S.B., on behalf of minor children, J.B., L.K. and S.K. v. Board of Education of the Brough of Barrington, Camden County, 9/30/21, (#205-21)

205-21
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
S.B., on behalf of minor children, J.B., L.K., and S.K.,
Petitioner,
v.
Board of Education of the Borough of
Barrington, Camden County,
Respondent.
Synopsis
Pro se petitioner appealed the determination of the respondent Board that her minor children were not domiciled
within the Barrington School District from March 8, 2021 until the end of the 2020-21 school year and were
therefore not eligible to receive a free public education in the Barrington public schools. The Board filed a
motion for summary decision and sought reimbursement of tuition for the period of J.B., L.K., and S.K.’s
ineligible attendance.
The ALJ found, inter alia, that: there are no material facts at issue in this case, and the matter is ripe for
summary decision; petitioner’s minor children were enrolled in Barrington schools during the 2019-2020 school
year as Affidavit Students based on S.B.’s claim that the children were residing with their grandmother in
Barrington due to a family or economic hardship; petitioner was notified by the Board in March 2020 that the
documentation she submitted in support of this claim was insufficient to enroll the children as Affidavit
Students; before the children could be removed from the District, all New Jersey schools were ordered closed
due to the COVID 19 epidemic, and the children were permitted to remain enrolled remotely; in February 2021,
the Board notified petitioner that her children had been determined to be ineligible for continued enrollment in
its school district because the grandmother and children were no longer residing in Barrington and S.B. was
found to be living in Magnolia, New Jersey; pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b)(2), petitioner has the burden of
proof in a determination of residency; petitioner has offered no competent proof that she and her minor children
were domiciled in Barrington during the period from March 8, 2021 through the end of the 2020-21 school year;
petitioner has in fact admitted that she has not resided in the District since 2018, and now resides in Haddon
Township. The ALJ concluded that the minor children were not entitled to receive a free public education in
Barrington schools during the period at issue; accordingly, the respondent Board is entitled to reimbursement in
the amount of $8,924.40 for tuition costs during the period of ineligible attendance.
Upon review of the record in this matter, the Commissioner concurred with the ALJ’s findings and conclusion.
The Initial Decision was adopted as the final decision in this matter, and the petitioner was ordered to reimburse
the Board for tuition in the amount of $8,924.40. 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.

1
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 03003-21
Agency Dkt. No. 34-3/21
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
S.B., on behalf of minor children, J.B., L.K.,
and S.K.,
Petitioner,
v.
Board of Education of the Borough of
Barrington, Camden County,
Respondent.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative
Law (OAL) have been reviewed. The parties did not file exceptions.
Upon such review, the Commissioner concurs with the Administrative Law
Judge’s (ALJ) finding that petitioner failed to sustain her burden of establishing that she was a
domiciliary of Barrington from March 8, 2021 to the end of the 2020-21 school year. The
Commissioner further concurs with the ALJ’s conclusion that the minor children were, therefore,
not entitled to a free public education in the District’s schools during that time.
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1b, the Commissioner shall assess tuition against
petitioner for the time period during which the minor children were ineligible to attend school in
Barrington. Therefore, the Board is entitled to tuition reimbursement in the amount of $8,924.40
for the for the time period from March 8, 2021 through the end of the 2020-21 school year,
during which time petitioner’s three minor children were ineligible to attend.
205-21

2
Accordingly, the Initial Decision of the OAL is adopted as the final decision in
this matter. Petitioner is directed to reimburse the Board in the amount of $8,924.40 for tuition
costs incurred during the time period in which J.B., L.K., and S.K. were ineligible to attend
school in Barrington. The petition of appeal is hereby dismissed.
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.
September 30, 2021
September 30, 2021

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION
SUMMARY DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
AGENCY DKT.NO. 34-3/21
S.B. ON BEHALF OF MINOR
CHILDREN J.B., L.K. AND SK.,
Petitioner,
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE
BOROUGH OF BARRINGTON,
CAMDEN COUNTY
Respondent.
S.B., on behalf of minor children J.B, L.K. and S.K. petitioners, pro se
Mark G. Toscano, Esq., for respondent (Comegno Law Group, attorneys)
Record Closed: June 24, 2021 	Decided: July 12, 2021
BEFORE JEFFREY R. WILSON, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner, S.B., on behalf of her minor children J.B, L.K. and S.K., challenges the
determination made by the respondent, Borough of Barrington Board of Education
(Board), that she, her family, and children do not, and have not for some time, resided

