Jeffrey Woodson, CSC Docket No. 2022-3204
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of December 21, 2022, CSC Docket No. 2022-3204: examination scoring or administration, denied. Jeffrey Woodson requests a make-up for the open competitive examination for Sheriff’s Officer (C0219D), Gloucester County.
Commission decisions · Meeting of December 21, 2022
Jeffrey Woodson requests a make-up for the open competitive examination for Sheriff’s Officer (C0219D), Gloucester County.
- Matter
- Examination scoring or administration
- Decided
- December 21, 2022, item B-17
- Outcome
- Denied
- Title
- SHERIFF'S OFFICER
- Employer
- Gloucester County
- Examination
- C0219D
- Chair at the time
- Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
- Official decision
- Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-017 12-21-22 TAMUD.pdf)
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this request be denied.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
Appellant's argumentJeffrey Woodson requests a make-up for the open competitive examination for Sheriff’s Officer (C0219D), Gloucester County.
BackgroundBy way of background, as indicated in the 2022 LEE Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) page,1 unlike previous LEE testing cycles, the 2022 LEE did not permit candidates to fill out a single application and indicate the titles for which they wished to be considered. Instead, titles that were included in the 2022 LEE testing cycle2 were announced separately by jurisdiction. As also noted in the LEE FAQs, “the Law Enforcement Aptitude Battery (LEAB) will be used to test candidates who apply for any of the LEE titles . . . Because the same examination is used, candidates will only have one opportunity to take the examination, regardless of the number of announcements for which they apply, and their score achieved on the examination will be applied to all these 2022 LEE announcements for which they have applied.” Candidates who were admitted to the 2022 LEE were sent an email on April 8, 2022 which provided information and links for self-selecting a test center, date, and time via Sign-Up Genius. The email further indicated that “all candidates will be sent a paper scheduling notice by mail [(Notification to Appear)] approximately two weeks
1 https://www.state.nj.us/csc/authorities/faq/safety/lee.html
2 The following titles were announced as part of the 2022 LEE: Police Officer; County Police Officer;
Park Police Officer; Campus Police Officer Recruit; Police Officer Recruit, Human Services; Police Officer, Palisades Interstate Park; State Park Police Officer Trainee; Sheriff's Officer; County Correctional Police Officer; Correctional Police Officer; Correctional Police Officer, Juvenile Justice Commission; Parole Officer Recruit; and Parole Officer Recruit, Juvenile Justice. Bilingual variants for some of these titles were also announced.
prior to the test date. Please bring the paper scheduling notification you receive by mail with you to the test center.”3 In this regard, Notifications to Appear dated May 19, 2022 indicating an assigned test center, date, and time were mailed to all eligible candidates. It is noted that Woodson was scheduled to be tested on June 11, 2022 at Camden County College in Blackwood, New Jersey.
Appellant's argumentOn appeal, Woodson submits notarized statements, dated July 1, 2022 and November 21, 2022, indicating that he received the above noted April 8, 2022 email “but [I] was unable to choose a date through the self-select. The email also stated that I’d receive a letter with a chosen date of any of the remaining test dates and sites. To date I have not received a letter at my address.” He presents that he contacted the Civil Service Commission on June 13, 2022 but he was informed that he had missed his scheduled test date of June 11, 2022.
CONCLUSION
RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.9 provides that make-up examinations for open competitive and general promotional testing may be authorized for the following reasons: 1. Error by the Civil Service Commission or appointing authority; 2. Serious illness or disability of the candidate on the test date, provided the candidate submits a doctor's certificate specifying that the candidate was not able to take the test on that day for medical reasons; 3. Documented serious illness or death in the candidate's immediate family; 4. Natural disaster; 5. Prior vacation or travel plans outside of New Jersey or any contiguous state, which cannot be reasonably changed, as evidenced by a sworn statement and relevant documentation; 6. When required for certain persons returning from military service (see N.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.6A); and 7. Other valid reasons.
AnalysisThe Commission acknowledges the presumption that mail correctly addressed, stamped and mailed is generally received by the party to whom it was addressed. See SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. State Department of Human Services, 146 N.J. 614 (1996); Szczesny v. Vasquez, 71 N.J. Super. 347, 354 (App. Div. 1962); In the Matter of Joseph Bahun, Docket No. A-1132-00T5F (App. Div. May 21, 2001). It also recognizes that on occasion, such mail never reaches its intended destination.
In the present matter, a review of the record finds no evidence of error as the notice sent May 19, 2022 informing candidates of the test date, time and location, was sent to the address indicated on Woodson’s application. Moreover, although being specifically advised and provided with multiple opportunities during the appeal process, Woodson did not submit a sworn notarized statement4 that he did not
3 For those candidates who did not self-schedule, they were assigned a test date and location and notified by the paper scheduling notification, i.e., Notification to Appear, indicated above. 4 A sworn notarized statement includes language to the effect in the area where signed by the notary public “subscribed and sworn before me on (month/day) 2022 by (individual’s name).” Absent this language, a notarized statement is merely an acknowledgement by the notary that the person signing receive a Notification to Appear for the subject test. Absent such a sworn statement, the Civil Service Commission cannot credit the appellant’s assertions.
A thorough review of the record indicates that the appellant has failed to support his burden of proof in this matter.
ORDER
Therefore, it is ordered that this request be denied.
ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.
Decisions this one cites
- SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. State Department of Human Services 146 N.J. 614
- Szczesny v. Vasquez 71 N.J. Super. 347, 354
- In the Matter of Joseph Bahun Docket No. A-1132-00T5F (May 21, 2001)
About this page
Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.
Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.
The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.
To report an error on this page, use the contact form.