Ethics Complaint Filed by Dominic Miller
Ethics Complaint Filed by Dominic Miller
Ethics Complaint Filed by Dominic Miller
I, Dominic Miller, residing at 33 Wisse Street, Lodi, New Jersey, 07644 (201) 697-0973,
request the School Ethics Commission to consider a complaint against the above-named
Respondent whose home address is 76 Liberty Street, Lodi, New Jersey, 07644, in accordance
with the authority of the School Ethics Commission to entertain such complaints under N.J.S.A.
18A:12-21 et seq.
1. Ryan Curioni is a Board Trustee on the Lodi Board of Education. He was sworn into
office during the Board's organization meeting on January 4, 2017.
2. During that meeting, the Board unanimously approved the Code of Ethics of the New
Jersey School Boards Association. Mr. Curioni was present while the Code of Ethics was
read, discussed, and approved by the Board.
3. Mr. Curioni operates a public blog entitled "Lodi By the Numbers" in which Mr. Curioni
comments upon various matters impacting the local government of Lodi. Mr. Curioni
began this blog in August 2013 and continues to post on the blog. To date, over 700 posts
have been made on the blog.
4. Upon information and belief, Mr. Curioni is the sole contributor of the content of "Lodi
By the Numbers~"
5. Since being sworn in as a Board Trustee, Mr. Curioni has posted over 100 entries.
Approximately half of those entries reference the Board, are critical of its administrators
and employees, and accuse other Board Trustees of illegality, wrongdoing, and unethical
conduct.
6. The blog, which for nearly half of its entries is critical of the Board and its operations, is
private action as defined under the School Ethics Act and violates N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l
(e). I assert the operation of this blog is private action in violation of the School Ethics
Act as its entries which attack, criticize, and belittle school board members, employees
and administrators because it compromises the Board in the manner in which its schools
are operated.
7. On January 8, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Isn't there a $15,000 cap
on sick day payouts for school administrators?" That blog entry contained comparisons
regarding the present Superintendent's contract against other districts in an attempt to
undermine and criticize Superintendent Frank Quatrone. Such action constitutes a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i). I assert this to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-
24.1 (i) because Mr. Curioni's entry undermines and attacks Mr. Quatrone, which I
believe violates Mr. Curioni' s oath to support and protect school personnel in proper
performance of their duties. A link to the post in question may be found at:
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/20 17/01 /isnt-there-15000-cap-on-sick-day .html
8. On January 15, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Superintendent sick day
payouts: how does Lodi compare to other districts?" That blog entry contained
comparisons regarding the present Superintendent's contract against other districts in an
attempt to undermine and criticize Superintendent Frank Quatrone. Such action
constitutes a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i). I believe this blog entry constitutes a
violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i) as it violates Mr. Curioni's responsibility to support
and protect Mr. Quatrone in the proper performance of his duties because the blog entry
undermines Mr. Quatrone and assumes that he is receiving an unlawful benefit. A link to
the post in question may be found at:
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/0 I/superintendent-sick-day-payouts-how .html
9. On April 26, 2017, Mr. Curioni published a blog entry entitled "Dominic Miller secretly
negotiated Marc Capizzi's new contract- NO TRANSPARENCY.." That blog entry
contained allegations that the Board President lied to the Board about board business
involving the negotiations of the Business Administrator's contract. Such conduct
constitutes a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e), (g), and (j). I believe this entry to be a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e) as the entry is private action compromising the
Board, because it alleges that I engaged in furtive conduct and deliberately attempted to
hide information from the public. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A.
18A: 12-24.1 (g) because the information contained in the blog post is inaccurate and
creates an unnecessary and unfounded potential for suspicion into the negotiations
process with district administrators. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A.
