S.W. and N.W., on behalf of minor child, M.W. v. Board of Education of the Township of Maurice River, Cumberland County, 7/17/2023, (#216-23)

216-23
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
S.W. and N.W., on behalf of minor child, M.W.,
Petitioners,
v.
Board of Education of the Township of Maurice
River, Cumberland County,
Respondent.
Synopsis
Petitioners challenged the decision of the respondent Board to relocate M.W.’s bus stop from their
driveway to a consolidated school bus stop located approximately one-tenth of one mile away from
petitioners’ home. Petitioners contended that there is no safe walking path between their home and
the new bus stop. A hearing in this matter was held on April 27, 2023.
The ALJ found, inter alia, that: 	the Commissioner will not overturn the decision of a local board of
education in the absence of a finding that its were arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable; in this case,
the Board determined a need to consolidate bus stops prior to the start of the 2022-2023 school year;
M.W.’s bus stop was changed from in front of her home to a consolidated stop approximately three
hundred feet away; 	petitioners argued that the new bus stop location is unsafe because it is on a
heavily traveled road that lacks a sufficient shoulder and proper maintenance, and has a posted speed
limit of fifty mph; however, the proposed consolidation of bus stops was needed for safety reasons to
reduce the number of home stops and to help alleviate a bus driver shortage; members of the Board
listened to parental concerns about the new bus stops , investigated the new consolidated bus routes
and determined that the plan was safe and efficient . The ALJ concluded that petitioners have not met
their burden to demonstrate that the decision of the Board in adopting the consolidated bus stop
proposal was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. 	Accordingly, the ALJ ordered the petition
dismissed.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurred with the ALJ’s detailed findings and conclusions, and adopted
the Initial Decision of the OAL as the final decision in this case. 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.

OAL Dkt. No. EDU 11099-22
Agency Dkt. No. 318-11/22
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
S.W. and N.W., on behalf of minor child, M.W.,
Petitioners,
v.
Board of Education of the Township of
Maurice River, Cumberland County,
Respondent.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law
(OAL) have been reviewed and considered. The parties did not file exceptions.
Upon review, and for the reasons thoroughly detailed in the Initial Decision, the
Commissioner concurs with the Administrative Law Judge that petitioners failed to
demonstrate that the Board’s decision to relocate M.W.’s school bus stop from the petitioners’
driveway to a consolidated school bus stop located approximately one-tenth of one mile away
from petitioners’ home was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
Accordingly, the petition of appeal is hereby dismissed.
216-23

2
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER2
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.
2 Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:4-34, this matter has been delegated to Assistant Commissioner Kathleen Ehling.
July 17, 2023
July 19, 2023

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
AGENCY DKT. NO. 318-11/22
S.W. AND N.W. ON BEHALF OF M.W.,
Petitioners,
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE
TOWNSHIP OF MAURICE RIVER,
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
Respondent.
___________________________________
S.W. and N.W., petitioners pro se
Erin R. Thompson, Esq., for respondent (Birchmeier & Powell, LLC, attorneys)
Record Closed: May 22, 2023 	Decided: 	June 20, 2023
BEFORE KATHLEEN M. CALEMMO, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioners, S.W. and N.W. on behalf of their daughter, M.W. challenged the
decision by the respondent, Board of Education of the Township of Maurice River (Board)
changing their daughter’s bus stop from their residence to Park Drive and Hesstown Road
because they allege there is no safe walking route from their home to the new bus stop.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
2
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Petitioner 	filed 	a 	petition 	of 	appeal 	with 	the 	Commissioner 	of 	Education
Controversies and Disputes (the Commissioner) on November 18, 2022. The respondent
filed its answer on December 8, 2022. 	On December 12, 2022, the matter was
transmitted to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), where it was filed on December 13,
2022, as a contested case. 	N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to B-15 and N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to F-13.
2019.
The hearing was held on April 27, 2023. After receipt of the closing summations
on May 22, 2023, the record closed.
FACTUAL DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
I FIND the following to be the undisputed FACTS of the case:
Prior to the commencement of the 2022-2023 school year, the Board determined
the need to consolidate bus stops. 	M.W.’s stop was changed from in front of her home
to a consolidated stop approximately three hundred feet away.
In August 2022, before M.W. was scheduled to start eighth grade, petitioners
received bus information, notifying them of the new bus stop. 	Once notified of the new
bus stop, petitioners brought their safety concerns to the Board. Petitioners maintained
that there was no safe walking route from their home to the bus stop because the road
lacked a sufficient shoulder and the posted speed limit was fifty miles per hour.
Petitioners further maintained that the road is highly traveled and not well maintained.
The white shoulder line is washed out in spots or covered with debris. 	They also
expressed issues with flooding even after a normal rainstorm.
Maurice River is a rural community of approximately ninety-two miles. There are
three State Highways, State Highway 47, State Highway 49, and Millville/Mays Landing
Road. 	Only the state highways have paved shoulders. 	Most of the roads in Maurice

