Michael D’Andrea, Jennifer Lewis-Gallagher, Therese Bonmati, and Debra DeFelice v. Anthony Ayres, Monroe Township Board of Education, Gloucester County, 9/30/26 (#395-26SEC)

395-26SEC
OAL 	Dkt. 	No. 	EEC-04337-26 	(EEC-01472-21, 	EEC-01474-21, 	EEC-01476-21, 	and 	EEC-01477-21
(consolidated) on remand)
SEC Dkt. Nos. C76-20, C77-20, C79-20, and C75-20
Agency Dkt. No. 326-07-26
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Michael D’Andrea,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony Ayres, Monroe Township Board of
Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent.
And
Jennifer Lewis-Gallagher,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony Ayres, Monroe Township Board of
Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent.
And
Therese Bonmati,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony Ayres, Monroe Township Board of
Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent.
And

2
Debra DeFelice,
Complainant,
v.
Anthony Ayres, Monroe Township Board
of Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent.
The Commissioner has reviewed the July 28, 2026 decision of the School Ethics Commission (SEC).
The SEC recommended that respondent Anthony Ayres, a member of the Monroe Township Board of
Education, be reprimanded pursuant to a settlement agreement entered into by the parties in resolution
of complainants’ allegations that respondent violated the School Ethics Act.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the penalty recommended by the SEC. Accordingly,
respondent is hereby reprimanded.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	September 30, 2026
Date of Mailing: 	September 30, 2026
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.

Before the School Ethics Commission
Final Decision
Michael D’Andrea, 	OAL Docket No.: EEC-04337-26
Complainant 	ON REMAND from
v. 	OAL Docket No.: EEC-01472-21
SEC Docket No.: C76-20
Anthony Ayres,
Monroe Township Board of Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent
Jennifer Lewis-Gallagher, 	OAL Docket No.: EEC-01474-21
Complainant 	SEC Docket No.: C77-20
v.
Anthony Ayres,
Monroe Township Board of Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent
Therese Bonmati, 	OAL Docket No.: EEC-01476-21
Complainant 	SEC Docket No.: C79-20
v.
Anthony Ayres,
Monroe Township Board of Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent
Debra DeFelice, 	OAL Docket No.: EEC-01477-21
Complainant 	SEC Docket No.: C75-20
CONSOLIDATED
v.
Anthony Ayres,
Monroe Township Board of Education, Gloucester County,
Respondent

2
I. 	Procedural History
The above-captioned matter arises from four separate, but related Complaints filed with
the School Ethics Commission (Commission) by Debra DeFelice (C75-20), Michael D’Andrea
(C76-20), Jennifer Lewis-Gallagher (C77-20) and Therese Bonmati (C79-20) (Complainants),
alleging that Anthony Ayres (Respondent), a member of the Monroe Township Board of
Education (Board), violated the School Ethics Act (Act), N.J.S.A. 18A:12-21 et seq. More
specifically, the Complaints alleged that Respondent violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(a) (C75-20),
N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(b) (C75-20), N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(e) (C75-20 and C77-20), N.J.S.A.
18A:12-24.1(f) (C75-20, C77-20 and C79-20), N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(g) (C75-20, C76-20, C77-
20 and C79-20) and N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(h) (C75-20) of the Code of Ethics for School Board
Members (Code).
At its meeting on January 26, 2021, the Commission voted to transmit each of the matters
to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) where Complainant(s) would carry the burden to
prove that Respondent violated the cited provisions of the Code.
The matters were consolidated at the OAL by Order dated September 30, 2021. The
parties agreed to amicably resolve the matter and, on or about February 10, 2025, the parties
placed the terms of the settlement on the record. Thereafter, the parties sought to execute a
written agreement, but could not agree on the inclusion of a release clause. The Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) issued an Initial Decision on December 22, 2025, which concluded that the
parties shall be bound to the terms of their settlement as placed on the record, and ordered that
the conditions imposed on Respondent in the settlement “constitute the penalty and imposition of
reprimand or censure.” Respondent filed exceptions to the Initial Decision, in accordance with
N.J.A.C. 1:1-18.4, and Complainants filed a reply thereto. At its meeting on February 24, 2026,
the Commission voted to reject the Initial Decision and to remand the matter to the OAL for
further review and consideration.
At the OAL on remand, the parties again agreed to settle the matter, and on May 5, 2026,
the parties indicated that they wished to reaffirm their agreement of February 10, 2025, and
agreed upon the sanction of reprimand. The ALJ issued an Initial Decision on May 22, 2026,
which approved the terms of the settlement and recommended a penalty of reprimand.
At its meeting on June 23, 2026, the Commission reviewed the Initial Decision, and at its
meeting on July 28, 2026, the Commission voted to adopt the Initial Decision as its Final
Decision. However, the Commission also voted not to take a position on the enforceability of the
parties’ written settlement agreement. Additionally, the Commission recommended that the
Commissioner of Education (Commissioner) impose a penalty of reprimand, consistent with the
terms of the settlement agreement.
II. 	Analysis
After pre-hearing discussions on May 5, 2026, the parties advised that they wished to
reaffirm their settlement agreement of February 10, 2025, which was placed upon the record, and