18A: 12-24.1 (j) because Mr. Curioni did not raise this concern with Superintendent
Quatrone outside of the public meeting session and took unilateral action instead. A link
to the post in question may be found at:
http ://lodioverhaul. blogspot. com/20 l 71041dominic-miller-secretly-negotiated-marc.html
---------
10. On April 26, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "No attendance, no ethics."
That blog entry contained allegations that the votes made by Board President, Dominic
Miller, along with Board Trustees, Jonathan Carafa and Michael Nardino were "VERY
UNETHICAL." He also is implying that Trustee Phil Carbonetti voted as he did because
of the principal of Washington School. Such conduct constitutes a violation
ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (g), (i), and G). I believe this entry to be a violation of
N.J.S.A.18A:12-24.1 (g) because the information contained in the post unnecessarily
impedes upon Board business by stating that the votes taken by the Board members were
unethical and thus invalid. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:l2-24.1
(i) because the Board members listed and attacked by the blog post were engaged in the
proper performance of their sworn duties when voting. I believe this entry to be a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l G) because no complaint was forwarded to
Superintendent Quatrone, nor did Mr. Curioni raise the issue through the proper channels
such as an ethics complaint. A link to the post in question may be found at:
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/201 7/04/no-attendance-no-ethics.html
11. On April 27, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "All brown-nosing, no
substance." That blog entry specifically attacks the Board President, alleging that Mr.
Miller "kisses up" to the public and "invites" them to the Board of Education meetings.
The blog post also contained an image of a nametag that stated, "Hello I'm a... Suck-
Up!'' in which Mr. Curioni is calling the Board of Education President a "Suck-Up."
Such actions constitute a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:l2-24.1 (e), (g), and G). I believe this
entry to be a violation ofN.J.S.A.18A:12-24.l (e) because Mr. Curioni's personal attacks
against the Board President is private action intended to harm the operation of the
schools, in direct contravention of his sworn duties. I believe this entry to be a violation
of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (g) because the blog entry specifically attacks the Board
President in the hopes of generating public disdain, thusly impeding upon the Board's
ability to see that the schools are properly run. I believe this entry to be a violation of
N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 G) because no complaint was forwarded to Superintendent
Quatrone, nor did Mr. Curioni raise the issue through the proper channels. A link to the
blog post in question is available at: http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/20 17/04/all-brown-
nosing-no-substance.html
12. On April 27, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Four board members took
away your right to vote AGAIN." That blog entry contained details stating that the Board
President, along with Trustees Jonathan Carafa, Phil Carbonetti, and Michael Nardino,
are having their votes "controlled" and "orchestrated behind the public's back." Such
actions constitute a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e), (g), (i), and G). I believe this
entry to be a violation of N..T.S.A.18A:12-24.1 (e) because the blog entry constitutes
private action to undermine the votes of four Board members and portray an inaccurate
picture to the public that its elected officials are deliberately disregarding the law. I
believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l (g) because the blog entry
intentionally seeks to disparage the listed Board members and attack their character to
create separation between those members and the public. I believe this to be a violation
ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i) because Mr. Curioni is specifically attacking Board members
for their votes, which are conducted in the proper performance of their duties. I believe
this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 G) because no complaint was
forwarded to Superintendent Quatrone, nor did Mr. Curioni raise the issue through the
proper channels. A link to the blog post in question is available at:
hll!2://lodioverhaul. blogspot.com/201 7/04/four-board-mem bers-took-away-your-
right.html
13. On April 27, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Marc Capizzi had no right to
stop my referendum motion on Monday night." That blog entry contained details
regarding the events of the Board's April 24 work session. The blog specifically attacks
Business Administrator Marc Capizzi, alleging that Mr. Capizzi improperly restrained
Mr. Curioni from bringing a motion for a vote before the Board. Mr. Capizzi asked to
table the motion so he could draft a resolution instead of relying upon an oral motion. Mr.
Capizzi acted completely within his rights as Business Administrator and Board
Secretary in order to maintain the normal operations of the Board and the District. Thus,
Mr. Curioni's actions constitute a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e) and (i). I believe
this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e) as the entry is private action
compromising the Board, because it alleges that Mr. Capizzi took illegal action in his role
as Business Administrator to prevent Mr. Curioni from speaking or voting. I believe this
entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i) because the blog post deliberately
attacks Mr. Capizzi, a member of the school personnel who is entitled to a board
member's support and protection under the Act. A link to the blog post in question is
available at: http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/04/marc-capizzi-had-no-right-to-
stop-my .html.
