In the Matter of Anthony Remy, Board of Education of Asbury Park, Monmouth County, 7/6/2022, (#153-22SEC)

SEC Dkt. No. T28-21
Agency Dkt. No. 122-5/22
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
In the Matter of Anthony Remy,
Board of Education of the City of Asbury Park,
Monmouth 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 April 26, 2022 Order to Show Cause
but prior to the SEC’s May 24, 2022 meeting; therefore, a penalty of censure 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 notes that in previous matters, when a respondent completed
the requisite training after the issuance of the Order to Show Cause – but prior to the SEC’s meeting
date – the penalty has been a reprimand. See, In the Matter of Annette Beasley, Irvington Board of
Education, Essex County, Commissioner Decision No. 223-21SEC, decided October 13, 2021; In the
Matter of Marcos Garciga, Cliffside Park Board of Education, Bergen County, Commissioner Decision No.
224-21SEC, decided October 13, 2021; In the Matter of Gary Yedman, Seaside Park Board of Education,
Ocean County, Commissioner Decision No. 230-21SEC, decided October 13, 2021. As the instant case
arises from the same circumstances, the Commissioner finds that a reprimand is the appropriate penalty
153-22SEC

2
for the respondent’s failure to timely complete the requisite training.1 Accordingly, the respondent shall
be reprimanded as a school official found to have violated the School Ethics Act.
IT IS SO ORDERED.2
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision:
Date of Mailing:
1 The SEC has previously recommended a penalty of a censure when a board member completed the training after
the issuance of the Order to Show Cause but prior to the SEC’s next meeting; however, the Commissioner rejected
the penalty recommendation in that case and advised that a reprimand is the appropriate penalty under those
circumstances. In the Matter of Robyn Schneider, The Ethical Community Charter School, Hudson County,
Commissioner Decision No. 140-16SEC, decided April 11, 2016.
2 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to P.L. 2008, c. 36
(N.J.S.A 18A:6-9.1).
July 6, 2022
July 6, 2022

1
Before the School Ethics Commission
Docket No.: T28-21
Decision for Failure to Complete Mandatory Training
Requirement in a Timely Manner
I/M/O Anthony Remy,
Asbury Park Board of Education, Monmouth 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 April 26, 2022, and also served on April 26,
2022, via electronic mail.1 The OTSC directed Anthony Remy (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 April 26, 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 Asbury Park Board of Education (Board), located in
Monmouth 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 on an annual basis. For convenience and ease, the training is offered online so any board
member may complete it at any time, from anywhere. Respondent was required to complete the
Governance 1 training program by December 31, 2021.
On or about April 15, 2022, NJSBA provided the Commission with the names of those
board of education members who failed to complete mandated training by December 31, 2021, and
1 As a result of the ongoing Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, and the implementation of electronic filing,
service of process was effectuated by the Commission through electronic transmission only.
.

2
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. 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 April 26, 2022.
To date, there is no dispute that Respondent did not complete his required training by
December 31, 2021, and did not complete the training prior to the issuance of the Commission’s
OTSC. After having been served with the OTSC, Respondent completed his training requirement on
May 3, 2022, but did not respond to the Commission’s OTSC as to why he did not complete
training by December 31, 2021.
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 meeting on May 24, 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, and because training is regularly completed annually and
can be completed from any computer or device with an internet connection, the Commission
recommends that the Commissioner of Education impose a penalty of censure.
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
Bureau of Controversies and Disputes, P.O. Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey 08625, marked
“Attention: Comments on Ethics Commission Sanction.”2 A copy of any comments filed must be
sent to the Commission (school.ethics@doe.nj.gov) and all other parties.
2 An electronic submission may also be sent to controversiesdisputesfilings@doe.nj.gov.

3
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: May 24, 2022