Two weeks ago, the Roxbury Board of Education held its annual retreat—an important time traditionally used to reflect, align on goals, and improve board functioning. Historically, these retreats have included three essential components: a professional training led by the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA), a board self-evaluation, and a formal review or presentation on BOE ethics. This year, however, all three were noticeably absent.

1. No NJSBA Training

A training had also been scheduled for March 15, but NJSBA did not attend, and no makeup session was held. This missed opportunity is significant, as NJSBA trainings are a cornerstone of effective governance. They ensure board members understand their legal and ethical responsibilities, keep up with policy changes, and learn strategies for collaboration and decision-making. Without this, board members lose a key tool for staying informed and aligned with best practices.

BOE President Milde did not comment on why the NJSBA did not provide training at the training meeting in March, or at the retreat in July.  It would seem that a lack of training hours could leave the board at risk of losing their master board status.

The retreat’s replacement agenda—focused instead on informal conversation and team building—may have offered a chance to reset dynamics, but it lacked the structure and accountability that formal training provides. Simply “talking things through” without expert facilitation risks overlooking critical issues, especially those related to policy compliance and ethical standards.

2. No Board Self-Evaluation

Another striking omission was the lack of a board self-assessment. In previous years, board members have anonymously evaluated their collective performance across areas such as communication, policy adherence, leadership, and effectiveness. These evaluations serve as a mirror—helping the board recognize strengths, acknowledge shortcomings, and track progress year over year.

Skipping the self-assessment eliminates a key mechanism of accountability and continuous improvement. In a time when the board has faced public scrutiny and internal tensions, failing to formally reflect on their effectiveness sends a concerning message: that there may be little interest in honest self-examination.

3. No Ethics Review

Most concerning was the complete absence of any presentation or discussion on Board of Education ethics—a standard feature of these retreats. Given recent controversies, including potential conflicts of interest and questions about transparency and board conduct, an ethics refresher would have been particularly appropriate. You can read about prior years retreats and the very concerning statements about BOE members feelings on whether they think they need to follow their ethical oath here.

A review of ethical obligations—such as acting in the best interest of students, avoiding personal agendas, and maintaining respectful discourse—is not optional. It is foundational. The omission raises questions about the board’s commitment to ethical governance, especially when the president himself acknowledged that “respect—or lack thereof—has to stop.”

Conclusion: A Missed Opportunity for Leadership

While the BOE president framed the retreat as a time for honest conversation and a “fresh start,” the absence of formal training, self-evaluation, and an ethics overview suggests a retreat that prioritized optics over substance. In a district facing significant decisions and public scrutiny, this lack of structure undermines the credibility and accountability the community deserves from its elected leaders.

Moving forward, restoring these components—training, evaluation, and ethical grounding—should be a top priority if the board wants to rebuild trust and function effectively.