14. On April 30, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Your opportunity to vote
was already approved. Dominic Miller blocked it from the November ballot." The blog
entry contained allegations that the sitting Board President Dominic Miller was engaged
in suppressing the right to vote. The blog post also contained an image containing a
photo-shopped picture of the sitting Board President as a puppet. Such actions constitute
a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e), (g), and G). I believe this entry to be a violation
of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e) as the entry is private action compromising the Board,
because it belittles me in my role as Board President, which compromises the integrity of
the Board. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (g) because the
blog post contains inaccurate information regarding the independent judgment of Board
Members. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l G) because the
blog post contains complaints which were not first referred to Superintendent Quatrone
before they were brought to a public meeting. These complaints also were never brought
to a public meeting after a failure of an administrative solution, as required by the statute.
A link to the blog post in question is available at:
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/04/dominic-miller-abstained-on-having.html
15. On April 30, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "How can 4 board members
vote against this resolution?" The blog post contained the resolution and specific detail
regarding how members voted and Mr. Curioni's opinion regarding that vote. This action
constitutes a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:l2-24.l (e) and G). I believe this entry to be a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l (e) as the entry is private action compromising the
Board, because it accuses four board members of being unreasonable and withholding
their votes for an unjustified reason. I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A.
18A:12-24.l G) because the blog post contains complaints which were not first referred
to Superintendent Quatrone before they were brought to a public meeting. These
complaints also were never brought to a public meeting after a failure of an
administrative solution, as required by the statute. A link to the blog post in question is
available at: http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/04/how-can-4-board-members-vote-
against.html
16. On May 3, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Dominic Miller quietly
"negotiated" another 2% raise for Capizzi." That blog entry contained details regarding
the Board's contractual procedures with its business administrator. Mr. Curioni did not
raise a similar question at a Board meeting. Such actions constitute a violation of
N.J.S.A. 18A:l2-24.1 (e). I believe this entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1
(e) as the entry is private action compromising the Board, because it implies that I
engaged in improper conduct as Board President when negotiating a contract for a
District Administrator. This creates an unnecessary and unjustified air of suspicion and
lack of support which is detrimental to the Board's performance of its responsibilities. A
link to the blog post in question is available at:
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/20 l 7/0 51dominic-miller-quietly-negotiated .html
17. On May 8, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "Voters will not have a say on
new Lodi Building ... (if 4 members get their way)." That blog entry contained
allegations that four sitting Board members were engaged in voter suppression. Such
actions constitute a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l (e), (g), and G). I believe this entry
to be a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (e) as the entry is private action compromising
the Board, because it states that four Board members are deliberately colluding from
preventing the public to voice their concerns. I believe this entry to be a violation of
N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l (g) because the blog post contains inaccurate information regarding
the independent judgment and reasoning of Board Members. I believe this entry to be a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.l G) because the blog post contains complaints which
were not first referred to Superintendent Quatrone before they were brought to a public
meeting. These complaints also were never brought to a public meeting after a failure of
an administrative solution, as required by the statute. A link to the blog post in question is
available at: http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/05/voters-will-not-have-say-on-new-
lodi.html
18. On May 14, 2017, Mr. Curioni posted a blog entry entitled "$25,108 bonuses shouldn't
be handed out like candy .. . " That blog entry contained allegations that board members
are derelict in their duties by simply "rubber stamping" approvals and not reading
resolutions prior to voting. The blog entry also infers that Superintendent Frank Quatrone
did not satisfy the mandatory obligations in order to receive merit pay. Such discussions
of personnel matters are conducted in executive session only, with only the vote for same
occurring in public. Mr. Curioni has not offered solutions nor attempted to resolve his
issues with the Board or Mr. Quatrone. Such actions constitute a violation of N.J.S.A.
