Salvatore Spilletti, CSC Docket No. 2023-2657

BackgroundThe appeal of Salvatore Spilletti, County Correctional Police Officer, Hudson County, Department of Corrections, 90 working day suspension, on charges, was before Administrative Law Judge Julio C. Morejon (ALJ), who rendered his initial summary decision on August 1, 2024, Exceptions were filed on behalf of the appointing authority and a reply was filed on behalf of the appellant.

Administrative Law JudgeIn his initial summary decision, the ALJ recommended dismissing the charges based on the appointing authority’s failure to follow the Attorney General Guidelines on Internal Affairs Policy and Procedures (AG Guidelines), finding that it failed to forward the matter to its internal affairs division for an investigation as required. Having 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 16, 2024, ordered that the matter be remanded to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for further hearing proceedings.

The crux of the ALJ’s determination hinges on his finding that, at the time of the infraction in 2022, the AG Guidelines applied to county correctional personnel, and because the appointing authority did not follow those guidelines, the suspension should be overturned. The ALJ substantially relied on O’Rourke v. City of Lambertville, 405 N.J. Super. 8, 23 (App. Div. 2008), which held:

[W]hen a law enforcement agency adopts rules pursuant to

N.J.S.A, 40A4:14-181 to implement the Attorney General’s Guidelines, the agency has an obligation to comply with those rules. Because it failed to do so, and because the deficiencies tainted the disciplinary process, the City’s decision to remove [O’Rourke] from his position cannot stand.

In its exceptions, the appointing authority questions whether the AG Guidelines were applicable to county correctional personnel prior to 2024, and thus at the time of this matter. In that regard, the Commission notes that another ALJ in another similar still-pending matter, determined that the AG Guidelines did not apply to county correctional personnel prior to 2024.! In reply, the appellant asserts that the appointing authority is estopped from raising such arguments, because it adopted its own guidelines in accordance with the 2022 AG Guidelines. However, it is unclear whether those guidelines were adopted prior to the events in this matter and thus whether those guidelines are applicable. As such, the Commission is remanding for further review and a determination on whether the AG Guidelines, or substantially similar regulations adopted by the appointing authority, were in effect at the time of this matter.

BackgroundIt is also noted that in many circumstances, procedural violations made by the appointing authority at the departmental level are deemed cured through the de novo hearing received at the Office of Administrative Law. See Ensslin v. Township of North Bergen, 275 N.J. Super. 352, 361 (App. Div. 1994), cert. denied, 142 N.J. 446 (1995); In re Darcy, 114 N.J. Super. 454 (App. Div. 1971). As such, while the parties are free to argue over the applicability of the AG Guidelines and whether a failure to apply those guidelines should result in reversal of the suspension here, the Commission also orders a hearing on the merits. The Commission reserves judgment on whether the appointing authority violated any procedural requirements and whether those violations may or may not be cured by the hearing now ordered before the OAL.

Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the OAL for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission reverses the ALJ’s granting of summary decision and the recommendation to reverse the 90 working day suspension of Salvatore Spilletti. Further, the Commission remands this matter to the Office of Administrative Law for further proceedings.

! In that matter, the ALJ denied that appellant’s motion for summary decision, finding that the AG Guidelines did not apply to County Correction Police Officers until 2024. That appellant then filed a motion for interlocutory review of the ALJ's order with the Commission. The Commission did not undertake review of that order, and the matter is proceeding at the OAL on the merits of the underlying charges.