A Pattern, Not a Moment: Targeting Administrators Has Become the Playbook
Last night’s Hardyston Board of Education meeting offered little that was new - and that, by itself, is the story.
For at least the second or third time this year, board members Donna Carey and Dana Kalczuk arrived with prepared written statements on the same topic. Both read their remarks aloud. And once again, the board’s attorney felt it necessary to remind them: you cannot discuss personnel matters publicly, and you are personally liable for what you say.
That a legal warning has become a recurring feature of these meetings should concern every Hardyston resident - regardless of where they stand politically.
Prepared Remarks, Repeated Targets
These were not off-the-cuff comments. Both Carey and Kalczuk came with written statements on the same topic, hitting the same themes, making the same kinds of allegations. The consistency across multiple meetings raises a question that deserves a straight answer: who is coordinating this, and why?
Board members are elected to represent the entire community - students, families, taxpayers. They are not the enforcement arm of any particular staff faction. District employees already have representation through their union. When board members repeatedly take up the cause of anonymous information sources within the building, they are not doing their jobs - they are doing someone else’s.
Carey has historically pushed for anonymous staff surveys and has been receptive to anonymous letters. A pattern of feeding information without accountability is not governance. It is pressure by proxy.
Voting No as a Weapon
The prepared statements are one part of the pattern. The voting record is another.
At the April 16th and May 7th budget votes, both Carey and Kalczuk voted no. Notably, at the March 24th meeting - when Donna Carey was absent - Kalczuk voted yes on the same type of matter. When Carey returned, so did the no votes.
Draw your own conclusions.
At the May 12th meeting, both voted no on the routine annual renewal of the elementary school principal - a tenured administrator whose school ranked #1 in Sussex County two years ago. The motion was straightforward:
“Motion to renew the employment of [the Elementary School Principal], tenured Elementary School Principal/Supervisor of Curriculum/Instruction, for the 2026-2027 school year, at an annual salary of $148,442.”
That represents a 3.3% increase over the prior year’s salary - a routine, below-inflation adjustment for a tenured educator with a documented record of results.
They also voted no on the renewal of the Director of Special Education. That administrator has since resigned.
When you vote no on a tenured employee’s renewal, you accomplish nothing legally - tenure exists precisely to protect qualified educators from political interference. What you do accomplish is making the work environment hostile enough that good people leave.
The record speaks for itself. Former Superintendent Mike Ryder’s departure - something we covered in depth earlier this year - did not happen in a vacuum. The Director of Special Education, who was voted against at the May 12th meeting, has since resigned. Carl Platvoet, who served as Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds for 20 years, retired in July 2023. His successor, David Lenz - with over 25 years of service to this district - submitted his retirement letter last November, effective June 30th of this month. And shared-services Business Administrator Rich Rennie chose not to continue his arrangement with the district, a decision widely attributed to the environment created by the Kids First team. When Rennie left, so did the shared-service cost savings - replaced by the full expense of a standalone BA hire absorbed entirely by Hardyston taxpayers.
Five departures. One common thread.
Dana Kalczuk Ran on Anti-Bullying
Dana Kalczuk is in her first term. She ran on the Kids First slate - the same slate as Donna Carey - and made anti-bullying a centerpiece of her campaign.
It is worth pausing on that.
Participating in a coordinated, multi-meeting campaign of prepared public statements on the same personnel topic - after the board’s attorney has repeatedly warned that such statements carry personal legal liability - is not an anti-bullying posture. It is the opposite.
If Kalczuk has independent judgment, the March 24th vote suggests she is capable of exercising it. The question is whether she chooses to.
The Transparency Complaint That Wasn’t
Carey also raised concerns last night about the board’s alleged lack of transparency regarding the percentage increase in the administrator’s salary renewal.
Board member Nick Demsak asked her directly: wasn’t the process the same in prior years?
Carey conceded that it was - including during the year she served as board president.
That exchange tells you everything you need to know about the nature of the complaint. This was not a principled stand for transparency. It was an attempt to generate alarm about a process Carey herself oversaw without objection. When the facts were put to her, she had no answer.
A Pattern Requires a Pattern Response
Hardyston residents should not evaluate last night’s meeting in isolation. They should look at the full arc: repeated prepared statements on the same personnel topic, coordinated no votes that track Carey’s presence, a legal warning that keeps having to be issued, and a transparency complaint that collapsed under the first factual question.
This is not a disagreement over policy. It is a sustained campaign - and it has already cost this district five experienced professionals.
The Kids First slate has had board representation for years now. The question worth asking is simple: what have they actually built? What has improved? What outcome, for students, can they point to?
Because from where many residents sit, the answer looks like turnover, legal bills, and a #1-ranked elementary school being made to feel unwelcome.
That is not Kids First. That is the community last.