18A:12-24.l (e), (g), (i), and G). I believe this entry to be a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-
24.l (e) as the entry is private action compromising the Board, because it accuses Board
members of "rubberstamping" Board decisions and not providing careful deliberation
prior to a vote, which is what we were charged with when we were elected. I believe this
entry to be a violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (g) because the blog post contains
inaccurate information regarding the deliberation process of board members. I believe
this entry to be a violation ofN.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1 (i) because the blog post deliberately
attacks the Board's approval of merit bonuses and thus accuses Mr. Quatrone of being
unqualified to receive the merit bonus which he achieved. I believe this entry to be a
violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:l2-24.1 G) because the blog post contains complaints which
were not first referred to Superintendent Quatrone. These complaints also were never
brought to a public meeting after a failure of an administrative solution, as required by
the statute.A link to the blog post in question is available at:
bnl2://lodioverhaul. blogspot.com/201 7/Q5/25 l 08-bonuses-sh_Q_uld_I11"'." be-handed-out.html
19. These entries constitute only a handful of private actions and opinions published by Mr.
Curioni in violation of the Code of Ethics as a Board member.
r-
WHEREFORE, I, as Complainant, request that the School Ethics Commission find and
determine that the above-named Respondent(s) has violated the School Ethics Act and that he or
she be subject to such penalty as provided by 1he Act. ~~
Dominic Miller, of full age, being duly sworn upon his or her oath according to law deposes
and says:
2. I have read the complaint and aver that the facts contained therein are true to the best of
my knowledge and belief and I am aware that the statute that created the School Ethics
Commission authorizes the School Ethics Commission to impose penalties for filing a frivolous
complaint. N.J.S.A. 18A: 12-29(e). I am aware that if the respondent alleges that the complaint
is frivolous, I shall have 20 days from receipt of the answer to respond to the allegation.
3. The subject matter of this complaint is not pending in any court of law or administrative
agency of this State. I will advise the School Ethics Commission if I subsequently become
aware that it is pending elsewhere.
I t/ 'Al',j.
Sworn and subscribed to before me this _/_ day of J v /z, '--' , 2017.
Notice: All final decisions issued in connection with complaints that come before the
School Ethics Commission for review and determination are public records uniformly
posted on the Department of Education's website at http://www.ni.gov/education/legaJ/. As
a general rule, selective requests to remove a particular decision for reasons of personal
preference are not entertained.
5/31/2017 Lodi by the Numbers: Support Lodi Students! : Isn't there a $15,000 cap on sick day payouts for school administrators?
More Next Blog Create Blog Sign In
.,. March(31)
T Januaiy (26)
for unused sick days and $16,106 for unused Scorzetti and Vara want to get
appointed by Nora P...
vacation days at the time of his retirement. \:Vbo removed the November
The total post-employn1ent benefits total 22, 2016 council mitmtcs ...
\:Va~
:tv!ayor Carafa \\\)rking
with Joe Capizzi to rush ...
http://www.nj.co1n/news/indcx.ssf/2012/05/nj_su l 6 names submitted for the'
preme_court.....:rules_sick-le.htinl vacm11 BOE l'Cat...
lsn't there a $15,000 cap on sick
day payouts for ...
T 2017 (150)
Superintendent sick day payouts: how does .,_ May (50)
.,_ February ( l 7)
T Januaiy (26)
A large district like Clifton ($15,000 max): \Vas Vinny Martin objective
whrn he voted on Scorzc ..
PASSAIC Employee Contract Ust for District CLIFTON CITY Vinny iV1artin had his cl.mrn:e to
~lA~~=R4~tl~r; t";-.:M_li;1 serve on the Lodi IL.
Lodi payroll one year bc~fore
Licata 's pn>moti(ln (J...
. .. . .
~l;:l '.'ft~ i:;q1,;...;;:4<'1t t~ '!f.J i 1 ;)
Borough pr(ividt'S response to
l)n;1n;..:1 ,q1t 11;,)!h>r C1Cr:.~' : ti
(,!!~rr!i(m.:r!)' . the Llcata pron1otion ...
Sh.:.11"::1D;,tm:1.
How many (hJys are needed to
M::~t".e1 ,,~-C,1!h:'<.'-'<, 6'i!f\}~!lWt;:: UM (t:.nu:., : tl cxphin Lic,11a's prnmo ..
~H,im:: ,,~. ;)~lfl f ( ::r.~~i!~I : [J!fl~ !.'!'.-'.
