Court Opinion

ID: 9949320
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-11 14:07:48.08292+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:30:03.791484
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
                            APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
     This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the
  internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

                                                     SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
                                                     APPELLATE DIVISION
                                                     DOCKET NO. A-2195-21

IN THE MATTER OF THE
CHARTER AMENDMENT
REQUEST OF COLLEGE
ACHIEVE GREATER
ASBURY PARK CHARTER
SCHOOL.
_________________________

                Argued September 20, 2023 – Decided March 11, 2024

                Before Judges Vernoia and Gummer.

                On appeal from the New Jersey Department of
                Education.

                Stephen J. Edelstein argued the cause for appellant
                Neptune Township Board of Education (Weiner Law
                Group, LLP, attorneys; Mark A. Tabakin, of counsel
                and on the briefs; Dustin F. Glass, on the briefs).

                Thomas Owen Johnston argued the cause for
                respondent College Achieve Greater Asbury Park
                Charter School (Johnston Law Firm, LLC, attorneys;
                Thomas Owen Johnston, of counsel and on the brief;
                Barbara Jean Bohi, on the brief).

                Carolyn G. Labin, Deputy Attorney General, argued the
                cause for respondent Commissioner of Education
                (Matthew J. Platkin, Attorney General, attorney;
            Sookie Bae-Park, Assistant Attorney General, of
            counsel; Carolyn G. Labin, on the brief).

            Methfessel & Werbel, attorneys for respondent Asbury
            Park Board of Education, join in the brief of appellant
            Neptune Township Board of Education.

PER CURIAM

      The Neptune Board of Education (Neptune BOE) appeals from a March

3, 2022 Commissioner of Education (Commissioner) final agency decision 1

approving College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School's (College

Achieve) request for an amendment to its charter permitting College Achieve to

expand a school it operates to include grades ten through twelve and reduce the

school's maximum enrollment from 961 to 858 students.2 Neptune BOE argues

the Commissioner's decision is arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable bec ause

it is based on findings that are not supported by evidence in the record and the

1
  Neptune BOE also appeals from a February 8, 2022 decision which, as we
explain, is not the final agency decision and is identical to the March 3, 2022
decision in all matters relevant to the issues on appeal.
2
  While this matter was pending before the New Jersey Department of Education
(the Department), the Department was headed at different times by Acting
Commissioners of Education Angelica Allen-McMillan and Kevin Dehmer.
Although during the times pertinent to this appeal they served as Acting
Commissioners, for purposes of clarity and simplicity, we refer to them
respectively as Commissioner Allen-McMillan and Commissioner Dehmer.
                                                                          A-2195-21
                                       2
Commissioner otherwise ignored Neptune BOE's public comments opposing the

amendment. We affirm.

                                        I.

        College Achieve has operated a public charter school in Asbury Park since

2017. In a February 1, 2021 letter, Commissioner Allen-McMillan granted

College Achieve a renewal of its charter through June 30, 2026, for grade levels

kindergarten through grade nine with a maximum enrollment of 961 students.

The Commissioner denied College Achieve's request to expand to include grades

ten through twelve.

        In rendering her decision, the Commissioner explained she had utilized

the Department's required Performance Framework "to evaluate the relative

success of the elementary, middle, and high school programs offered by charter

schools." See N.J.A.C. 6A:11-1.2; N.J.A.C. 6A:11-1.2; see also Off. of Charter

& Renaissance Schs., N.J. Dep't of Educ., Performance Framework (rev. July

2017)              [hereinafter              Performance            Framework],

https://www.nj.gov/education/chartsch/accountability/docs/PerformanceFrame

work.pdf. The Performance Framework is "the accountability system that shall

be used by the Department to evaluate the academic, financial, and

organizational performance of each charter school." N.J.A.C. 6A:11-1.2.

                                                                           A-2195-21
                                        3
The February 18, 2021 Charter Amendment Request

      In a February 18, 2021 letter to Commissioner Allen-McMillan, College

Achieve sought a charter amendment permitting one of two options. College

Achieve requested an amendment expanding the grade configuration for its

school to kindergarten through grade ten with a decrease in maximum

enrollment from 961 to 930 students or, in the alternative, expansion of the grade

levels through grade twelve by June 2024 with a decrease in maximum

enrollment to 858 students by the end of the charter term in 2026. Before a

response to the request was provided, Commissioner Dehmer replaced

Commissioner Allen-McMillan.