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
3
River have dirt or gravel shoulders. 	Some of the roads are unpaved. 	There are very
limited sidewalks.
During 	the 	2022-2023 	school 	year, 	the 	Board 	was 	responsible 	for 	busing
approximately three hundred and fifty elementary students and two hundred high school
students. The buses traveled on all the roads through out Maurice River.
The new consolidated bus stop at Hesstown and Park Drive accommodated five
or six students. 	The bus was able to pull into the stop off the road to an area that was
large enough to accommodate parked cars. The stop was considered centrally located
for all students to access being approximately one tenth of a mile from the impacted
students’ homes.
TESTIMONY
Petitioners
S.W. believed that the Board did not exercise due diligence in investigating her
safety concerns. On September 8, 2022, S.W. and N.W. sent an email to Susan Walkup,
Transportation Coordinator, and to Dr. Cohen, Superintendent, to express their concerns.
(P-1.) 	The ability of their daughter to safely walk from their home to the new bus stop
was their main concern. They did not believe that Hesstown Road was safe for walking
for anyone, especially children. 	After attending the Board meeting on September 20,
2022, and learning that the bus stops were going to remain in place, S.W. sent another
email and included Patricia Powell, (Powell), Business Administrator, because she felt
her safety concerns had not been addressed. (P-2.) S.W. outlined her safety concerns
to include no sufficient shoulder, uneven ground, speed limit of fifty miles per hour, and
flooding concerns.
Although Dr. Cohen responded by email, dated October 5, 2022, S.W. felt his
answer was vague and non-responsive. (P-3.)