>r.tlli
i ".1\.,.i;<;t.:>!-.e1Af!",:1;;,I
Tr.1r+..~r t:;~r.1~i),.-i ~ 1J! : ;,~,,,;q,~, 1~..,~ 111> (:i, :"t..:.: 1:.tr., 6.~;,! : s,;.;
uiii1r~ t",-t;i;~-.tr;~~~~ f'.w.:~ r.1:i>v ('ntrn-:-:: !r.r ~"1i1~lf :N t- ~11t<: !i<")
'--"'~~_$;'.t\1:il ~)~,r;t..-E~n~"'l!~y;~\~,1
~I,)~
0
d r14~0N;? 0~ ~"iC '-.tW'f.'i- . "!.~.11);,~to1!"r~1~ !3 ,;'')m!.-lll~t-!;..,,'. 1f,;(IJ t.~~~ Jl"<l l>;!l Oi:tdMf! ~;~~ i~,; Si"iil~iii::t-e.tWY.C!
\Vho removed tbe November
22, 2016 council minutes
St:>::u:1
~r.tr~:11;11l f>.~1-f-mr..'."1 1 'T.,. ~, f1.i-11t."~ l);y:ij:to:t'I ~ i ;:,;iy:-n,-!' cf y;i,~.1t:tA'\ "ill/I<' S.:1':":"1mi:-~-~ :- r~:fl"l;(!'l:,,_!;!r tr~ f!l i!-C''<-11;<1 t>JI r. -1~~<1 ~;i .~.~~C-'1 ~ 111i n.--.1 i ,., :..-.e
3 hour work sesr;ion t(mig:ht..
i ~rn..-:m
fi.'lernbar {jfCClle:..ih'e Bart;;i1!a~1iJ Un! {C!3L')':" N Time for more pub Ii'' hearings
and video recordings ...
tnd Dutil' I:'.' Cr,;;n{r~ et O r.i.S(!!~ U
Co.r.1rc1_~t.mt N>J:rn~;:i ~f i-.n."lu 11r VYc!k D:17s 2!10
Con~rncl~d F..J1.1111b!!< c! Annu.'11 VB>:-tion Di!t s :.m ... 2016 (256)
6ootu:n::t1.:"1 N\m'l~.>Y! 'JI Artllll<"I t,; 1d< C.l.o 1:,
C;;i n l rn:;~?d N u~1 brn;I Arini.ml PE!T!iCll"iil G;;p; .1
... 2015(215)
Cont1JJ ;.1e-d ~urnD~r c l A1111u:i l C.~risu lt1ng Do;ys O
... 201 4 (123)
N ;; rr1b~1 Dl CllM( C.:>r:tr.)C~t-1 Ni:lriWOrk.mg D.,~ $ !~
Ge-~cr .:ilit:: n er 0th>~ C':.mtrncler;f \ :.i~ \"/u;ki;:~J Dil ytii Ci!s19m:lfl :J Ht.1 -'Jil)' !> ....:!013 (47)
Tole!; AlkNl&n.::;:.s .:..rncu ,..,1 $1:1 ~rtr
Sh~mi:i Co unty
St12:~oj o:s:t:ict
.............. .. .. - ... ....... ... ..; .
.Job Titl11 Otwr D;~trlcl :
M~mc.;;~r :::Jll~cnvo Barg.,.ir.i.~Q -U~i1 {Cali)?!N
l31i.>i;innl11g D~te of -C-:in~1~cl : 07101 /14
End Do.to c.-rce:ntrJc.t 01313011.i
C-::,ntraci.ed Numt~r of A.rli'Hltl l Vv'c-tk O&iy !i 260
Cor.trru:ted NwT:ber of Ar.,-,.i~i v~1ccli~r. l1;1:r~ 2f,
CJ..U~Vi'!Ctod Nu i t.".t~r ot f.-,.,"ln! J<~l $1 ~ k Dt::rys ! ).
C~::! nh1Jct?~: N~m ; bN ::I" .A11mml Pe-1'":i-::r111I Days
(':(lr.m1cte-d tt..imC.,,r of An"oual C-onsufhr.g Days 0
l'\umt-nr of Otht;:r C~nt!;i c ~ed NOf>..tVmkir:g t~ys 70
Description o~ Other Contr.actec Ncm:.,vc.r~r: g O\lys :
Tct3 1Allovr.inc!"l!r Amo;.int S'1, 07:::,
Total 9vnusc-s. 1\rno;.n~t : SO
Tomi Stip~ndti A !TIOt mt so
Oi~if, ::t Ccntnbu!rors ..:i.bch'f' f~i:0.h9d c:'. ;n~;..,e, :a ; lroS!,11anoei (H~a'l/1. tJe:~:~: j ti-, : )tlH}(j so .