      In an August 13, 2021 letter, Commissioner Dehmer denied the request

after reviewing College Achieve's "academic, operational, and fiscal standing

based on the criteria outlined in the . . . [Performance Framework]."         The

Commissioner explained the Performance Framework required measurement of

the school's academic performance based on the "relative success of the

elementary, middle[,] and high school programs offered" by the school. The

Commissioner further noted the February 1, 2021 letter granting College

Achieve's charter renewal had explained that a statewide assessment for the

2017-2018 school year resulted in a Tier 3—"low performing"—rank for the

                                                                            A-2195-21
                                        4
school and a Tier 2—"middle performing"—rank for 2018-2019.3                  The

Commissioner determined that "[a]bsent the results of statewide assessments for

the 2019-2020 school year," the request for the charter amendment "fails to

articulate local assessment data that would bolster the Department's confidence

that College Achieve . . . continues to make academic gains."

      Commissioner Dehmer also denied the requested charter amendment

based on concerns about College Achieve's financial performance, as assessed

under the Performance Framework. The Commissioner explained that a review

of College Achieve's fiscal year 2020 had "indicate[d] that the school met few

standard rated measures in the Fiscal Performance Framework."               More

particularly, the Commissioner determined "[t]he current ratio and unrestricted

days cash variance" had not met the "standard for the first two years of the

charter, while enrollment variance fell far below standards for all three years of

the charter," and "[a]ctual enrollment fell far below maximum enrollment and

was significantly below budgeted enrollment since inception."

3
  Under the Performance Framework, academic performance is measured using
a tier system, with Tier 1 indicating a "high performing" school, Tier 2
indicating a "middle performing" school, and Tier 3 indicating a "low
performing school." Performance Framework, at 5-6.
                                                                            A-2195-21
                                        5
      The Commissioner further rejected the requested charter amendment

based on concerns about the school's organizational performance.              The

Commissioner explained the organizational performance matrix of the

Performance Framework required consideration of whether College Achieve

had "demonstrated the organizational capacity to sustain the amendment

request."   Commissioner Dehmer noted "[t]he ability to serve grades not

approved within the current charter is not [guaranteed]," the school "has an

obligation to ensure that systems are in place for the seamless transition of

students post the grade levels authorized to serve," and "the amendment request

failed to articulate the additional instructional staff required to provide robust

high school instruction and how College Achieve . . . would provide rich high

school programming for the additional grades."

      The Commissioner further explained he had considered letters supporting

and opposing the requested charter amendment.          As noted, Commissioner

Dehmer denied the requested amendment in the August 13, 2021 letter. At some

point following issuance of the August 13, 2021 denial, former Commissioner

Allen-McMillan replaced Commissioner Dehmer.

                                                                            A-2195-21
                                        6
The November 30, 2021 Charter Amendment Request

      Three and a half months after the August 13, 2021 letter rejecting its

charter amendment application, College Achieve submitted a November 30,

2021 letter to Commissioner Allen-McMillan again seeking a charter

amendment to add grades ten through twelve and reduce maximum enrollment.

College Achieve acknowledged it had made an identical request in February

2021, that had been rejected in Commissioner Dehmer's August 13, 2021 letter.

College Achieve asserted it was entitled to the charter amendment because in its

view, it had addressed, or was addressing, the stated bases for the August 13,

2021 denial.

      For example, College Achieve stated the Commissioner's August 13, 2021

letter had denied the charter amendment in part because the school had received

a Tier 3—"low performing"—rating. College Achieve disputed the purported

finding, asserting the school had "recently been designated as being advanced

to Tier 2."

      College Achieve's assertion misstated the Commissioner's August 13,

2021 rejection decision, which noted College Achieve had obtained a Tier 3

ranking for 2017-2018 but also recognized the school had obtained a Tier 2

ranking for 2018-2019.     That is, contrary to College Achieve's claim, the

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                       7
improvement of its tier ranking was considered by Commissioner Dehmer in the

August 13, 2021 denial.     In fact, Commissioner Dehmer had rejected the

amendment application despite the improvement in the tier ranking, noting the

school had a "low" Tier 2 ranking of only 38.3 points.4 Commissioner Dehmer

had also explained there had been no statewide assessments permitting a

revision of the tier ranking for the most recently completed 2019-2020 school

year and College Achieve had not provided "local assessment data" supporting

a determination that the school "continues to make academic gains."

