In the Matter of Muhammad Mahmoud, Board of Education of the Village of Ridgewood, Bergen County, 10/24/22, (#282-22SEC)

SEC Dkt. No. T05-22
Agency Dkt. No. 248-9/22
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
In the Matter of Muhammad Mahmoud,
Board of Education of the Village of
Ridgewood, Bergen County.
The record of this matter and the decision of the School Ethics Commission (SEC) have been
reviewed. The SEC found that respondent violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-33 by failing to timely complete the
required board member training. The SEC’s decision was forwarded pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:12-29 for
the Commissioner’s final determination on the recommended penalty. The SEC advises that the
respondent ultimately completed training after the issuance of the August 23, 2022 Order to Show
Cause but prior to the SEC’s September 14, 2022 meeting; therefore, a penalty of reprimand is
recommended. Respondent did not file exceptions to the recommended penalty, nor was the SEC’s
underlying finding of a violation appealed to the Commissioner pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:4.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the penalty recommended by the SEC for
respondent’s failure to timely honor an obligation placed upon board members by law. Accordingly, the
respondent is hereby reprimanded as a school official found to have violated the School Ethics Act.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision:
Date of Mailing:
1 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9.1.
Under N.J.Ct.R. 2:4-1(b), a notice of appeal must be filed with the Appellate Division within 45 days from the date
of mailing of this decision.
282-22SEC
October 24, 2022
October 24, 2022

1
Before the School Ethics Commission
Docket No.: T05-22
Decision for Failure to Complete Mandatory Training
Requirement in a Timely Manner
I/M/O Muhammad Mahmoud,
Ridgewood Board of Education, Bergen County
I. 	Procedural History
This matter arises from an Order to Show Cause (OTSC) that was issued by the School
Ethics Commission (Commission) at its meeting on August 23, 2022, and also served on August 23,
2022, via electronic mail.1 The OTSC directed Muhammad Mahmoud (Respondent), a “board
member” as defined in N.J.S.A. 18A:12-23 of the School Ethics Act (Act), N.J.S.A. 18A:12-21 et
seq., to show cause as to why the Commission should not find him in violation of the Act, for
failing to complete training as required by N.J.S.A. 18A:12-33 and N.J.A.C. 6A:28-4.1.
In the OTSC served on August 23, 2022, the Commission notified Respondent that he had
twenty (20) days to respond to the OTSC, and further advised that failure to respond would be
deemed an admission of the facts set forth in the OTSC. Respondent was also notified that, upon
receipt of the response or upon expiration of the twenty (20) day time period for so filing, the
Commission may proceed to a determination of a violation on a summary basis (i.e., without a
hearing or further proceedings) in accordance with N.J.A.C. 6A:28-1.6(c), which so permits when
material facts are not in dispute.
II. 	Analysis
The Act was enacted by the New Jersey State Legislature to ensure and preserve public
confidence in members of local boards of education and local school administrators. N.J.S.A.
18A:12-33 and N.J.A.C. 6A:28-4.1 require every board member to complete a training program
prepared and offered by the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA).
Respondent is a member of the Ridgewood Board of Education (Board), located in Bergen
County. As a result of his position on the Board, and in accordance with N.J.S.A. 18A:12-33 and
N.J.A.C. 6A:28-4.1, Respondent is required to complete a mandated training program. For
convenience and ease, the training is offered online so any board member may complete it at any
time, from anywhere. According to NJSBA, Respondent was required to complete the Governance
1 training program by March 31, 2022.2
1 In order to conduct business during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the Commission implemented
an electronic filing system, which remains a permissible method by which the Commission and parties can
effectuate service of process. Consequently, service of process was effectuated by the Commission through
electronic transmission only.
2 The March 31, 2022, deadline is because on an April school board of education election.

2
On or about August 22, 2022, NJSBA provided the Commission with the names of those
board of education members who failed to complete mandated training by March 31, 2022, and the
list provided included Respondent. Prior to this time, multiple communications about mandated
training were sent to Respondent from NJSBA through a variety of means, including targeted e-mail
messages and postings in School Board Notes. More specific information detailing the outreach
efforts of NJSBA to communicate with Respondent and/or the charter school lead about mandated
training is set forth in the attached Certification from NJSBA. See Exhibit A. Notwithstanding all
of these communications, Respondent did not complete mandated training.
In light of Respondent’s failure to complete mandated training, an OTSC was issued by the
Commission, and served on Respondent, via electronic mail, on August 23, 2022.
To date, there is no dispute that Respondent did not complete his required training by March
31, 2022, and did not complete the training prior to the issuance of the Commission’s OTSC. After
having been served with the OTSC, Respondent completed training on August 25, 2022, and also
filed a response to the Commission’s OTSC. More specifically, Respondent stated, “he (incorrectly)
believed that he had previously completed this training; upon realizing his error, he immediately
completed the training.” Importantly, Respondent did not deny that he did not complete training in a
timely fashion.
III. 	Decision/Penalty Recommendation
N.J.A.C. 6A:28-4.2(d) provides that school board members and charter school trustees who
fail to comply with their training mandate shall be considered in violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-33.
Based on the record as set forth above, at its special meeting on September 14 2022, the
Commission 	found 	that 	Respondent 	violated 	N.J.S.A. 	18A:12-33 	and 	N.J.A.C. 	6A:28-4.1.
Respondent received repeated notifications of his training requirement, and had ample opportunity
to complete the mandated training in a timely fashion; nonetheless, he failed to complete training as
required.
Where a violation of the Act is found by the Commission, the Commission may recommend
to the Commissioner of Education that a penalty be imposed. The recommended penalty can include
a reprimand, censure, suspension or removal of the school official. N.J.A.C. 6A:28-10.12. For the
reasons set forth above, the Commission recommends that the Commissioner of Education impose a
penalty of reprimand.
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:12-29(c), this decision shall be forwarded to the Commissioner of
Education for review of the Commission’s recommended penalty. Respondent may either: 1) file
exceptions to the recommended sanction; 2) file an appeal of the Commission’s finding of a
violation; or 3) file both exceptions to the recommended sanction together with an appeal of the
finding of a violation.
Parties taking exception to the recommended sanction of the Commission but not disputing
the Commission’s finding of a violation may file, within thirteen (13) days from the date the
Commission’s decision is forwarded to the Commissioner, written exceptions regarding the
recommended penalty to the Commissioner. The forwarding date shall be the mailing date to the
parties, as indicated below. Such exceptions must be forwarded to: Commissioner of Education, c/o

3
Bureau of Controversies and Disputes, P.O. Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey 08625, marked
“Attention: Comments on Ethics Commission Sanction.”3 A copy of any comments filed must be
sent to the Commission (school.ethics@doe.nj.gov) and all other parties.
Parties seeking to appeal the Commission’s finding of violation must file an appeal pursuant
to the standards set forth at N.J.A.C. 6A:4:1 et seq. within thirty (30) days of the filing date of the
decision from which the appeal is taken. The filing date shall be three (3) days after the date of
mailing to the parties, as shown below. In such cases, the Commissioner’s review of the
Commission’s recommended sanction will be deferred and incorporated into the Commissioner’s
review of the finding of violation on appeal. Where a notice of appeal has been filed on or before
the due date for exceptions to the Commission’s recommended sanction (thirteen (13) days from the
date the decision is mailed by the Commission), exceptions need not be filed by that date, but may
be incorporated into the appellant’s briefs on appeal.
______________________________
Robert W. Bender, Chairperson
Mailing Date: September 14, 2022
3 An electronic submission may also be sent to controversiesdisputesfilings@doe.nj.gov.