Antonio Salters, CSC Docket No. 2021-1827

BackgroundThe appeal of Antonio Salters of the bypass of his name on the eligible list for Fire Fighter (M1838W), Township of Hillside, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Matthew G. Miller (ALJ), who rendered his initial decision on February 28, 2024. No exceptions were filed.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the attached ALJ’s initial decision, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting on April 10, 2024, accepted and adopted the ALJ”’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions and his recommendation to uphold the bypass and dismiss the appellant’s appeal.

By way of background, in In the Matter of Antonio Salters (CSC, decided November 17, 2021), the Commission denied the appellant’s appeal of the bypass of his name on the eligible list for Fire Fighter (M1838W), Township of Hillside. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Upon its review, the Appellate Division vacated the Commission’s decision. Citing the four-step test articulated in Jamison v. Rockaway Township Board of Education, 242 N.J. Super. 436 (App. Div. 1990), the court remanded the matter back to the Commission in order to develop a more fulsome record through a hearing to determine whether the reasons for the appellant’s bypass were pretextual/improper and whether the bypassing would have occurred regardless of the improper motives. See In the Matter of Antonio Salters, Docket No. A-1265-21 (App. Div. April 13, 2023). Thereafter, in accordance with the court’s opinion, the appellant’s appeal was transmitted to the Office of Administrative Law for a hearing.

As set for in the initial decision, the ALJ found that the Mayor, who is the appointing authority, bypassed the appellant because he interviewed poorly, was not truthful about being a “lifelong” resident of Hillside, and was possibly involved in his father’s criminal case. The ALJ also found that the Mayor’s dislike of the appellant’s father and the appellant's political alignment with his father were not considered in his bypass. The ALJ’s findings were based on his assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, notably, finding the Mayor’s testimony credible in that she bypassed the appellant for the foregoing legitimate, non-discriminatory/non- retaliatory reasons and the appellant’s testimony not credible about his living arrangements and education.

The Commission acknowledges that the ALJ, who has the benefit of hearing and seeing the witnesses, is generally in a better position to determine the credibility and veracity of the witnesses. See Matter of J.W.D., 149 N.J. 108 (1997). “[T]rial courts’ credibility findings . . . are often influenced by matters such as observations of the character and demeanor of the witnesses and common human experience that are not transmitted by the record.” See also, In re Taylor, 158 N.d. 644 (1999) (quoting State v. Locurio, 157 N.J. 463, 474 (1999)). Additionally, such credibility findings need not be explicitly enunciated if the record as a whole makes the findings clear. Jd. at 659 (citing Locurto, supra). The Commission appropriately gives due deference to such determinations. However, in its de novo review of the record, the Commission has the authority to reverse or modify an ALJ’s decision if it is not supported by sufficient credible evidence or was otherwise arbitrary. See N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10(c); Cavalieri u. Public Employees Retirement System, 368 N.dJ. Super. 527 (App. Div. 2004), In this matter, the Commission finds nothing in the record to question those determinations or the findings and conclusions made therefrom.

Consistent with N.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.8(a)3, an appointing authority has selection discretion under the “Rule of Three” to appoint a lower ranked eligible absent any unlawful motive. In this case, after a full hearing, the reasons for the appellant’s bypass were not pretextual nor was an unlawful motive found. Therefore, the Commission agrees with the ALJ’s recommendation to uphold the appellant’s bypass and dismiss his appeal.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission finds that the action of the appointing authority in bypassing the appellant on the eligible list for Fire Fighter (M1838W), Township of Hillside, was justified. The Commission therefore dismisses the appellant’s appeal.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.