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
4
S.W. wanted to attend the Transportation Committee meeting, but her request was
denied. 	She sent an email dated October 27, 2022, so the committee would have her
main safety concerns, including a video of flooding after a normal rainfall, along with her
daughter’s comment about fearing heavy traffic coming in both directions with nowhere
for her go. (P-4.) By email, dated November 7, 2022, Dr. Cohen advised S.W. that the
Transportation Committee reviewed all her concerns but voted to keep the bus stop in
place. 	(P-5.) 	S.W. was not satisfied. 	She wanted information which adequately
addressed her safety concerns.
S.W. walked the route and took pictures. 	(P-6.) 	The pictures showed that the
ground on the sides of the road is uneven and overgrown. 	Although the bus stop is on
the same side of the street as their home, M.W. crosses the street to the east side to walk
home so she can see the traffic coming towards her. The east side is covered with debris
and trash.
S.W. has lived in her home for fifteen years. 	She acknowledged that Maurice
River, not the school district, is responsible for snow, shrubbery, and debris removal along
Hesstown Road. She did not contact Maurice River about the condition of the shoulder,
only the Board.
N.W. testified that after fifteen years of living on Hesstown Road, they are very
familiar with how unsafe it is. It is not safe for anyone to walk. He understood the need
to consolidate bus stops but questioned the desire for efficiency over safety.
Respondents
Susan Walkup (Walkup) is the transportation coordinator. She was hired by the
Board two years ago. She received her transportation supervisor certification eight years
ago. She has fifteen years of experience in driving a school bus. During her first year as
the transportation coordinator, Walkup studied the bus routes but made no changes. As
a result of driving and studying the routes, she proposed consolidating fifty bus stops
beginning in the 2022-2023 school year.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
5
She 	understood 	that 	parents 	prefer 	front 	door 	stops, 	but 	central 	location
community bus stops are safer for bus drivers and children. She drove the new and old
routes with the business administrator, Powell.
To provide Dr. Cohen and the Board members with visualization of the new routes,
Walkup drove them in a school bus to visit eleven of the new bus stops where parents
had expressed concerns. 	The tour included the Hesstown Road and Park Drive new bus
stop. There were no expressed concerns about the safety of this sight. Walkup did not
view any impediments to M.W. walking to and from her home on the grassy shoulder area
alongside the road.
Walkup is very familiar with Hesstown Road. It is not a major road and there are
no sidewalks, which is typical for Maurice River Township. 	This stop was selected
because it was centrally located for all impacted students, being approximately one tenth
of a mile from all their homes. 	The location was off the road and large enough to
accommodate parked cars for parents. While waiting for the bus, the children are off the
road. She deemed the location safe for the students and safe for the bus driver.
Due to S.W.’s and N.W.’s concerns about flooding. 	Walkup drove the road with
Powell on January 31, 2023, after it had been raining for about six hours. 	There were
puddles but no safety concerns. Powell took pictures of the road. (R-6.)
In her professional opinion, the new bus stop did not present any safety concerns.
Patricia Powell has been the school’s business administrator for the past twenty-
one years. Powell hired Walkup to be the transportation coordinator. Facing a bus driver
shortage, part of Walkup’s duties was to study the routes for efficiency and safety. After
Walkup revised the routes, Powell went with her on a school bus to experience the
changes. 	There had been too many home bus stops that needed to be consolidated.
When buses make multiple short stops on the same road, there is more cause for concern
from aggressive drivers. Powell deemed Walkup’s proposals to be safe and needed.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
6
After Powell reviewed the proposal for the new routes, she sent the information to
the Board’s Transportation Committee for their review. At the August 22, 2022, meeting
the Board approved the proposal to consolidate bus stops. 	After the new bus passes
were sent to the families, complaints about the changes were received. To address these
complaints, Walkup took Powell, Dr. Cohen, the Board president, and two members of
the Transportation Committee on a bus trip to experience the old and new routes. There
were complaints about eleven consolidated stops. At each new stop, the Board members
would vote yes or no on whether to keep the change. The stop at issue got a unanimous
yes vote from the Transportation Committee members. Powell believed the consolidated
routes were more efficient.
The new stop on Hesstown and Park Road was situated at an entrance to a trailer
park. It was wide enough to accommodate parked cars and all impacted students had an
equal walking distance of about one tenth of a mile. There were no expressed concerns
about the walkability of the grassy dirt shoulder running along the roadway. In Powell’s
opinion, the distance between petitioners’ house and the bus stop was walkable with
sufficient room to walk on the grassy/dirt area off the limited shoulder.
After a rainstorm, Powell returned to the area with Walkup. 	She took pictures of
the road and did not notice any flooding concerns. (R-6.)
Robert A. Chard (Chard) is the chairman of the Transportation Committee. Chard
has been a Board member for nineteen years. 	He has been on the Transportation
Committee for sixteen years. Chard grew up on Hesstown Road, near where petitioners
currently live. 	He is very familiar with all the roads in the Township because he spent
twenty-five years as a Maurice River police officer.
In July 2022, after receiving the information on the proposed consolidation of bus
stops, he personally drove the new route. 	He thought the plan to cut down the number
of stops was good for the children and the bus drivers. 	He had no issues with the
proposal.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
7
He described Hesstown Road as having one lane in each direction with a dirt
shoulder. He noted that the speed limit was forty-five miles per hour. He was advised on
cross-examination by S.W. that the speed limit is fifty miles per hour.
Chard participated on the bus trip to review the new sites. 	At the Hesstown and
Park stop, he got off the bus and walked a short distance. 	From what he viewed, he
believed petitioners’ daughter could easily walk to her home. 	When the members got
back on the bus, they unanimously voted to keep the consolidated stop. 	Chard also
viewed the video of the road during a rainstorm, but it had no effect on his decision. At
the Board meeting, Chard voted to approve the consolidated stop.
Having heard the testimony presented at the hearing, and having reviewed the
documentary evidence, I FIND the following additional FACTS:
The proposed consolidation of bus stops was needed for safety to reduce the
number of home stops and to help alleviate the shortage of bus drivers. 	After voting to
approve the consolidation plan, the Board listened to the concern of the parents. Walkup
took members of the Board on a school bus tour to directly experience the proposed
changes. 	They were able to experience first-hand from the seat of a bus, these new
routes and stops.
The petitioner’s concern is not with the site, but rather with their daughter’s inability
to safely walk to and from their home to the bus stop. Without access to sidewalks, the
only way to walk from the house to the bus stop is on the shoulder and grassy area of a
road where cars can drive at speeds of fifty miles per hour. The pictures showed a grass,
gravel, and dirt area off the sides of the road. 	(R-6 and P-6.) 	Testimony from Walkup,
Powell, and Chard about the walkability of the shoulder area differed from S.W. and N.W.
While I do not doubt the sincerity of the petitioners and their obvious motive to keep their
daughter as safe as possible, I was more persuaded by the pictures from both parties
and the testimony from respondent’s witnesses that there was sufficient room to walk.
The terrain was uneven, and overgrown, but there was room to safely walk the short
distance from petitioners’ home to the bus stop. 	All the students to the new site were
required to navigate one tenth of a mile to this new communal bus stop.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
8
Petitioners’ 	flooding 	concern 	was 	also 	investigated 	by 	the 	Board. 	The
Transportation Committee reviewed the video she submitted. 	Moreover, Walkup and
Powell drove the road after a six-hour rainstorm and found no concerns.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Commissioner will not overturn the decision of a local board in the absence of
a finding that the action below was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. 	T.B.M. v.
Moorestown 	Bd. 	of 	Educ., 	EDU 	2780-07, 	Initial 	Decision 	(February 	6, 	2008),
<http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/oal/> (citing Thomas v. Morris Twp. Bd. of Educ., 89
N.J. Super. 327, 332 (App. Div. 1965), aff’d, 46 N.J. 581(1966)). The Commissioner will
not substitute his judgment for that of the board of education, whose exercise of its
discretion may not be disturbed unless shown to be “patently arbitrary, without rational
basis or induced by improper motives.” Kopera v. W. Orange Bd. of Educ., 60 N.J. Super.
288, 294 (App. Div. 1960). 	Our courts have held that “[w]here there is room for two
opinions, action is not arbitrary or capricious when exercised honestly and upon due
consideration, even though it may be believed that an erroneous conclusion has been
reached.” 	Bayshore Sewage Co. v. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 122 N.J. Super. 184, 199-200
(Ch. Div. 1973), aff’d, 131 N.J. Super. 37 (App. Div. 1974). Thus, to prevail, the petitioner
must demonstrate that the Board acted in bad faith, or in utter disregard of the
circumstances before it. 	T.B.M., EDU 2780-07. 	It is a weighty burden; one which I
CONCLUDE these petitioners have not met. 	This record has presented me with no
evidence that would suggest that the actions of this Board, or its personnel, were taken
in bad faith or in utter disregard of the circumstances presented.
N.J.S.A. 18A:39-1 provides that for “elementary school pupils who live more than
two miles from their public school of attendance or secondary school pupils who live more
than two and one-half miles from their public school of attendance, the district shall
provide transportation to and from school . . .” 	However, local school boards are given
broad discretion to “make reasonable classifications for furnishing transportation, taking
into account differences in the degree of traffic and other conditions existing in the various
sections of the district.” Buonocore v. Hillsdale Bd. of Educ., 92 N.J.A.R.2d (EDU) 655,

