Legislation

By: Robert A. Muccilli, Esq.
Editor: Sanmathi (Sanu) Dev, Esq.

School boards now have more flexibility in attracting and retaining qualified and experienced superintendents as a result of changes to N.J.A.C. 6A:23A-1.2, an accountability regulation affecting compensation, which were adopted on May 1, 2017.

Here are some of the important changes to N.J.A.C. 6A:23A-1.2 made by the rule adoption with respect to superintendents. The salary brackets, which are based on student enrollment, have been reduced from six brackets to three with the following caps: $147,794 (enrollment of 749 or less); $169,689 (enrollment of 750 to 2,999); and $191,584 (enrollment greater than 3,000). Further, the high school salary increment (for a school district that includes a high school) was increased to $5,000 from $2,500.

Additionally, the existence of salary caps no longer precludes salary increases from exceeding the caps. Upon the expiration of a contract in effect on July 1, 2016, a superintendent reappointed for a subsequent term with the same school district may receive an annual salary that exceeds the maximum salary amount by up to two percent (2%) in the first year of the renewal contract, followed by annual increases of up to two percent (2%) in each of the remaining years of the renewal contract and any contract thereafter. Similarly, if the contract in effect on July 1, 2016 is not the superintendent’s initial contract with the school district, the superintendent can renegotiate at any time after and may receive an annual salary moving forward that exceeds the maximum salary amount by up to two percent (2%) in the first year of the renewal contract, followed by annual increases of up to two percent (2%) in each of the remaining years of the renewal contract and any contract thereafter.

Other requirements relating to a superintendent’s contract can be found at N.J.A.C. 6A:23A-3.1.

Below is an article written by my colleague, Sheila M. Mints, Esq., Co-Chair of our firm’s Cannabis Law Group. If you wish to view additional articles and/or be kept up-to-date with current developments in federal and state laws addressing cannabis legislation, register for our Cannabis blog by clicking here.

Legislation requiring the employer, workers’ compensation and PIP insurers to cover the costs of medical marijuana was passed by the NJ Assembly Appropriations Committee on October 26, 2020 and will be considered by the entire Assembly.  Assembly Bill No. 1708, sponsored by Assemblyman John Burzichelli, Assemblyman Herb Conaway and Assemblywoman Joann Downey, requires that “an employer or workers’ compensation insurance carrier or private passenger automobile insurance carrier shall provide coverage for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana.”  If enacted, this legislation will not require that private insurers or governmental health programs like Medicare or Medicaid cover the costs of medical marijuana.

A first step in requiring workers’ comp coverage of the costs of medical marijuana came on January 13, 2020 when the Appellate Division decided the case of Hager v. M&K Construction, 462 N.J. Super. 146 (App. Div.), certif. granted, 241 N.J. 484 (2020). This case required reimbursement of the costs rather than coverage of the costs as set forth in the legislation.  The Hager case is currently on appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court, which has agreed to hear the case.

Capehart Blogs

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Categories