In The Matter of Obdulia Gonzalez, Israel Varela, Milady Tejeda, Samuel Lebreault, and Kenneth Puccio, Board of Education of The City of Perth Amboy, Middlesex County, 1/14/18, (#18-19SEC)

1
18-19SEC (SEC Decision: https://www.state.nj.us/education/legal/ethics/2018/C08-15.pdf)
Agency Dkt. No.. 290-11/18
SEC Dkt. No. C08-15
In the Matter of Obdulia Gonzalez, 	:
Israel Varela, Milady Tejeda, Samuel 	Commissioner of Education
Lebreault and Kenneth Puccio, 	:
Board of Education of the City of 	Decision
Perth Amboy, Middlesex County. 	:
The record of this matter and the decision of the School Ethics Commission have
been reviewed. The Commission found that respondents Gonzalez, Varela and Tejeda1 violated
N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24(c) of the School Ethics Act for voting to approve a settlement agreement that resulted
in a personal benefit to each respondent – specifically, the dismissal of ethics charges against them – and
recommended a 60-day suspension or, to the extent that any of the respondents no longer serve as a board
member, the Commission recommended a penalty of censure. 	The Commission’s decision was
forwarded 	pursuant 	to 	N.J.S.A. 	18A:12-29 	for 	the 	Commissioner’s 	final 	determination 	on 	the
recommended penalty. 	Respondents did not file exceptions to the recommended penalty, nor was the
Commission’s underlying finding of violation appealed to the Commissioner pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:4.
Counsel for the respondents did, however, inform the Commissioner that all three respondents had
resigned from the Board, so they would only be subject to a censure rather than a suspension.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the penalty recommended by the
Commission. 	Accordingly, respondents Gonzalez, Varela and Tejeda shall each be censured as school
officials found to have violated the School Ethics Act.
IT IS SO ORDERED.2
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	January 14, 2019
Date of Mailing: 	January 17, 2019
1 Respondent Puccio was dismissed from this matter, and Respondent Lebreault accepted a penalty of censure as part of a
settlement agreement. Accordingly, this decision only involves respondents Gonzalez, Varela and Tejeda.
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).