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
9
658 (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). “It is well-settled that a local school
board’s action lying within their discretion will not be overturned unless it is arbitrary,
without rational basis, or induced by improper motives.” Lemma v. Bd. of Educ. of Twp.
of Branchburg, EDU 8953-97, Initial Decision (July 22, 1998).
Further, “responsibility for the removal of traffic safety hazards belongs to the
municipal governing authority rather than to the school boards.” Mr. & Mrs. T.F.S. ex rel.
J.R.S. v. S. Brunswick Twp. Bd. of Educ., EDU 10118-05, Initial Decision (June 29, 2006)
(citing Schrenk v. Ridgewood Bd. of Educ., 1961 S.L.D. 185, 187)), adopted, Comm’r
(August 4, 2006), < https://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/oal/ >.
Here, petitioners’ daughter has been asked to walk approximately one tenth of a
mile along a rural road to her assigned bus stop. Petitioners assert that the shoulder is
not safe for walking, made even worse by rain. However, based on a review of the images
admitted into evidence, the road contains no obvious safety concerns and there is a
sufficiently wide grassy dirt area for walking. I agree that the terrain does not look even
and there are areas in need of maintenance, but it remains, nonetheless, walkable. There
is a concern about the fifty miles per hour speed limit and aggressive driving in this area.
However, these concerns and the maintenance of the shoulder to the roadway are the
responsibility of the governing authority and not the school Board.
The Board’s investigation was thorough and involved physical inspections of the
route and ultimately a determination that the bus stop was safe and accessible by all
impacted students. Petitioners have not shown that the Board ignored obvious dangers
in making their determination.
Local boards of education have wide discretion to determine appropriate bus
routes and stops for school children. The decisions of local boards will only be overturned
if arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise unreasonable.
The Board herein thoroughly investigated the new consolidated bus routes and
determined that the plan was safe and efficient. 	Petitioners have not shown that the
roadway was unreasonably dangerous or that the Board had otherwise acted in an

