearings citing the board’s failure to adhere to the earlier settlement agreement regarding their son’s education.

The Kennedys were seeking enforcement of the agreement as well as payment to Phyllis Kennedy for educational services she provided to her son that the school should have provided, along with other specific costs and fees.

When these applications were filed, the board immediately asked the state Commissioner of Education William Librera to find that Kennedy had created a conflict of interest and to remove him from the board.

The commissioner transferred the matters to an Administrative Law Judge who decided in May 2005 that Kennedy’s actions were permissible under school ethics rules, that allow school officials to protect their or their child’s personal interests.

Librera rejected the judge’s recommendation stating that Kennedy’s actions created a conflict of interest under another state law that prevents board members from suing their boards.

Kennedy was removed from office.

In its opinion, delivered by Justice Jaynee LaVecchia, the Supreme Court noted some contradictions within state laws governing these matters.

One section allows board members to represent themselves in negotiations or proceedings concerning their own interests, while another section prohibits members from having any claim against their board.

Kennedy claimed in his appeal that the former cancelled out the latter, but the appeals court disagreed.

The recent Supreme Court opinion affirmed the appellate decision.

“We conclude that the two statutes can, and must, be harmonized,” the opinion stated.

The court said otherwise parents of children with disabilities might be precluded from board service.

The court held that not all disputes between parents of special education pupils and school districts require a board member’s removal from office.

“That said, we agree with the Commission’s determination that, in this matter, removal was necessary and appropriate because of concrete, pecuniary aspects to the dispute between the parties,” the opinion stated.

Kennedy is also this city’s former police chief who was forced to resign from that position earlier this year amid controversy surrounding an alleged affair with a subordinate employee in his department.

Contact Hart at (609) 886-8600 Ext 35 or at: jhart@cmcherald.com