This is a letter sent by four members of the New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee,– Kristin Corrado, Jon M. Bramnick, Anthony M. Bucco, and Michael Testa—to Committee Chair Brian Stack. The letter expresses “concerns” about Gov. Murphy’s nomination of Mary Bennett to the State Board of Education, especially because it was labeled as a “non-interview” position, which waives the requirement she be required to answer questions from the Judiciary Committee. Bennett also didn’t disclose on her Nominee Questionnaire her affiliation with a group that, in the name of integration, challenges certain kinds of school choice like public charter schools. (See here for more.) The Judiciary Committee was schedule to vote on Bennett’s confirmation yesterday but, in response to this letter, the nomination was pulled temporarily from the agenda.

Dear Chairman Stack:

We write to express concerns about a nomination that is scheduled for a vote at the next meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, January 30, 2023. Specifically, the nomination of Ms. Mary Bennett to be a member of the State Board of Education is presently listed on the Committee’s agenda to be heard as a “non-interview” position, meaning, unlike other important positions in State government, she will not be required to appear before the Committee
for questioning.

In light of the significant role that Board members play, we ask for your commitment that Ms. Bennett’s nomination be held until such time that she can be invited to appear before the Committee.

As you are aware, the State Board of Education is empowered to adopt rules and regulations that implement State education laws and facilitate supervision and governance of the State’s over 2,500 public schools, which serve approximately 1.4 million students. In addition, the Board advises on educational policies proposed by the Commissioner and confirms Department of Education staff appointments made by the Commissioner. The Board is comprised of 13 members who serve an initial six-year term. Historically, members have often remained in holdover status for many years thereafter. Therefore, it is clear that, once confirmed by the Senate, a nominee to the State Board of Education will wield significant policy-making authority over the lives of millions of students and parents for many years to come.

Unfortunately, we must also note that in recent times the State Board of Education has been at the center of a number of controversies, many of which remain ongoing, including the following:

• During the height of Covid-19 lockdowns, the Board adopted new, statewide sex education standards, leaving many parents with concerns about not only the controversial content of the new curriculum, but also the lack of transparency and opportunity for meaningful public input. The full impact of these standards continues to be a matter of concern, as they are only now being implemented during the 2022-2023 school year.
• The Board is in the process of proposing regulatory changes that would integrate an ill-defined concept of “equity” throughout statewide education policies, leaving many parents and educators with unanswered questions about the impact of these changes and whether they will be misused in the furtherance of a political agenda.
  With respect to transparency, the Board has come under heavy criticism for its ongoing failure to resume in-person meetings and, moreover, its repeated failure to provide timely public notice of its virtual meetings, thus depriving the public of any meaningful opportunity to engage in the formation of statewide education policies.
• We must also highlight certain issues that have arisen with respect to the nominee herself. It has come to our attention that Ms. Bennett is a principal member of the board of trustees for an organization that advocates changes in education policy that would eliminate the rights of students to attend school in the districts in which they live, the so-called New Jersey Coalition for Diverse and Inclusive Schools. However, it would appear that Ms. Bennett has failed to disclose this affiliation where, under penalty of perjury, she was required to do so on her Nominee Questionnaire. Moreover, Ms. Bennett has failed to offer any response whatsoever to straightforward inquiries that have been sent to her by Republican members of the Committee. These matters only bolster the need for Ms. Bennett to appear before the Committee.

Based on the forgoing, we trust that you will agree that such a position should not be filled lightly and that, instead, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee should have a meaningful opportunity to fulfill their constitutional duty to provide Advice and Consent by raising issues that are important to the People of New Jersey in an open public forum.

We thank you for your consideration of this request and we stand willing to discuss this matter with you at your convenience.

Senators Kristin Corrado, Jon M. Bramnick, Anthony M. Bucco, and Michael Testa

Five Facts About A Request to Intervene In a Lawsuit Seeking to Deny School Choice to Low-Income New Jersey Families.