10/25/2026
Hello CHSEPTA Nation,
As you know a statement was read on behalf of CHSEPTA at the 10/13/26 Board of Education meeting. In that statement and a followup email to the Board we detailed our position that we feel the the administration has discriminated against us, gave evidentiary examples to support our allegations, and requested the board commission an unbiased investigation to determine if they needed to intervene as the responsible party to do so if our rights were being violated by the administration. We did not receive a response from the board, rather the Districts Retained Council replied.
It would appear the district chooses to Deny the allegations, and dismissed the credibility of concerns, claiming that we are the party not looking to move forward because we did not feel comfortable that a meeting with Dr Morton would be productive at this time after speaking to NJPTA multiple times.
For transparency we are including the email correspondence below for our members to review.
As the district refuses to acknowledge our concerns, and given the district leaderships decision to not seek an un bias opinion, CHSEPTA will be moving forward with other avenues to protect our rights. We feel very strongly that we need to lead by example and advocate for ourselves as diligently as we would for any family that comes to us.
Best regards
CHSEPTA
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: CHSEPTA
Date: Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 10:40 PM
Subject: BOE Investigation
To: Winters, Gina , Greenbaum, Adam , Bridget Palmer , Dean Drizin , Manzano, Melissa , Cherfane, Renee , Candi Cummings , Stern, Miriam , Jim Neary , Jennifer Naddeo , Christine Braswell , Laurie Neary , Christopher Naddeo , Jacque Armstrong
Dear Board of Education Members,
The Cherry Hill Special Education PTA ("CHSEPTA") writes to request that the Cherry Hill Board of Education ("BOE") commission an independent, neutral third party investigation into the discriminatory actions of Cherry Hill Superintendent, Dr. Kwame Morton, Director of Elementary Education, George Guy, and Director of Special Education, Caitlin Mallory. Each of the aforementioned parties has engaged in First Amendment violations aimed at CHSEPTA including viewpoint discrimination, applying inappropriate communication channel restrictions, and disparate treatment.
CHSEPTA specifically requests that an independent, neutral third party investigation be initiated and completed prior to any contract extensions or renewals or the continued employment of the aforementioned parties. Attached is a copy of CHSEPTA's statement from the October 13, 2026 BOE Meeting which briefly summarizes the pattern of discriminatory behavior perpetrated by Dr. Morton, Mr. Guy, and Ms. Mallory. CHSEPTA can provide additional evidentiary support of its discrimination allegations upon request and has emailed the BOE in the recent past regarding its allegations and with attached evidence.
The BOE has the power and authority to commission and retain independent, neutral outside professionals to conduct an investigation regarding allegations of First Amendment violations, civil rights violations, and discrimination. See N.J. Stat. Ann. §18A:11-1(c)–(d). To be very clear, CHSEPTA's allegations are not confined to "day to day administrative decisions" which are usually within the purview of District administration. CHSEPTA is specifically alleging that Dr. Morton, Mr. Guy, and Ms. Mallory engaged in, and are continuing to engage in, a systemic, coordinated pattern of viewpoint discrimination which impinges upon CHSEPTA's civil rights and its ability to function as a PTA for the community's most vulnerable members.
CHSEPTA demands that the BOE immediately retain a neutral (a party NOT related to or affiliated in any way with the District or administration), independent investigator to conduct an investigation into these allegations. To avoid the consequences of legal liability to the District, aforementioned parties, and BOE, CHSEPTA demands an investigation be commissioned and underway by December 1, 2026.
Thank you,
CHSEPTA
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Katherine A. Gilfillan
Date: Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 4:09 PM
Subject: Response to Request for Investigation
To: [email protected]
CC: Winters, Gina , Greenbaum, Adam , Morton, Kwame
Good afternoon Mr. and Mrs. Neary.
I have been asked to respond to CHSEPTA’s demand that the Board of Education “commission” an independent, neutral, third-party investigation into allegations of discriminatory actions by certain members of the administration.
The Board declines to commission such an investigation. The Board acknowledges your concerns. However, it categorically and explicitly denies that any member of administration has engaged in discrimination of any type against CHSEPTA or its membership. CHSEPTArepresentatives were permitted to attend back to school nights. Apparently, representatives chose not to do so. That CHSEPTA did not have its own table at Back to School Night does not establish even a facially valid claim under the First Amendment or any other federal or state anti-discrimination law.
Dr. Morton met with representatives NJPTA two weeks ago to discuss your allegations. In collaboration with NJPTA, he offered to meet with representatives of CHSEPTA and NJPTA in an attempt to have an open, civil and respectful discourse about your concerns. CHSEPTAadvised that they are not interested in meeting. While that is certainly CHSEPTA’s prerogative, ultimately, it does not move the parties forward. If you reconsider your position, I am sure the invitation will remain open.
