BOE News 12/19/07

[admin]

Residency Officer

* 13 cases were/are being investigated
* 5 of them were verified as legitimate residents of the Borough and provided proofs
* 3 families with a total of 5 children removed their children from the district due to non-residency
* 5 cases are still being investigated

This is just the status from about November 1st of this year, there will be more investigations. Plus the Residency Officer is a part time.

A couple of things to keep in mind, while we say it cost approx $8K to educate a student, this does not mean we now have a $40K credit. To get the per pupil cost, you just divide by the number of students, so our PP cost now many have gone up a dollar or two. But, if any of these kids required extra services, that would be a big savings, plus it reduces class size which is always good.

The RO is following the laws of the state of NJ, whether people like these laws or not, they are the law… If people suspect children are not residents of the Boro (as legal defined by the State of NJ and the Courts) and are in our schools, they should provided specific facts and details to the School Administration. This information can then be used by the RO to investigate the child’s status. The more detailed the info the better, just reporting and out of State plate dropped 3 kids off is not really that helpful.



The Police have been cracking down on Seat Belts and Child Seats since the beginning of the school year. The Police do not have the resource to be at the schools every day. This has caused complaints to make their way to the Human Relations Committee.

[admin]

freeholdvoice.proboards46.com/index.cgi?board=schools&action=display&thread=1197925987

In the above link, Jeffham reported some observations. This thread contains some very good information in response to Jeff's inquiry.

[Libyan Sibyl]

Brian, I believe that the borough can now go after the families for the money. I think they should do it, if for no other reason than to send a message.

[admin]

libyansybil said:

Brian, I believe that the borough can now go after the families for the money. I think they should do it, if for no other reason than to send a message.

If that is the case, the right eyes will see this. We will have to wait and see what happens.

[richardkelsey]

libyansybil said:

Brian, I believe that the borough can now go after the families for the money. I think they should do it, if for no other reason than to send a message.

Gosh -- that would be an interesting idea. It might have a chilling effect on those who knowingly use the school district in contravention of state law. (which by the way -- allows just about anyone to use the schools!)

My brother lived in Long Branch and paid for his daughter to go to public high school in another town because she was admitted into a very great and unique writing program there when they originally lived there. So -- there is no question that one must pay if one is not a proper resident of the town.

Going after those who stole the services -- that seems right both from a justice stand-point, and as a deterrent -- if the Borough believes the problem is wide-spread.

[Libyan Sibyl]

instead of billing the borough, if they send me to law school, I pledge one year of free legal service in exchange.

Fiber, this also appears to answer some questions about what is considered sufficient proof of residency. Hopefully my link below works out. Otherwise, the state website has all statutes listed (it's just a bit difficult to find what you want).

18A:38-1 Attendance at school free of charge.

18A:38-1. Public schools shall be free to the following persons over five and under 20 years of age:

a.Any person who is domiciled within the school district;

b. (1) Any person who is kept in the home of another person domiciled within the school district and is supported by such other person gratis as if he were such other person's own child, upon filing by such other person with the secretary of the board of education of the district, if so required by the board, a sworn statement that he is domiciled within the district and is supporting the child gratis and will assume all personal obligations for the child relative to school requirements and that he intends so to keep and support the child gratuitously for a longer time than merely through the school term, and a copy of his lease if a tenant, or a sworn statement by his landlord acknowledging his tenancy if residing as a tenant without a written lease, and upon filing by the child's parent or guardian with the secretary of the board of education a sworn statement that he is not capable of supporting or providing care for the child due to a family or economic hardship and that the child is not residing with the resident of the district solely for the purpose of receiving a free public education within the district. The statement shall be accompanied by documentation to support the validity of the sworn statements, information from or about which shall be supplied only to the board and only to the extent that it directly pertains to the support or nonsupport of the child. If in the judgment of the board of education the evidence does not support the validity of the claim by the resident, the board may deny admission to the child. The resident may contest the board's decision to the commissioner within 21 days of the date of the decision and shall be entitled to an expedited hearing before the commissioner on the validity of the claim and shall have the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the child is eligible for a free education under the criteria listed in this subsection. The board of education shall, at the time of its decision, notify the resident in writing of his right to contest the board's decision to the commissioner within 21 days. No child shall be denied admission during the pendency of the proceedings before the commissioner. In the event the child is currently enrolled in the district, the student shall not be removed from school during the 21-day period in which the resident may contest the board's decision nor during the pendency of the proceedings before the commissioner. If in the judgment of the commissioner the evidence does not support the claim of the resident, he shall assess the resident tuition for the student prorated to the time of the student's ineligible attendance in the school district. Tuition shall be computed on the basis of 1/180 of the total annual per pupil cost to the local district multiplied by the number of days of ineligible attendance and shall be collected in the manner in which orders of the commissioner are enforced. Nothing shall preclude a board from collecting tuition from the resident, parent or guardian for a student's period of ineligible attendance in the schools of the district where the issue is not appealed to the commissioner;

(2)If the superintendent or administrative principal of a school district finds that the parent or guardian of a child who is attending the schools of the district is not domiciled within the district and the child is not kept in the home of another person domiciled within the school district and supported by him gratis as if the child was the person's own child as provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection, the superintendent or administrative principal may apply to the board of education for the removal of the child. The parent or guardian shall be entitled to a hearing before the board and if in the judgment of the board the parent or guardian is not domiciled within the district or the child is not kept in the home of another person domiciled within the school district and supported by him gratis as if the child was the person's own child as provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection, the board may order the transfer or removal of the child from school. The parent or guardian may contest the board's decision before the commissioner within 21 days of the date of the decision and shall be entitled to an expedited hearing before the commissioner and shall have the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the child is eligible for a free education under the criteria listed in this subsection. The board of education shall, at the time of its decision, notify the parent or guardian in writing of his right to contest the decision within 21 days. No child shall be removed from school during the 21-day period in which the parent may contest the board's decision or during the pendency of the proceedings before the commissioner. If in the judgment of the commissioner the evidence does not support the claim of the parent or guardian, the commissioner shall assess the parent or guardian tuition for the student prorated to the time of the student's ineligible attendance in the schools of the district. Tuition shall be computed on the basis of 1/180 of the total annual per pupil cost to the local district multiplied by the number of days of ineligible attendance and shall be collected in the manner in which orders of the commissioner are enforced. Nothing shall preclude a board from collecting tuition from the parent or guardian for a student's period of ineligible attendance in the schools of the district where the issue is not appealed to the commissioner;

