When Leadership Walks Away: The Cost of Driving Good People Out
A look at how the Kids First majority's conduct has coincided with the departure of experienced leaders-and the real costs borne by the district.
Strong districts don’t just keep programs. They keep good people.
Over the last several years, Hardyston has seen a troubling pattern: experienced leaders choosing to leave rather than keep working under the current Kids First majority.
These exits weren’t random, and they weren’t free. Each one cost the district stability, institutional knowledge, and real money.
This isn’t about personalities. It’s about governance, professionalism, and the environment leadership created.
The Shared Services Breakdown: When Experience Wasn’t Worth the Hassle
Hardyston previously benefited from a shared services Business Administrator - a model that reduced costs, improved continuity, and aligned financial practices with neighboring districts.
That relationship ended.
Not because the arrangement failed. Not because performance was lacking. But because the BA reportedly chose not to continue dealing with Tony Alfano.
The result was predictable and avoidable:
- Hardyston lost a cost-effective shared service
- The district incurred higher standalone administrative costs
- Taxpayers absorbed the difference
Shared services only work when there is trust, professionalism, and mutual respect. When leadership behavior makes collaboration untenable, the savings disappear - and residents pay more for less.
The Most Concerning Signal: Rumors of the Superintendent’s Departure
The biggest signal may be the widely circulated rumor that Superintendent Mike Ryder is seeking, or has accepted, a position elsewhere.
Whether or not an official announcement has been made, the fact that this possibility is being discussed at all should give the community pause.
Superintendent turnover is expensive. It is disruptive. And it sets districts back years.
If this rumor proves true, it would not be an isolated event - it would be the culmination of a broader pattern where experienced leaders decide they can do their jobs better, and with less friction, elsewhere.
Leadership Isn’t About Power - But That’s What This Became
Healthy boards focus on stability, collaboration, and student outcomes. What Hardyston has seen instead is control-first governance, where consolidating influence appears to matter more than retaining experienced professionals.
Power struggles don’t stay confined to board meetings. They ripple outward - into administrative offices, shared service relationships, and day-to-day operations. When leaders feel undermined, second-guessed, or treated as obstacles rather than partners, they eventually choose to leave.
That is how a district loses:
- Cost-saving shared services
- Continuity at the administrative level
- Trust with experienced professionals
This is the hidden cost of a power grab. Not headlines - but turnover. Not slogans - but instability.
Hardyston residents didn’t vote for infighting or consolidation of control. They voted for steady leadership, responsible governance, and decisions that put students first.
When power becomes the priority, the people best equipped to serve students are often the first to walk away - and the community is left to absorb the damage.