In response to last week’s article on the Orange Board of Education, legal counsel serving on behalf of Mr. Wingfield sent us a letter. In reply to that letter, Mr. Tarver sent us a letter as well.
RE: Tarver v. Wingfield, Commissioner Dkt. No. 14-11/23A
Dear Mr. Tarver:
I am writing in connection with an article published this week in the “Local Talk” weekly newspaper, which contains information provided by you during an interview with a reporter. While the School Ethics Commission’s 10/17/2023 decision is publicly available, your discussion of same in the press is problematic in light of the fact that the decision is the subject of an appeal and is thus considered a matter of active litigation.
Of greater concern, however, are certain material inaccuracies in the statements attributed to you including, inter alia, the statements in numbered paragraphs 16 and 17 of the article. With regard to paragraph 16, the SEC has not “given a reprimand” to Mr. Wingfield. Instead, the SEC has “recommended” that Mr. Wingfield receive a reprimand, but the final decision in this matter has not yet been issued by the Commissioner. The fact that the sanction has merely been “recommended” is mentioned multiple times on page 5 of the SEC’s decision. With regard to paragraph 17, the Commissioner absolutely has the authority to “change the violations,” and is not limited to reviewing the penalty only. This is made clear on page 6 of the SEC’s decision.
On behalf of Mr. Wingfield, I hereby request that you issue a retraction to be published in the 12/7/2023 issue of the “Local Talk” weekly newspaper Please be advised that your conduct may constitute a violation of the School Ethics Act, N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24(b) (using your official position to secure support in the public eye by publishing misrepresentations in the press), 18A:12-24(c) (acting in your official capacity to publish misrepresentations in a matter in which you have a personal involvement), 18A:12-24.1(c) (failing to confine your board action to policy making, planning, and appraisal), 18A:12-24.1(e) (taking private action that may compromise the board), and 18A:12-24.1(g) (failing to provide accurate information), inter alia.
Very truly yours,
THE BUSCH LAW GROUP LLC
Alyssa K. Weinstein, Esq.
Counsel
To Mr. Dhiren Shah (Publisher/Editor of Local Talk):
RE: Last Week’s Article: Orange Board of Education Member Wingfield Accused of Sharing Confidential Information
Thank you for the invitation to be interviewed regarding School Ethics Complaint C98-21 submitted by me to the state and the School Ethics Commission’s latest decision. Since this interview, I have been contacted by parties and residents who are unsure of some details of the interview, as well as the attorney for Mr. Jeffrey Wingfield, regarding the ongoing legal process for this complaint.
Briefly, I would like to say a few things. First, the violations decision by the New Jersey School Ethics Commission (SEC), as well as the contents of this complaint and their decision, are NOT confidential. The decision is publicly available on the New Jersey School Ethics Commission Decisions webpage. Also, an article regarding the Tarver v. Wingfield SEC Violation Decision has been printed and published by the NJ School Board Association (NJSBA) in the November 2023 edition of their monthly publication and distributed and mailed statewide. Their article is also publicly available on the NJSBA website on their November 8, 2023 “School Board Notes” webpage and archive.
Second, none of the statements by me in the interview contain any confidential district information. All of the information revealed in my interview is part of the SEC public decision available for download from the two previously mentioned websites.
Next, although I stated that the SEC determined that violations occured and their decision was final and was submitted to the NJ Commissioner of Education for review of the penalty, my statement is not summative of what is still ongoing.
The SEC stated in their October 17, 2023 decision “Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:12-29(c), this decision shall be forwarded to the Commissioner of Education for review of the Commission’s recommended penalty.” But since the SEC decision, the legal representation for Mr. Wingfield has filed an appeal of the SEC Decision to the NJ Commissioner of Education. So the process and final outcome is still ongoing and pending.
Lastly, after the interview and before the article was printed in your newspaper, I contacted you, Mr. Shah, to include a standard disclaimer by me stating that although I am a current Orange School Board Member, my statements in the interview are solely attributed to me and are not a reflection of the Orange School Board since this Ethics Complaint is not a School Board or District matter. You kindly assured me that although my request to include this disclaimer in my interview was a bit late because the newspaper printing process had already begun, you would include my disclaimer in a future printed issue of Local Talk.
Again, thank you very much for the interview and opportunity to provide transparency by informing the public of this important process.
Best Regards,
Tyrone Jon Tarver