. Ot'it(ct Cor.trtl>utions /\D:ivco. To.:sch"'!!r ~ntmc'i torR<'brcmcm Pt1:1.r:s SO
Tottl! Qcmtrnctlal! Po'!.l-Emp::;yrienl Bentifi! A.tl1clunt s:rn COO
Co ntractua' P o!'i~E'rnplo ymof:\:nt a.tn'l~N Gesr.~ipti.:H1 of P<Yyout o~ Si i::k; ~tays b~gal ~hr~
I CorJrnctual Pos:H,; m pk:iymen l Hi,:.:11~-llt D~soipfo:;.r, d PafOlil of \l<:~:at.c~u d<117>-> LegiJ I '. 1 :n ~
C:-Ctttrnckl-al P::-st-F..mploymen~ Benefit l)e!?{;r~ ption r..f Pa you~ of P"'l rs.c ~ 11~ <.!i.1yt; U/lu:sed ''~ r'.'\ioonnl .::Ji'l~s. :t:OWfJt to sf:.ek
C onl! <' C~J.lt ~ l'ostEniployrru.:,r:; 8('.!ll:'ti! De:scriptior. (If 0~<'!' B('n(flrs 1 ,
II "c::r.-;tf~ctu~~PPF>l."F..mploynient Bene.fit o~~cr.ipt1ar; of 0.hiH. Sr.r.ems .2
C!!r.tracru.ai Po;t.. Employmeri<BaMfit D~~riptk1~ of Cthur Bor;efil"> 3 .
Jc-P T.otlo ii
,
.......... .. .
B~ Annual Sa!ar1 Amc::utit : S1-61;SOO
f~i ;~r1_~~;r:q~i;~tent {FrE) ; 1.0
Sharnd 1,vitlt 1~notll<?r District? N
Sh;;red C'.-0:1nty
SJl;[email protected] c~strict
T 2017(150)
Dominic Miller secretly negotiated Marc 1111- May (50)
T April (26)
Capizzi's new contract- NO How cm1 4 board members vote
TRANSPARENCY.. against this resoluti ...
315 of the Lodi council was fine
with your right t. ..
Your opportunity lo vote was
already appwved. Do ...
A:r~ruing
that Lod:i d()csn 't liav<e
a nepotism probkm .. ....
Cheering nepotisn1 is WTong!
.Mayor Cmafa should explain liis
divisive remarks ..
Borough bills are :wailable for
April...
Everyone deserves to be.
respecled, represented, an ...
Board needs a different meeting
Board "President" Dominic Miller secretly chose himself pfoc"e.
to negotiate Marc Capizzi's new contract. Fom board members took away
your right to vote AG ...
The legal opinion was based on
He secretly met with Mr. Capizzi to "negotiate" a new "Esteves vs Bel ofE ...
contract. Marc Capizzi had no right to
stop my referendum mo ...
AH brc>wn-nosing.. no substance.
He lied about it when questioned at Monday's work Shutting the public out. ..
sess10n. literally.
Dominic Miller secretly
negotiated Marc Capizzi's ...
I was never informed of the committee. I was never The Board Attorney wasn't
scheduled for tonight's ...
informed of the meeting.
No attendance, no ethics.
[nteresti.ng Bo{lfd meeting
There is no excuse for this bad behavior. sd1edulcd for Wedmsday,. ..
All of Lodi shon.ld support !he
residents nc~ir Trud ...
T 2tll7 (93)
No attendance, no ethics. T April ( J9)
Board need~ J new meding
plaC('.
AU brown-no:;;ini~, no substnnre.
Shutting the publi, (>Ut ...
litcrnlly.
No attendance, no etl1ics.
