BOE wrongly accuses student of living in Trenton
HAMILTON » Talk about a costly mistake.
The Hamilton Township Board of Education wrongly demanded $14,034 in tuition from a township mom who had properly enrolled her daughter at Greenwood Elementary School.
The child was legally entitled to a free public education in Hamilton. After all, she and her mother lived here as domiciled township residents, according to Dr. Lamont Repollet, commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Education.
But the Hamilton school board presented a different narrative, falsely accusing the child of living in Trenton with her father for much of the 201718 schoolyear.
The Hamilton Township School District launched an investigation into the child’s residency last year after a private citizen complained the first-grade Greenwood student lived in another jurisdiction, according to the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law.
The child’s parents were married but separated. The child lived with the mother in Hamilton, while the father lived with two roommates in Trenton. The child’s maternal grandmother owned the homes at the Hamilton and Trenton addresses, according to the findings of Administrative Law Judge Judith Lieberman.
Repollet issued an order dated Jan. 17 adopting Lieberman’s decision, which determined the Hamilton school board presented “insufficient” evidence to support its allegations the student lived in the capital city.
The district used two of its investigators, Michael Celentana and Clarence Stockton, to secretly surveil the Hamilton home where the student lived with her mother and the Trenton home where the student would sometimes spend time with her father.
The student exited the Trenton house and was driven to Greenwood Elementary in Hamilton 13 times during a 63-day investigation conducted by the district’s residency investigators, according to Lieberman’s findings.
But the child had good reason to spend time with her father in Trenton. The father wanted to spend time with his children, but he had restrictions limiting his access.
Under a restraining order, the father was prohibited from visiting the Hamilton house where the child lived. But the order permitted the father to spend time with his child at his home in Trenton. The child’s mother also supported having the child spend time with the father, especially because it accommodated the mother’s hectic work schedule and allowed the child to spend time with family as opposed to being placed in costly child care.
In reviewing the facts of the case, the administrative law judge and the state education commissioner determined the child was properly attending Hamilton public schools during the 2017-18 schoolyear and dismissed the school board’s counterpetition that sought over $14,000 in tuition reimbursement.
If the school board wants to continue its fight for tuition reimbursement, it may appeal the commissioner’s decision to the New Jersey Superior Court’s Appellate Division.