Ethics Complaint Against Marlboro Schools Superintendent Is Dismissed

MARLBORO, NJ — Schools superintendent Eric Hibbs said he is looking forward to a new school year, especially now that a 2019 School Ethics Commission complaint has been resolved in his favor.

"I'm very happy this meritless claim is now gone," Hibbs said, adding that his focus in now on the upcoming school year.

A state Administrative Law Court judge last week dismissed a complaint by the state School Ethics Commission from a former Board of Education member, Craig Marshall.

The ruling recapped the claims of the initial complaint: It said Marshall alleged that while Hibbs’ educational consulting firm, AME Educational Consultants (AME), was employed by the Hazlet Township Public Schools, Hibbs “retained the Hazlet Superintendent Bernard Bragen as an educational consultant (Defined Learning Solutions) to mentor a newly hired employee for the district, Dana Blair, as director of Special Services and that he "failed to disclose that AME was employed/retained by Hazlet,” according to the complaint.

In response, Hibbs maintained that “it was the Marlboro business administrator/board secretary (Cindy Barr-Rague) at the time and not Hibbs who recommended Bragen, and Hibbs further argued that the board “subsequently interviewed Dr. Bragen, was satisfied with his credentials, and appointed his firm.” "At no time did the consulting relationship between AME and Hazlet play any part in the appointment."

Administrative Law Judge Jacob Gertsman, in a 54-page ruling, stated, in part, that "Hibbs knew that Bragen had a background and was an expert in special education and he was retained for that presentation. Further, the record is devoid of any evidence to suggest that either Hibbs or Bragen directed their respective districts to retain the other’s company."

The ruling stated, in part, that the entire interview committee in the district, not just Hibbs, "ultimately thought Blair was the right choice for the job" and cited Bragen's "extensive special education experience" as her mentor.

And Hibbs said Monday that Blair has become "an outstanding, transformational leader."

Hibbs' attorney in the ethics matter, David B. Rubin of Metuchen, commented on the ruling:

"Gertsman's decision squarely and unequivocally exonerates Dr. Hibbs from any claim of unethical behavior in this matter," he said Tuesday in an emailed statement.

"This wasn't just a case of the complainant not meeting its burden of proof. We affirmatively proved Dr. Hibbs' innocence, and the judge so found," Rubin said.

Rubin said the School Ethics Commission will now review the decision, but its "ability to overturn the judge's credibility determinations will be very limited."

Marshall, in an article in app.com, said he did not expect the ethics commission to challenge the ruling but he "stands by his complaint." Marshall served on the board from 2015 to 2018.

Rubin said the judge found that Marshall "stated facts in his complaint that were demonstrably false - specifically, his allegation that Dr. Bragen was still superintendent in Hazlet in May 2018 when Marlboro engaged him as a consultant, and in August 2018 when Dr. Hibbs' consulting firm did work in Hazlet.

"As was clear from the publicly available minutes of the Hazlet Board of Education, Dr. Bragen was no longer employed in Hazlet after December 2017, six months before Marlboro appointed him as Dr. Blair's mentor," Rubin said in the statement.

The Marlboro Board of Education president Dr. Randy Heller also welcomed the news of the dismissal:

“I am pleased that Dr. Eric Hibbs was exonerated of all charges, as I was confident he would be. I have worked with him for nearly six years as a board member, vice president, and current president of the Board of Education, and have always found him to be a man of strong character, ethics, conviction, and someone who has been a great educational leader for our district."

"He has had to endure many years of having this scurrilous complaint hanging over his head. Thankfully, the judge properly recognized the allegations were baseless and riddled with misinformation, which is why he was fully exonerated," Heller added.

Rubin also commented on the issue of comments "spread in the community."

"Rather than take our word for any of this, we encourage the public to read Judge Gertsman's decision in full, which speaks for itself and, hopefully, puts an end to the misinformation that continues to be spread in the Marlboro school community by those seeking to smear Dr. Hibbs reputation to advance their own political agenda," Rubin said.

Gertsman's ruling stated, in part:

"In sum, while Hibbs and Bragen knew each other as fellow superintendents, they were not friends. The record is devoid of any evidence to demonstrate that they had an express or implied agreement that they trade off engagements in one district for engagements in another, or that they directed engagements in their districts to the other. The simple and undisputed fact that they were leading their respective districts until Bragen left on Dec. 31, 2017, is insufficient to establish that any relationship existed between Hibbs/AME and Bragen/Defined.

"Therefore, I conclude that the SEC has failed to meet its burden of proving that a longstanding relationship existed between Hibbs/AME and Bragen/Defined."

The judge also wrote in his summation:

"At the heart of this matter is Marshall’s allegation that Hibbs’ actions in retaining Bragen was a quid pro quo for Hazlet’s previous retention of AME. ... Here, the SEC has failed to meet its burden to support its argument that a longstanding relationship existed between Hibbs/AME and Bragen/Hazlet. In fact, Hibbs and Bragen provided credible testimony demonstrating the opposite. There was no express or implied agreement between them to exchange services in their respective districts and the SEC (the ethics commission) has failed to provide any evidence that any such agreement existed.

The ruling also states:

"Finally, and most significantly, the record demonstrates that that the idea to hire Bragen originated with Barr-Rague (the board administrator/board secretary), not Hibbs. This disproves Marshall’s allegation that Hibbs acted to exchange the retention of Bragen as Blair’s mentor for previous services in Hazlet by AME.

"Accordingly, I conclude that the SEC has failed to meet its burden to prove that the hiring of Bragen by Marlboro was a quid pro quo for Hibbs’ and AME’s previous engagements in Hazlet," the judge said in his summation of his ruling.

Gertsman's ruling also stated, in part:

"Hibbs correctly argues that 'there is no evidence that Hibbs and Bragen were ever associated with each other in the public eye, and certainly weren’t in June 2018 when Marlboro engaged Bragen’s firm.' Put simply, there was no 'actual relationship' that a reasonable person would expect to create a conflict of interest. Additionally, Bragen and Hibbs had no contact with each other dating to before Bragen left Hazlet, which was more than six months prior to the hiring of Bragen by Marlboro on June 19, 2018. I therefore conclude that this constitutes 'enough time to dilute any reasonable suspicion of favoritism.'"

Finally, in dismissing the complaint, the judge ruled that "as the idea to retain Bragen originated with Barr-Rague (the board administrator/board secretary) not Hibbs, and the retention of Bragen was not a quid pro quo for the previous engagements of AME in Hazlet, that Hibbs did not have a direct or indirect financial involvement in the retention of Bragen that impaired his objectivity and did not have a personal involvement that created a benefit to an ‘other,’ accordingly, based on the foregoing, I conclude that Hibbs did not act in his official capacity as superintendent in a matter in which he had a personal involvement that might have been reasonably expected to impair his objectivity, and/or one in which he had a personal involvement that created a benefit to an ‘other.’"