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
2
within the Barrington School District. 	The respondent argues that pursuant to N.J.S.A.
18A:38-1(b)(2), the Superintendent may apply to the Board of Education for the removal
of the students, and the Commissioner may assess tuition against the students’ parent or
guardian if the students are deemed ineligible. The respondent seeks payment of tuition
and costs for the number of days J.B, L.K. and S.K. attended school in the Barrington
School District while ineligible to do so.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The matter was filed at the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) on March 26, 2021,
as a contested case. 	N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to 15 and 14F-1 to 13. 	On May 25, 2021, the
respondent filed a motion for summary decision. 	The petitioner filed a response in the
form of two emails, on June 24, 2021, and the record closed.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following facts of this case are not in dispute; therefore, I FIND as FACT:
1. 	On March 4, 2020, it was determined by the District that the petitioners, who were
residing with their grandmother at XXXX Clements Bridge Road, Apartment XXX,
Barrington New Jersey, were ineligible for enrollment in the Barrington School District
as Affidavit Students. 	A formal letter notifying of this determination, was hand
delivered to S.B. on March 4, 2020.
2. 	The Board determined that there was insufficient proof that the children’s’ mother,
S.B., was incapable of caring for the petitioners due to a family or economic hardship.
The documentation submitted by S.B. also indicated that the children would only be
residing with their grandmother in Barrington until the end of the 2019-2020 school
year.
3. 	Despite S.B.’s indication that an appeal would be filed following the Board’s March 4,
2020, letter, no appeal was filed challenging the Board’s determination that the
petitioners did not qualify for enrollment as Affidavit Students.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
3
4. 	Before the children could be removed from the District, all New Jersey schools were
ordered closed by the Governor as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and remained
closed through the end of the 2019-2020 school year. The children were permitted to
remain enrolled in the District during the period of ordered closure, and during the
period in which the District attempted to re-open for in-person instruction.
5. 	In December 2020, the Board learned that the children’s grandmother no longer
resided within the Barrington School District.
6. 	On February 25, 2021, the District sent S.B. a Notice of Ineligibility letter.
7. 	The February 25, 2021, letter detailed new information discovered by the District. The
District learned that the children’s grandmother, and the children themselves, were no
longer residing at the XXXX Clements Bridge Road, Apartment XXX address.
8. 	Around this time, the Board also learned that S.B. has not resided within the Barrington
School District, and in fact, is residing at the XXX E. Evesham Avenue address in
Magnolia, New Jersey.
9. 	In the February 25, 2021, letter, the Board determined that the children were ineligible
for continued enrollment in the Barrington School District because neither the children,
their grandmother, nor S.B. were residing at XXXX Clements Bridge Road, or at any
other address within the Barrington School District.
10. The Board held a meeting on March 8, 2021, wherein S.B. appeared. 	The Board
found that the children were ineligible to continue to attend school free of charge in
Barrington. For the reasons set forth in the February 25, 2021, letter as well as S.B.
admitting that she left the Magnolia School district due to issues with the District, the
Board made this determination of ineligibility.
11. During the March 8, 2021, Board meeting, S.B. alleged to the District, for the first time,
that there was previously a family crisis incident relating to domestic violence. 	S.B.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
4
alleged that this domestic violence incident occurred in the Spring of 2020 and was
the impetus for S.B. and the children to no longer reside at the XXX E. Evesham
Avenue address. 	Prior to the March 8, 2021, meeting, the District had not been
informed of any such alleged family crisis incident.
12. Despite 	repeated 	requests 	from 	the 	Board, 	S.B. 	has 	failed 	to 	provide 	any
documentation supporting her claim that a family crisis incident occurred which
required the children to relocate out of the Magnolia School District.
13. However, even assuming that S.B.’s allegations of a family crisis actually took place,
the petitioners would still not be entitled to attend the Barrington School District free
of charge. If anything, the petitioners would have been allowed to remain enrolled in
the Magnolia School District during the family’s relocation period.
14. Following the March 8, 2021, meeting, the Board issued a letter on March 15, 2021,
outlining their determination that the children are ineligible to continue attending
Barrington Schools.
15. S.B. has admitted to the Board that neither she, the children, nor the children’s
grandmother presently reside within the Barrington School District.
16. The petitioners filed an appeal on March 2, 2021.
17. S.B admitted during the May 10, 2021, telephone prehearing conference in this matter,
that she presently resides at XXXXB Grant Ave, Haddon Township, NJ 08107, (with
J.B., L.K. and S.K.), which residence is not located within the attendance area of the
District.
18. S.B listed XXX E. Evesham Avenue, Magnolia NJ 08049 as her address on the
Residency Appeal form filed on March 24, 2021. The Magnolia residence is similarly
not located within the attendance area of the District.
19. To date, S.B. has provided no further information demonstrating her residence in