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
10
arbitrary or discriminatory fashion in denying their request to reject the bus stop proposal
and allow their daughter to be picked up and returned to their home.
I CONCLUDE petitioners have not met their burden to demonstrate that the
decision of the Board, in adopting the consolidated bus stop proposal was arbitrary,
capricious, or unreasonable.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, I ORDER that the appeal be DISMISSED.
I 	hereby 	FILE 	this 	initial 	decision 	with 	the 	COMMISSIONER 	OF 	THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized
to make a final decision in this matter. 	If the Commissioner of the Department of
Education does not adopt, modify, or reject this decision within forty-five days and unless
such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final
decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
11
Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was
mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the COMMISSIONER OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ATTN: 	BUREAU OF CONTROVERSIES AND
DISPUTES, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey 08625-
0500, marked “Attention: 	Exceptions.” 	A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the
judge and to the other parties.
June 20, 2023
DATE 	KATHLEEN M. CALEMMO, ALJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
KMC/tat

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
12
APPENDIX
WITNESSES
For Petitioner:
S.W.
N.W.
For Respondent:
Susan Walkup
Patricia Powell
Robert Chard
EXHIBITS
For Petitioner:
P-1 	Email, dated September 8, 2022, regarding safety concerns
P-2 	Email, dated September 21, 2022, regarding lack of response
P-3 	Follow-up email, dated October 5, 2022 and video of flooding
P-4 	Email, dated October 27, 2022 with concerns for Transportation Committee
P-5 	Email, dated November 6, 2022
P-6 	Pictures of walking route
For Respondent:
R-1 	Email exchange

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 11099-22
13
R-2 	Board minutes, dated September 20, 2022
R-3 	Board minutes, dated October 18, 2022
R-4 	Board minutes, dated November 21, 2022
R-5 	Google map of area
R-6 	Photographs of new bus stop after rain on January 31, 2023
R-7 	Photographs of other bus stops after rain on January 31, 2023