annielou said:
No one would give a hoot about her attendance record were it not for the skinhead comment

The way that the attendance records came up on Nextdoor is that Robin Baker has missed 16 of 35 meetings, or 45.71%, since becoming a BOE member on Jan.3, 2018. SLM has the second worst attendance record. 

cramer said:

annielou said:
No one would give a hoot about her attendance record were it not for the skinhead comment

The way that the attendance records came up on Nextdoor is that Robin Baker has missed 16 of 35 meetings, or 45.71%, since becoming a BOE member on Jan.3, 2018. SLM has the second worse attendance record. 

And her record in the past year or so is significantly worse than earlier years.  I think attendance does matter, both for voting and for understanding the issues.

But yes, each of us is more likely to forgive the poor attendance record if we like the candidate...

cramer said:

She has missed 26 of 120 BOE meetings, or 21.67%, since she became a BOE member Jan. 7, 2014.  She missed three meetings in a row - May 1, May 11, May 15, 2017. Per BOE rules and regulations, members can be dismissed if they miss three meetings in a row.  (This information is from Nextdoor where someone posted the attendance records of every BOE member.)

Thank you for the information, cramer.

The bylaws say that “a member who fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the Board without good cause may be removed from office on the affirmative votes of six of the remaining Board members.” 

Were all three meetings in May 2017 considered regular meetings? (The bylaws define what a meeting is, but not what a “regular” meeting is. As a layman, I’d interpret that to mean the monthly meeting, and elsewhere the bylaws distinguish regular meetings from “workshops and special Board meetings.”)

ETA: The online minutes refer only to the monthly meetings as “Regular Meeting.”

cramer said:

The way that the attendance records came up on Nextdoor is that Robin Baker has missed 16 of 35 meetings, or 45.71%, since becoming a BOE member on Jan.3, 2018. SLM has the second worst attendance record. 

Just saw that spreadsheet via Nextdoor. For the record, it shows Javier Farfan with the second-worst rate, at 27 percent.

And the only three absences in a tow highlighted are SLM's even though others had the same issue.  You draw your own conclusions.

Steve said:
And the only three absences in a tow highlighted are SLM's even though others had the same issue.  You draw your own conclusions.

Yes, Robin Baker had two streaks where she missed three meetings in a row (although they were not all regular meetings, per DaveSchmidt's observation.)  They were not highlighted. All of the comments on Nextdoor following the OP's pertained to Robin Baker and not SLM. 

DaveSchmidt said:

cramer said:

She has missed 26 of 120 BOE meetings, or 21.67%, since she became a BOE member Jan. 7, 2014.  She missed three meetings in a row - May 1, May 11, May 15, 2017. Per BOE rules and regulations, members can be dismissed if they miss three meetings in a row.  (This information is from Nextdoor where someone posted the attendance records of every BOE member.)

Thank you for the information, cramer.
The bylaws say that “a member who fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the Board without good cause may be removed from office on the affirmative votes of six of the remaining Board members.” 
Were all three meetings in May 2017 considered regular meetings? (The bylaws define what a meeting is, but not what a “regular” meeting is. As a layman, I’d interpret that to mean the monthly meeting, and elsewhere the bylaws distinguish regular meetings from “workshops and special Board meetings.”)
ETA: The online minutes refer only to the monthly meetings as “Regular Meeting.”

Board Meetings

The Board meets on the third Monday of each month, except when precluded by a holiday. The Board, from time to time, will add additional meetings. Public sessions of all meetings of the Board are held at the Board Administration building, located at 525 Academy Street in Maplewood, and convene at 7:30 PM.

(From the SOMSD website)

Frequently, school boards hold special meetings for things like student disciplinary or residency hearings, where there's no need for all members to attend, only a quorum. In some districts it's common for some members to attend almost all of these and others to attend almost none, sometimes by personal preference/specialization, sometimes because of work obligations (special meetings usually come up on short notice). I'd look very warily at someone who was missing even a very small number of regular meetings, but not necessarily special meetings. (It depends on their topic; if you're skipping a bunch of budget workshop meetings, that's bad in a way skipping discipline hearings isn't.) 

Someone posted on FB that the Commissioner of Education has ruled on the appeal. She will receive a 30 day suspension. 

Turning to the appropriate penalty, and while in no way minimizing the appellant’s conduct, the Commissioner finds that the SEC’s recommended penalty of a six-month suspension is not supported by the evidence in the record and is inconsistent with penalties recommended by the SEC in other cases. In recommending the extreme penalty of a six-month suspension, the SEC assessed the appellant’s conduct during the traffic stop and her testimony before the Commission in an unduly harsh manner. Moreover, the weight afforded to the aggravating factors by the SEC was disproportionate to that afforded to the mitigating circumstances in light of the nature of the offense.

Specifically, the Commissioner disagrees with the SEC’s conclusion that “seemingly without any reasonable basis” the appellant stated “[a]nd I am scared of cops because you guys hurt black people.” The SEC did not give due consideration to the fact that the appellant testified that she was afraid and, more importantly, the SEC appeared to minimize the anxiety the appellant experienced during the traffic stop. Whether the SEC believes the appellant should or should not feel a certain say is immaterial here; rather, in evaluating the appropriate penalty, the motivation behind appellant’s behavior must be fully considered.

The full decision is available in The Village Green: https://villagegreennj.com/election/18-months-after-viral-video-boe-candidate-still-awaiting-ethics-appeal/

Here’s the rest of that second paragraph I quoted. (I’m copying by hand, so I wanted to post what I had before risking deleting everything by mistake.)

Although the appellant’s use of inappropriate language was not necessary, it was also not unreasonable for the appellant to feel insulted when Officer Horst offered to call an ambulance given her mindset that morning. The appellant’s testimony at the hearing about why she felt the way she did (i.e., her concern for her personal safety as a black woman during a traffic stop; her stress about getting her kids to school; her irrational response to her interaction with Officer Horst) was overall very compelling in light of the circumstances.

Personally, I don't want a person on the Board who becomes near hysterical, if not hysterical, at a traffic stop.

It's your kids, vote as you will; but, don't you want a more level headed person on the Board?

Just one man's thoughts here in Maplewood.

TomR

Tom_R said:

It's your kids, vote as you will;

It’s not my kid anymore (he aged out of the district), but thanks for the permission. I’ll take it on Nov. 5.

Today, it was enough to have a level-headed person in the state education commissioner’s seat.

DaveSchmidt said:

, but thanks for the permission. 

 Is that really necessary?

SLM has accepted the 30-day suspension and called it "fair."  This means she knows what she did was wrong. She doesn't belong on the BOE. Period.

Red_Barchetta said:

Is that really necessary?

Not at all necessary. Acknowledging the comment’s punctilious quality, a Tom_R hallmark, was a choice.

yahooyahoo said:

This means she knows what she did was wrong.

To some (including the schools commissioner), so did her apology.

DaveSchmidt said:

Red_Barchetta said:

Is that really necessary?

Not at all necessary. Acknowledging the comment’s punctilious quality, a Tom_R hallmark, was a choice.

yahooyahoo said:

This means she knows what she did was wrong.

To some (including the schools commissioner), so did her apology.

Her apology included several excuses for her actions.  Just apologize.