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
5
District, or otherwise demonstrating J.B.’s, L.K.’s. and S.K.’s eligibility to attend the
District’s schools.
20. The Board’s daily tuition rate for the 2020-2021 school year was $44.44 per day per
child. 	Therefore, the Board is owed tuition from S.B. in the amount of $8,924.40 for
J.B.’s, L.K.’s and S.K.’s attendance from March 8, 2021, through the end of the school
year.
LEGAL DISCUSSION
N.J.A.C. 1:1-12.5(b) provides that a motion for summary decision may be granted
if the papers and discovery which have been filed, together with the affidavits, if any, show
that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact challenged and that the moving party
is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. See also Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 142 N.J.
520 (1995). The opposing party must submit responding affidavits showing that there is
indeed a genuine issue of material fact, which can only be determined in an evidentiary
proceeding, and that the moving party is not entitled to summary decision as a matter of
law. 	Failure to do so, entitled the moving party to summary judgment. 	Id. at 520.
Moreover, even if the non-moving party comes forward with some evidence, the courts
must grant summary judgment if the evidence is “so one-sided that [moving party] must
prevail as a matter of law.” 	Id. at 536. 	If the non-moving party’s evidence is merely
colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment should not be denied. See
Bowles v. City of Camden, 993 F. Supp. 255, 261 (D.N.J. 1998).
In view of the standard for summary decision, the petitioner’s Residency Appeal
Petition fails and must be dismissed in its entirety based on S.B.’s own admission that
she does not live within the Board’s attendance area. 	N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1 provides that
“Public schools shall be free to the following persons over five and under 20 years of age:
a. Any person who is domiciled within the school district. . . ” 	N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.1(a)(1)
makes clear that “A student is domiciled in the school district when he or she is the child
of a parent or guardian whose domicile is located within the school district.”

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
6
N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b)(2) further provides:
. . . If the superintendent or administrative principal of a school district finds
that the parent or guardian of a child who is attending the schools of the
district is not domiciled within the district and the child is not kept in the
home of another person domiciled within the school district and supported
by him gratis as if the child was the person's own child as provided for in
paragraph (1) of this subsection, the superintendent or administrative
principal may apply to the board of education for the removal of the child.
The parent or guardian shall be entitled to a hearing before the board and
if in the judgment of the board the parent or guardian is not domiciled within
the district or the child is not kept in the home of another person domiciled
within the school district and supported by him gratis as if the child was the
person's own child as provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection, the
board may order the transfer or removal of the child from school. The parent
or guardian may contest the board's decision before the commissioner
within 21 days of the date of the decision and shall be entitled to an
expedited hearing before the commissioner and shall have the burden of
proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the child is eligible for a free
education under the criteria listed in this subsection.
Here, S.B. has failed to show that she resides within and/or been domiciled within
the District. In fact, she has admitted within her Petition and during the initial hearing in
this matter, that she presently resides (with J.B., L.K. and S.K.) at XXXXB Grant Ave,
Haddon Township, NJ 08107, (with J.B., L.K. and S.K.), which residence is not located
within attendance area of the District. S.B. further admits that she has not lived within the
District since 2018. 	S.B. has failed to provide any subsequent proofs that she resides
within the District’s attendance area. 	As a final matter, S.B. herself has provided this
tribunal with a Haddon Township address to receive mail and service in this matter, further
proving that she does not reside within the District’s attendance area.
Based on the foregoing, I CONCLUDE there are no genuine facts in dispute and
that summary decision is warranted.
ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that respondent’s motion for summary decision be
GRANTED. Based upon he the Board’s daily tuition rate for the 2020-2021 school year

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
7
of $44.44 per day per child, it is further ORDERED that the Board is owed tuition from the
Petitioner in the amount of $8,924.40 for J.B.’s, L.K.’s and S.K.’s attendance from March
8, 2021, through the end of the school year.
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.
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.
July 12, 2021
DATE 	JEFFREY R. WILSON, ALJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
JRW/tat

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 03003-21
8
APPENDIX
LIST OF EXHIBITS
For Petitioner:
P-1 	Email response to motion for summary decision, transmitted to the Office of
Administrative Law on June 24, 2021.
For Respondents:
R-1 	Motion for summary decision filed with the Office of Administrative Law on
May 25, 2021.