IN THE MATTER OF THE CERTIFICATES OF DONALD SALAAM, NEW JERSEY STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS, 6/6/14, (#241-14A) (APPEAL DECISION)

#241-14A (SBE Decision: http://www.state.nj.us/education/legal/examiners/2014/jan/1112-120.pdf)
STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS DKT. NO. 1112-120
AGENCY DKT NO. 2-2/14A
IN THE MATTER OF THE REVOCATION OF 	:
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
THE CERTIFICATES OF DONALD SALAAM 	:
DECISION
BY THE STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS. 	:
Order of Revocation by the State Board of Examiners, January 24, 2014
For the Respondent-Appellant, Stephen J. Kaflowitz, Esq.
For the Petitioner-Respondent State Board of Examiners, Angela L. Velez,
Deputy Attorney General (John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General of
New Jersey)
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and the papers filed in connection
with appellant Donald Salaam’s appeal of the State Board of Examiners’ (Board) Order of
January 24, 2014, revoking his Teacher of the Handicapped Certificate, Substance Awareness
Coordinator Certificate of Eligibility with Advanced Standing, Principal Certificate of Eligibility
and Supervisor Certificate. On appeal, the appellant argues that a video recording of the incident
at issue in this case should not have been admitted into evidence at the Office of Administrative
Law 	because 	it 	was 	not 	properly 	authenticated. 	The 	appellant 	also 	contends 	that 	the
Commissioner should reject the Board’s decision revoking his certificates and impose a two year
suspension of his certificates.
In reviewing appeals from decisions of the State Board of Examiners, the
Commissioner may not substitute his judgment for that of the Board so long as the appellant
received due process and the Board’s decision is supported by sufficient credible evidence
1

in the record. 	Further, the Board’s decision should not be disturbed unless the appellant
demonstrates that it is arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. N.J.A.C. 6A:4-4.1(a).
After full consideration of the record and all submissions, the Commissioner finds
that the record adequately supports the Board’s determination that the appellant engaged in
unbecoming conduct and that the revocation of the appellant’s certificates was the appropriate
penalty. 	There is nothing in the record to suggest that the Board’s decision was arbitrary,
capricious or unreasonable, and as a result the Commissioner finds no basis upon which to
disturb the decision of the State Board of Examiners.
Accordingly the decision of the State Board of Examiners is affirmed for the
reasons expressed therein.*
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: June 6, 2014
Date of Mailing: 	June 6, 2014
*This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to P.L. 2008, c. 36.
2