The provisions of this section requiring proof of support, custody or tenancy shall not apply to a person keeping a child in his home whose parent or guardian is a member of the New Jersey National Guard or a member of the reserve component of the armed forces of the United States and who has been ordered into active military service in any of the armed forces of the United States in time of war or national emergency. In such a situation, the child shall be eligible to enroll in the district in which he is being kept, and no tuition shall be charged by the district. Following the return of the child's parent or guardian from active military service, the child's eligibility for enrollment without tuition in the district in which he or she is being kept shall cease at the end of the current school year;

c.Any person who fraudulently allows a child of another person to use his residence and is not the primary financial supporter of that child and any person who fraudulently claims to have given up custody of his child to a person in another district commits a disorderly persons offense;

d.Any person whose parent or guardian, even though not domiciled within the district, is residing temporarily therein, but any person who has had or shall have his all-year-round dwelling place within the district for one year or longer shall be deemed to be domiciled within the district for the purposes of this section;

e.Any person for whom the Division of Youth and Family Services in the Department of Children and Families is acting as guardian and who is placed in the district by the division;

f.Any person whose parent or guardian moves from one school district to another school district as a result of being homeless and whose district of residence is determined pursuant to section 19 of P.L.1979, c.207 (C.18A:7B-12).

L.1967, c.271; amended 1977, c.373; 1985, c.6; 1989, c.290, s.2; 1993, c.380; 1994, c.169, s.1; 2006, c.47, s.94.

18A:38-2. Free attendance at school by nonresidents placed in district under court order
Public schools shall be free to any person over five and under 20 years of age nonresident in a school district who is placed in the home of another person, who is resident in the district, by order of a court of competent jurisdiction of this state or by any society, agency or institution incorporated and located in this state having for its object the care and welfare of indigent, neglected or abandoned children, or children in danger of becoming delinquent, or any person who is a resident in any institution operated, by any such society, agency or corporation, on a nonprofit basis, whether or not such other person, society, agency or institution is compensated for keeping such person; but no district shall be required to take an unreasonable number of persons under this section except upon the order of the commissioner issued in accordance with rules established by the state board.

L.1967, c.271.

18A:38-3. Admission for nonresident of school district; parent on active duty
18A:38-3. a. Any person not resident in a school district, if eligible except for residence, may be admitted to the schools of the district with the consent of the board of education upon such terms, and with or without payment of tuition, as the board may prescribe.

b. Any person not resident in a school district, if eligible except for residence, and if that person previously was a resident of the district, shall be admitted to the schools of the district without payment of tuition if that person's parent or guardian is a member of the New Jersey National Guard or a member of the reserve component of the armed forces of the United States and has been ordered into active military service in any of the armed forces of the United States in time of war or national emergency, resulting in the relocation of the student out of the district. A school district admitting a student pursuant to this subsection shall not be obligated for transportation costs.

L.1967, c.271; amended 1994,c.169,s.2.

lis.njleg.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=113315968&Depth=4&TD=WRAP&advquery=%2218A%3a38-1%22&headingswithhits=on&infobase=statutes.nfo&rank=&record={7E6F}&softpage=Doc_Frame_Pg42&wordsaroundhits=2&zz=

[admin]

On the plus side, and if memory serves me, I think the Residency officer has a budget if fifteen thousand dollars. He has already caught almost three times that in theft of services. I would say we are getting our money's worth.

[admin]

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2008/0123/Schools/023.html

Students' addresses are being reviewed
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO Staff Writer


FREEHOLD - In order to attend an elementary school or the intermediate school in Freehold Borough a pupil must live in the municipality.

A residency officer was recently hired by the Board of Education to ensure that rule is being adhered to and that the school district is not paying to educate students who do not live in town.

The ability to hire the part-time residency officer at a cost of $15,000 annually was made possible by voter approval of a second ballot question in the April 2007 school election.

According to Freehold Borough Superintendent of Schools Elizabeth O'Connell, the residency officer, Donald Swinarski, has tuned up 12 cases which are now under investigation to make certain that the pupils are indeed borough residents.

Swinarski is a retired Freehold Township Police Department detective who started his work for the school board in November.

O'Connell told the News Transcript that she recently reported to the school board that seven out of the 12 cases being investigated were found to be pupils who do not live within the borders of Freehold Borough.

She said Swinarski is helping the families of those children to register the youngsters in the school district where they reside.

"The families have really appreciated his help," O'Connell said. "He has always been very professional and there have been no complaints from anyone."

O'Connell said one red flag which may indicate that a pupil does not live in town is difficulty reaching a family member.

Mail that has been returned or never answered and telephone messages that have never been returned are two things that alert administrators to a potential problem, according to O'Connell, who said these are instances that Swinarski will be asked to check out.

Freehold Borough Board of Education President Jim Keelan said Swinarski is doing great work.

"He is professionally, efficiently and thoroughly investigating all residency related issues for the district," Keelan said. "He provides a level of service the district was unable to achieve up until now, such as home visits and surveillance for evidence of non-residency."