3
the parties agreed upon the sanction of reprimand to be imposed upon Respondent. Initial
Decision at 3-4. The terms of the parties’ agreement, as stated on the record, are as follows:
1. 	Respondent Ayres admits to a violation of the School Ethics Act, as to his actions in
Counts F, G, and J.1
2. 	Respondent Ayres may submit a written or verbal justification which would explain what
he was thinking at the time of those actions of Counts F, G, and J.
3. 	Respondent Ayres has voluntarily agreed with Complainants that he will not serve and/or
fill a seat on the Board of Education of Monroe Township for two years from the date of
the entry of the Commissioner’s Final Agency Decision in this case.
4. 	Respondent Ayres is permitted to continue to volunteer for the school district in any other
capacity.
5. 	Respondent Ayres has agreed to submit a personal letter of apology directly to
Complainant DeFelice and L.D., within thirty days.
6. 	The parties agree to the sanction of reprimand for Respondent Ayres.
Id. at 12.
The ALJ found that all other Counts of the consolidated complaints, digested as Counts
A, B, C, D, E, H, and I, have been voluntarily withdrawn by Petitioners and are dismissed. Id. at
13.
After reviewing the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement, the ALJ found that the
settlement is voluntary, consistent with the law, and fully disposes of all issues in controversy
between the parties. Ibid. Having concluded that the parties’ settlement agreement met the
requirements of N.J.A.C. 1:1-19.1 and should be approved, the ALJ incorporated the terms of the
settlement into the Initial Decision. Ibid.
IV. 	Decision
Following its review, the Commission does not find a reason why it should not defer to
the parties’ mutual decision to amicably resolve their dispute. The Commission adopts the Initial
Decision as its Final Decision, but does not take a position on the enforceability of the parties’
settlement agreement. Accordingly, consistent with the terms of the settlement agreement, the
Commission recommends that the Commissioner impose a penalty of reprimand.
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:12-29(c), this decision shall be forwarded to the Commissioner
for review of the Commission’s recommended penalty.
Dennis M. Roberts, Chairperson
Mailing Date: July 28, 2026
1 Those counts state that Respondent’s actions were in violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(a), (e), (f), (g),
and (h).

4
Resolution Adopting Decision
in Connection with C75-20, C76-20, C77-20 and C79-20
(Consolidated)
Whereas, at its meeting on January 26, 2021, the School Ethics Commission (Commission) voted
to transmit the above-captioned matters to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for a hearing; and
Whereas, while at the OAL, the parties agreed to a settlement on the record; and
Whereas, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an Initial Decision on December 22, 2025,
which concluded that the parties shall be bound to the terms of their settlement as placed on the record,
and ordered that the conditions imposed on Respondent in the settlement “constitute the penalty and
imposition of reprimand or censure”; and
Whereas, at its meeting on February 24, 2026, the Commission voted to reject the Initial Decision
and to remand the matter to the OAL for further review and consideration.
Whereas, the ALJ issued an Initial Decision on May 22, 2026, which approved the terms of the
settlement and recommended a penalty of reprimand; and
Whereas, at its meeting on June 23, 2026, the Commission considered the Initial Decision and
discussed adopting the Initial Decision as its Final Decision, but not taking a position on the
enforceability of the parties’ written settlement agreement; and
Whereas, at its meeting on June 23, 2026, the Commission discussed recommending a penalty of
reprimand, consistent with the terms of the settlement agreement; and
Whereas, at its meeting on July 28, 2026, the Commission reviewed and voted to approve the
within decision as accurately memorializing its actions/findings from its meeting on June 23, 2026; and
Now Therefore Be It Resolved, the Commission hereby adopts the within decision as its Final
Decision, and directs its staff to notify all parties to this action of its decision herein.
____________________________________
Dennis M. Roberts, Chairperson
I hereby certify that this Resolution was duly
adopted by the School Ethics Commission at its
regularly scheduled meeting on July 28, 2026.
________________________________
Brigid C. Martens, Director
School Ethics Commission