Carafa went four whole months without attending any "Former Bergen County
Exerntive fined f(1:r decti(>fl ...
meetings. He missed 7 out of 16 meetings. He missed
Jn the Olympics. tlw next person
numerous meetings in 201 7. He missed Monday's gets the medal wb ...
meeting. The rest of us had to sit there until 1 in the "Lodi school board member
mormng. sues to take ovl'r longer...
himself. I pointed out that Dominic Miller should recuse ... 20l5 (215)
himself because Emil Carafa is technically his boss and ... 2014(123)
promoted him last year. Emil Carafa actually passed an .... 2013(47)
ordinance changing the table of command just so Miller
can be promoted.
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/04/no-attendance-no-ethi cs.htm I 1/2
4/28/2017 Lodi by the Numbers: No attendance, no ethics.
Posr~~i by RC at 10:35 PM
L~-~~..J Recommend this on Google
No attendance, no ethics.
Last night, four Board members took away your right to Victorin Scilli.u GuidP
vote in November on whether or not $8M Lodi tax dollars lnten,sting Board meeting
should be spent needlessly on a new administration schedttled for Wednesday,. ..
building. All of Lodi should support the
residents ne<ir Trud ...
April 26th public hearing on the
Those members are: 8choo l budget ..
The Board budgeted over $7M tonight for the ... fommry (26)
administration building. That money can only be spent on ... 2016 (25 6)
that building and nothing else. ... 2015 (215)
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/04/four-board-members-took-away-your-right.html 1/2
4/28/2017 Lodi by the Numbers: Four board members took away your right to vote AGAIN .
Posted by RC at 10:50 PM
T 2017 (150)
Marc Capizzi had no right to stop my ... May (50)
I made a motion on Monday night to place the referendum Everyone deserves tt> be
respected, reprGsented, an ...
question on the November 7th ballot. Board needs a difforent meding
phKe.
voted for a referendum on January 4th. I made the motion The legal opinion was based on
"Esteves vs Bd ofE ...
to set the referendum date- November 7th. .M arc Capizzi had no right to
stop my referendum mo ...
He took away our right to vote on Monday. He took away ... January (26)
... 2015(215)
Posted by RC :ii 11 :07 AM
... 2014 (123)
~ Reccm1rnend t!tis on Gooql<.
... 20l3(47)
T April (26)
approved. Dominic Miller blocked it from How c<111 4 board me.mbcn; vote
the November ballot. against this rnsolnri ...
3/5 of the Lodi connci l was fine
with you:r right 1:...
Your opportunity to vote was
already approved. Do...
It appears that Dominic Miller has SUlTendered all "Lodi :;chool board member
sn<:s to take over longer. ..
independent judgment to Joe Capizzi and Emil Carafa.
Once again. l mu aot
"lrd inj prirnafacic".
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/20 I 7/04/domi nic-miller-abstained-on-ha ving .html 112
5/31/2017 Lodi by the Numbers: Support Lodi Students! : Your opportunity to vote was already approved. Dominic Miller blocked it from the November ballot.
.,. Fcbmary ( J 7)
Make phone calls. Send emails. Do everything
.,. January (26)
possible to get this question on the November ballot.
Its your money. Its your right. ... 20 16 (256)
... 20l3(47)
5/31/2017 Lodi by the Numbers: Support Lodi Students! : How can 4 board members vote against this resolution?
" 2()\7(150)
How can 4 board members vote against ... May (50)
..... 20 17(150)
Dominic Miller quietly "negotiated" V May (50)
Don't be fooled! l called this
another 2% raise for Capizzi. years ago .
Secretaries throughout New Jersey. Marc Capizzi had one /:\. ..~ounci!w01nan..t tt~ach<.:~r
11 11
,, 2017 (J 50)
"Voters will not have a say on new Lodi 'I' May (50)
Don't be foo le.d' l called this
building" ... (if 4 members get their way) yeurs ago.
Crush it in November'
the budget or he purposely mislead the public. "When school children start
paying union dues ... "
the Board would not have budgeted $7,187,542 that can Good Nt'ws!
Crnsli it in November'
A. rouncilwon.1a11/ 11 h:!acht'r"
That is 35% more than a teacher aide's salaiy. picketing on a board nu~mb .. .
rubber-stamp? How about the evidence for attainment? lt's ti1n..:: to turn our f0cus to
.::duration ... Childrcn ...
A completely inequitable
distribntit'n acr(>ss past .