Failure to Deliberate in Public Nullifies BOE Candidate Appointment

Failure to Deliberate in Public Nullifies BOE Candidate Appointment

Recently, the Appellate Division voided a board member appointment because the Board conducted all substantive deliberation in executive session and limited the public session to a nomination and vote. Arminio v. Monroe Twp. Bd. of Educ., --- A.3d ---- (App. Div. Nov. 24, 2025). Although OPMA permits boards to discuss certain aspects of appointments in closed session, the court emphasized that OPMA is violated when “formal action is taken in closed session and never ratified or even discussed in a public session.”

Importantly, the court also focused on the fact that the Board’s public notice and agenda indicated that candidate interviews would occur publicly, yet all interviews were conducted in executive session. That inconsistency reinforced the conclusion that the public was improperly excluded from the Board’s decision-making process.

The court’s concern was heightened because the vacancy involved an elected position, where public accountability interests are at their peak. The issue was not the mere use of executive session, but substituting closed-door deliberations for a public electoral choice.

The District’s Policy 0143 is in compliance with OPMA although it permits interviews in public or executive session because it also requires that Board members, during the public nomination and voting process, express their opinions in support of their vote so the public can witness the Board’s deliberations and decision-making. As written, the policy ensures that executive session is not the exclusive forum for deliberation.

When this process arises again, in compliance with Policy 0143, executive session should not be used to make final decisions on whom to appoint and Board members should provide brief, general explanations for their votes, without disclosing confidential information in public.

Importantly, public notices, agendas, and actual practice must align. If interviews are noticed as public, they must be conducted publicly.

Although Arminio arose in the context of filling an elected board vacancy, the underlying OPMA principle applies more broadly. Boards may interview candidates and discuss personnel matters in executive session where permitted, but should avoid conducting all evaluative discussion and decision-making behind closed doors.

For non-elected positions, OPMA does not require the same level of public discussion, but it does require that final decisions occur in public session and the public session reflects that the Board exercised judgment, rather than merely ratifying a decision already made in private.

In short, Arminio does not prohibit executive-session interviews. It reinforces two practical rules: (1) the public must be able to observe at least some portion of the Board’s deliberative process, and (2) the Board must do what it tells the public it is going to do.

Please reach out if you have any further questions or concerns.