Regards,
Katherine A. Gilfillan, Esq.
Board Solicitor
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: CHSEPTA
Date: Fri, Oct 23, 2026 at 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Response to Request for Investigation
To: Katherine A. Gilfillan
CC: Winters, Gina , Greenbaum, Adam , Morton, Kwame , Cherfane, Renee , Stern, Miriam , Dean Drizin , Bridget Palmer , Candi Cummings , Manzano, Melissa
Katherine,
The factual and legal inaccuracies and bias in your response is the reason CHSEPTA requested a neutral, third party investigation into its allegations of discrimination. An investigation, or even a cursory review of the evidentiary emails and documents previously sent to the Board, would reveal that CHSEPTA was never “invited" to back to school nights. By Mr. Morton and Mr. Guy's own statements and emails it was clear that CHSEPTA was not an organization that was “permitted” to attend or was “offered/granted space” at back to school nights. In fact, principals were strictly advised that CHSEPTA had to be “granted” space by Mr. Morton's office, clearly showing exclusion as to CHSEPTA only. Such a restriction was not placed on other PTA's throughout the District. Please refer to Mr Morton’s August 31, 2026 email as well as the September 4, 2026 emails from Mr. Morton and Mr. Guy to all principals. Also note that Mr. Morton's September 4, 2026 was read into the public record at the September 13, 2026 Board meeting, however, Mr. Morton changed words as he read, altering the context/factual integrity of the statement. Furthermore, CHSEPTA's consulting counsel has advised that restricting communication channels, including failing to distribute CHSEPTA material since at least September 13, 2026 and conditioning only CHSEPTA's participation in back to school nights on permission from another group, is easily sufficient to make a prima facie claim of viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment. Please also see Cailtin Mallory's August 26, 2026 email defining viewpoint discrimination and then stating she is engaging in such conduct.
Moreover, CHSEPTA's refusal to meet with Mr. Morton, a party whom CHSEPTA alleges is actively discriminating against CHSEPTA, is irrelevant to the Board's decision whether to conduct an investigation. Refusing to meet with a party who is currently and actively discriminating against CHSEPTA is "certainly CHSEPTA's prerogative" and supports CHSEPTA's allegations of discrimination. Unless there is a policy which applies only to CHSEPTA that we are unaware of, a Board investigation is not conditioned upon the parties meeting prior to an investigation.
Your response denying any past or ongoing discrimination against CHSEPTA is biased and based solely on the District's inaccurate facts, a misunderstanding of the law, and highlights why an independent investigation is necessary. As the Board/District's retained counsel, you are obligated to protect the Board/District's interests, making your opinion in no way neutral or unbiased and rendering your opinion regarding whether there was discrimination against CHSEPTA superfluous. Your response highlights an ongoing District tactic of ignoring complaints in order to force parties, especially those making disability and/or special education related complaints, to bring litigation regarding these disputes at their own expense while the District uses retained outside counsel with taxpayer dollars. See https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2026/10/ex-justice-details-how-nj-courts-fail-disabled-kids-and-their-families
Please provide a basis for denying CHSEPTA's request to "commission" an independent, neutral, third party investigation which is not solely based on your biased opinion. Please also provide the date when the Board met and voted not to conduct an investigation, as well as when the minutes from such a vote will be made available. Also note that CHSEPTA's request for an investigation was on behalf of CHSEPTA as an entity - responding to only Jim and Laurie Neary is inappropriate and may give the impression that Mr. and Mrs. Neary are being personally targeted and retaliated against for their viewpoints.
Regards,
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Katherine A. Gilfillan
Date: Fri, Oct 23, 2026 at 12:20 PM
Subject: RE: Response to Request for Investigation
To: CHSEPTA
CC: Winters, Gina , Greenbaum, Adam , Morton, Kwame
There was no vote take and no vote is necessary. The declination of the invitation to commission an investigation is that there is no reasonable basis on which to conclude that any discriminatory action was taken. Your allegations, as they stand, do not allege a cognizable complaint. Respectfully, I understand that you have a contrary interpretation and point of view.
I have removed the entirety of the Board to ensure that there are no OPMA violations. As you are surely aware, the Board is not able to conduct business via electronic mail. Your continued emails are an invitation to do otherwise.
Regards,
Kate Gilfillan
New special master report finds rampant delays, judicial bias in New Jersey special education legal challenges, slowing due process.
