NJ Civil Service Navigator

KEVIN NORTON, CSC Docket No. 2023-1362

NJ Civil Service Commission decision of February 28, 2024, CSC Docket No. 2023-1362: discipline, penalty modified. Kevin Norton, Police Officer, Wanaque, Police Department, removal, effective December 1, 2022, on charges of incompetency, inefficiency or failure to perform duties, conduct unbecoming

Commission decisions · Meeting of February 28, 2024

Kevin Norton, Police Officer, Wanaque, Police Department, removal, effective December 1, 2022, on charges of incompetency, inefficiency or failure to perform duties, conduct unbecoming a public employee, neglect of duty and other sufficient cause.

Matter
Discipline
Decided
February 28, 2024, item A-5
Outcome
Penalty modified
ALJ's recommendation
Modify the removal to a 45 working day suspension.
Penalty appealed
removal
Penalty after the decision
suspension
Recorded vote
Allison Chris Myers (Yes), Dolores Gorczyca (No), Daniel W. O’Mullan (Yes), Christina Mongon (Yes)
Title
POLICE OFFICER
Employer
Wanaque Borough
Chair at the time
Allison Chris Myers, Acting Chairperson
Official decision
CSC's PDF

Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission modified the removal to a six-month suspension.

The decision

BackgroundThe appeal of Kevin Norton, Police Officer, Wanaque, Police Department, removal, effective December 1, 2022, on charges, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Thomas R. Betancourt (ALJ), who rendered his initial decision on January 18, 2024. Exceptions and replies were filed on behalf of the appellant and appointing authority.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the ALJ's initial decision, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, including a thorough review of the exceptions and reply, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting on February 28, 2024, adopted the ALJ's Findings of Facts and Conclusions. However, it did not adopt his recommendation to modify the removal to a 45 working day suspension. Rather, the Commission imposed a six-month suspension.

Administrative Law JudgeIn this matter, the ALJ found that the appellant was guilty of all of the infractions alleged with the exception of the falsification charge. It its exceptions, the appointing authority contends that charge should have also been sustained. The Commission disagrees. The ALJ explicitly detailed his reasons for finding that charge was not sustained. Upon its de novo review of the ALJ's determination in that regard, the Commission agrees with the ALJ's findings on the charges and finds nothing in the appointing authority's exceptions to demonstrate that the ALJ's findings on that charge was arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable.

AnalysisThe Commission also agrees that the dismissal of that charge warrants a lesser penalty than originally imposed. In this regard, similar to its assessment of the charges, the Commission review of the penalty is de novo. In addition to its consideration of the seriousness of the underlying incident in determining the proper

About this page

Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's PDF. 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.