Gerard Ciandella, CSC Docket No. 2020-2575

BackgroundThe appeal of Gerard Ciandella, Deputy Registrar of Vital Statistics, Hoboken, Department of Human Services, layoff, effective May 7, 2020, was before Administrative Law Judge Nanci G. Stokes (ALJ), who rendered her initial decision on August 3, 2023. Exceptions were filed on behalf of the appointing authority and a reply was filed on behalf of the appellant.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the ALJ’s initial decision, including a thorough review of the exceptions and reply, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting of October 11, 2023, did not adopt the ALwJ’s granting of initial partial summary decision or her recommendation to reverse the layoff. Rather, the Commission remanded the matter to the Office of Administrative Law for further proceedings.

This matter involves, in essence, an interpretation of statutes governing local registrars of vital statistics. In this regard, in her initial decision, the ALJ found:

RuleThe crux of this case is whether N.J.S.A. 26:8-17 requires

AnalysisHoboken to maintain the position of a “Deputy Registrar of Vital

Administrative Law JudgeStatistics” even in the face of economic stress. Notably, N.J.S.A. 26:8-2 notes that Hoboken is a registration district of vital statistics as a political subdivision. Thus, Hoboken’s only way to avoid appointing a local registrar is to permit the Hudson County clerk to act as its registrar of vital statistics under N.J.S.A. 26:8-11, which it did not allow. Then, under N./.S.A., 26:8-17, upon appointment, the local registrar for the district “shall appoint a deputy to assist in the normal, day-to-day operation of the office and whose duty shall be to act in the registrar's stead in case of absence, disability, or death of the registrar.” (Emphasis supplied.) Further, the registrar “may appoint one or two alternate deputy registrars if the local registrar deems such an appointment to be necessary for the office to function efficiently and to provide quality service to the public.” Jbid. (Emphasis supplied.) Notably, “the deputy registrar and any alternate deputy registrar shall serve at the pleasure of the local registrar.” Id. Still, the statute requires that Hoboken have a local registrar, and the registrar must appoint a deputy registrar. (Emphasis supplied.) Hoboken believes it designated Rivera, absent civil service qualifications or an appointment, as the deputy registrar. Yet, such an appointment is not discretionary, even though the deputy registrar serves at the pleasure of the registrar. An alternate deputy registrar does not serve instead of a deputy registrar, but in addition to the deputy, should the registrar feel the community's service needs support an alternate. Indeed, I CONCLUDE that an alternate registrar appointment is discretionary, but a deputy registrar appointment is not.

Suppose the position is unnecessary or useless, and an employer can abolish the job without impairing departmental efficiency. In that case, the motive for the job’s elimination or laying off the person holding the position is immaterial. Greco, 40 N.eJ. Super. at 189-90. Here, the deputy registrar position is not useless, and Hoboken did not abolish the work. Instead, Hoboken reassigned the duties of the deputy registrar to its alternate deputy registrar, who possessed a Clerk 1 title without a CMR, despite its awareness of the statutory requirements to have a registrar and a deputy registrar. Hoboken rescinded the registrar's layoff notice once apprised of the statute, but not Ciandella’s notice. Hoboken suggests that a civil service deputy registrar title and the statutory title are different, and it need not maintain an appointed deputy registrar. Yet, Hoboken cites no authority permitting it to leave a mandatorily appointed deputy registrar position vacant and “designate” an optional alternate deputy to fulfill the statutory role of a deputy. While it may have been economical to use the alternate deputy registrar as its deputy as any salary decrease would, I CONCLUDE that Hoboken had no rational legal basis to do so, given its known statutory obligation.

Therefore, 1 CONCLUDE that a preponderance of the evidence exists to show that Hoboken acted in bad faith because its motive in adopting the plan was to remove Ciandella in “violation of [his] civil service protections rather than to accomplish economy.” Under these circumstances, I CONCLUDE that Ciandella’s motion for summary decision should be GRANTED as a matter of law and his layoff be REVERSED.

AnalysisInitially, the Commission cannot agree with the ALJ’s interpretation of N.J.S.A. 26:8-17. N.J.S.A. 26:8-17 states, in pertinent part:

The local registrar, immediately upon acceptance of the appointment, shall appoint a deputy to assist in the normal, day-to-day operation of the office and whose duty shall be to act in the registrar's stead in case of absence, disability or death of the registrar. In case of death of the local registrar the deputy shall act as local registrar until a new local registrar has been appointed and qualified.

The deputy registrar and any alternate deputy registrar shall serve at the pleasure of the local registrar.

RuleHowever, N.J.S.A. 26:8-20 states:

The provisions of this chapter fixing the terms of office and providing methods of appointment and removal shall not apply to the positions of local registrar, deputy registrar, alternate deputy registrar, or subregistrar in municipalities operating under the provisions of the

Analysis“Civil Service Act,” Title 11A of the New Jersey Statutes (emphasis added).

Administrative Law JudgeThe ALJ did not consider the import of N.J/.S.A. 26:8-20, despite basing her initial decision almost entirely on a statutory interpretation of N.d.S.A. 26:8-17. Given N.J.S5.A. 26:8-20’s language exempting the “methods of appointment and removal” of the Deputy Registrar, which are specified in N./.S.A. 26:8-17, there has been no analysis as to whether N.J.S.A. 26-8-17’s requirement to appoint a Deputy Registrar is applicable in Civil Service jurisdictions. Moreover, even if the Deputy Registrar is a required position in Civil Service jurisdictions, there has been no finding of fact that the appointing authority willfully violated the statute or acted in bad faith. Solely relying on the proposition that the title is statutorily required, as the ALJ did, does not necessarily mean that the appellant’s layoff was in bad faith. As such, a full hearing where all the testimony and evidence in the record is analyzed to ascertain whether the appellant sustained his burden of proof would be required.

AnalysisAccordingly, the Commission reverses the ALJ’s granting of partial summary decision and remands the matter to the Office of Administrative Law to have the ALJ reconcile N.J.S.A. 26:8-17 and N.J.S.A. 26:8-20, as well as to conduct a full evidentiary hearing to determine whether the appellant’s layoff was undertaken for reasons other than economy, efficiency, or other related reasons. See N.d.A.C. 4A:8- 2.6(a)1.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission reverses the ALJ’s granting of partial summary decision and the recommendation to reverse the layoff of Gerard Ciandella. Further, the Commission remands this matter to the Office of Administrative Law for further proceedings.