PATRICIA McRAE V. STATE-OPERATED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, ESSEX COUNTY, 4/20/17, (#114-17)

114-17 (OAL Decision: Not yet available online)
PATRICIA MCRAE, 	:
PETITIONER, 	: 	COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
V. 	: 	DECISION
STATE-OPERATED SCHOOL DISTRICT 	:
OF THE CITY OF NEWARK,
ESSEX COUNTY, 	:
RESPONDENT. 	:
SYNOPSIS
Petitioner – a non-tenured second grade teacher employed by the respondent Board through the
Provisional Teacher Program Alternate Route for the 2015-2016 school year – appealed the non-
renewal of her contract following notification, by letter received on or about May 11, 2016, that she
would not be renewed for the 2016-2017 school year based upon her performance and conduct.
Petitioner filed a petition for emergent relief on August 24, 2016, alleging that she was terminated as
a result of ineffective and partially effective performance ratings. Petitioner asserted that funds were
withheld from her paycheck to pay for required mentoring services that were never provided to her,
and therefore her evaluations should be viewed as unfair and considered null and void. 	The Board
filed a motion for summary decision.
The ALJ found, inter alia, that: there are no material facts at issue herein, and the matter is ripe for
summary decision; 	petitioner had notice of the Board’s decision to non-renew her contract as of
May 11, 2016; 	the time for filing a petition is clearly set forth at N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.3(i), which
provides that a petition of appeal before the Commissioner must be filed no later than the 90th day
from the date of receipt of the notice of a final order or ruling; in this case, the petitioner filed her
appeal on August 24, 2016, which was 106 days after she received notice of non-renewal; and
jurisdiction over whether respondent had a contractual obligation to provide mentoring services or
failed to provide such services does not rest with the Commissioner or with the OAL. 	The ALJ
concluded 	that 	the 	within 	petition 	was 	not 	timely 	filed 	pursuant 	to 	N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.3(i).
Accordingly, the ALJ granted the Board’s motion for summary decision and dismissed the petition.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurred with the ALJ that the within petition was untimely filed
and must be dismissed on those grounds. 	In so determining, the Commissioner clarified that
petitioner’s allegations related to teacher mentoring services implicate New Jersey school law, as all
novice teachers are required to enroll and successfully complete the respective district’s mentoring
program in order to become eligible for a standard teaching certificate. 	N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.4, 8.7.
Accordingly, the recommended decision of the OAL was adopted with modification. 	The petition
was dismissed.
This synopsis is not part of the Commissioner’s decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It
has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commissioner.
April 20, 2017

1
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 13150-16
AGENCY DKT. NO. 230-8/16
PATRICIA MCRAE, 	:
PETITIONER, 	: 	COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
V. 	: 	DECISION
STATE-OPERATED SCHOOL DISTRICT 	:
OF THE CITY OF NEWARK,
ESSEX COUNTY, 	:
RESPONDENT. 	:
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law
have been reviewed. The parties did not file exceptions to the Initial Decision.
Upon such review, the Commissioner concurs with the Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) that the petition of appeal was time barred under N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.3(i)1 because, consistent
with well-settled law, the ninety-day time period accrues from the employee’s receipt of the board of
education’s notice of nonrenewal.2 Furthermore, a Donaldson hearing – an “informal appearance”
before the board “to permit the staff member to convince the members of the board to offer
reemployment”3 – does not toll the time for an employee to file a petition of appeal with the
Commissioner because the Donaldson hearing occurs after the board has already made its decision to
not renew the employee’s contract and has acted on that decision by providing notice of nonrenewal
to the employee. 	Therefore, the day that petitioner received the notice of nonrenewal from the
1 N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.3(i) provides in relevant part: “The petitioner shall file a petition no later than the 90th day from
the date of receipt of the notice of a final order, ruling or other action by the district board of education . . . .”
(emphasis added).
2 E.g., Suarez v. State-Operated School District of the City of Jersey City, OAL Dkt No. EDU 11077-04,
Commissioner Decision No. 393-05 (Oct. 28, 2005); Perkins v. Bd. of Educ. of the Twp. of Gloucester, OAL Dkt.
No. EDU 13750-15, Commissioner Decision No. 76-16, (Feb. 19, 2016); Campbell v. Bd. of Educ. of the City of
Camden, OAL Dkt. No. EDU 480-12, Commissioner Decision No. 359-12, (Aug. 30, 2012); Clark v. Bd. of Educ.
of the Twp. of Winslow, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12981 (D.N.J. Feb. 9, 2011).
3 See N.J.S.A. 18A:27-4.1.

2
District – May 11, 2016 – is the date from which petitioner had ninety days to file her cause of
action. 	Additionally, requesting a statement of reasons and a Donaldson hearing does not provide
“constructive notice” to a board that its former employee intends to file a petition of appeal with the
Commissioner at a later time. 	There is simply no legal basis for such assertions made by the
petitioner.
The Commissioner clarifies that the petitioner’s allegations related to teacher
mentoring services do implicate New Jersey school law. 	All novice teachers – irrespective of
whether they are participants in the Alternate Route Program – are required to enroll in and
successfully complete the respective district’s mentoring program in order to become eligible for a
standard teaching certificate. 	See N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.4, 8.7. Therefore, whether petitioner received
proper mentoring services (or allegedly failed to take advantage of the mentoring services offered to
her by the District) falls within the purview of the Commissioner. 	The record in this matter,
however, is insufficient to consider the merits of petitioner’s allegations regarding the District’s
mentoring 	program. 	More 	importantly, 	petitioner’s 	appeal 	is 	time 	barred 	pursuant 	to
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.3(i).4
Accordingly, the recommended decision of the ALJ – as modified herein – is adopted
as the final decision in this matter for the reasons expressed therein, and the petition is hereby
dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.5
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	April 20, 2017
Date of Mailing: 	April 20, 2017
4 The record also indicates that the petitioner did not dispute the contents of her evaluations or raise her concerns
about the mentoring program prior to the filing of this untimely petition.
5 This decision may be appealed to the Superior Court, Appellate Division, pursuant to P.L. 2008, c. 36
(N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9.1)