      Despite its misstatement about Commissioner Dehmer's purported failure

to consider the school's Tier 2 ranking, in its November 30, 2021 amendment

application, College Achieve acknowledged the August 13, 2021 denial was

based in part on the absence of local assessment data showing improved student

performance. Addressing the deficiency, College Achieve asserted: a New

Jersey Start Strong (Start Strong) assessment showed a "participation rate" of

approximately ninety percent and an increase—from the second to the twenty-

4
  Under the Performance Framework, the range for a Tier 2 rating is between
35 and 64.9 percent of points possible based on the academic performance
metric. Performance Framework, at 5-6. As noted by the Commissioner,
College Achieve's Tier 2 ranking for the 2018-2019 school year was only 38.3
percent, just 3.3 percent above the minimum score for the ranking. See id. at 6.

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                       8
fifth percentile—in an "ESSA 5 summative ranking" from 2018-2019; the

school's chronic absenteeism rate had been reduced from 26.6 percent in 2018-

2019 to 2.6 percent in 2020-2021; and a "new assessment platform"—

Fastbridge—had established increased schoolwide averages for math and

English language skills in 2019-2020.

      College Achieve also addressed the financial performance concerns

Commissioner Dehmer had noted in the August 13, 2021 denial.            College

Achieve represented that its current working capital ratio satisfied the

Performance Framework standard for 2021, but acknowledged its unrestricted

days cash "does not meet the standard." Similarly, College Achieve addressed

the Performance Framework's requirement for "[l]onger term financial

sustainability," claiming it "now" met the "[d]efault" standard but also

acknowledging it did not meet the framework's "cash flow" standard. College

Achieve further asserted it had "now met" the financial audit and financial

management and compliance standards in the Performance Framework.6

5
  "ESSA" is an acronym for the Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 6301
to 7941.
6
  The various standards to which College Achieve referenced in its November
30, 2021 letter request for the charter amendment are defined in the Performance
Framework. See Performance Framework, at 19-21 (defining "current [working

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                        9
      College Achieve further addressed the issue of enrollment variance,

claiming its enrollment had grown to ninety percent of the planned enrollment

at the school and offering explanations—issues related to taking occupancy of a

new facility and student uncertainty attendant to not having a viable high school

program—as to why its enrollment was not higher.               College Achieve

acknowledged enrollment variance is a metric under the Performance

Framework that requires ninety-five percent enrollment to satisfy the metric's

standard. See Performance Framework, at 20.

      College Achieve's November 30, 2021 request for an amendment to its

charter also addressed Commissioner Dehmer's August 13, 2021 concerns

regarding organizational capacity. College Achieve explained it had "added key

staff including a high school principal, high school pathway guidance counselor,

additional social workers and a high school certified teaching staff." It further

represented it had established "a complete high school program aligned with [the

Department's] credit requirements for graduation including opportunities for

advanced placement and dual enrollment."

capital] ratio," "[u]nrestricted days cash," "[d]efault," "[f]inancial audit,"
"[f]inancial [m]anagement and [c]ompliance," "[c]ash flow," and other metrics
used to assess the performance of charter schools).
                                                                           A-2195-21
                                      10
      Neptune BOE submitted a letter to Commissioner Allen-McMillan in

opposition to College Achieve's November 30, 2021 request for the charter

amendment.     The letter noted the improvement in College Achieve's tier

ranking—from Tier 3 to Tier 2—but pointed out the improved ranking was based

on the 2018-2019 school year and College Achieve had not provided any ranking

for the two school years—2019-2020 and 2020-2021—prior to its November 30,

2021 charter amendment request.

      Neptune BOE further alleged deficiencies in College Achieve's reliance

on the Start Strong data, explaining it did not measure educational progress but

served only "as a beginning point for districts to use for planning purposes."

Neptune BOE also asserted the Start Strong data on which College Achieve

relied was not supported by necessary details, such as the number and percentage

of students tested or the manner in which they were tested.

      Neptune BOE further questioned College Achieve's reliance on ESSA

data and College Achieve's claim the school had moved in one year from the

second percentile to the twenty-fifth percentile in one measured standard.

Neptune BOE claimed the ESSA reports for 2017-2018 did not support College

Achieve's claim and questioned why that information, which had been available

prior to the August 13, 2021 rejection of the identical request for a charter

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                      11
amendment, now supported an application made two years after the school year

in which the purported improvement occurred.

      Neptune BOE also challenged the validity of College Achieve's claim that

local assessment tools utilized during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school

years showed increased rates of academic improvement. The Neptune BOE

asserted the local assessments were "diagnostic in nature" and the alleged gains

shown were the product of unreliable tests taken at home in June 2020, when

schools were closed and the students attended school virtually. Also, according

to Neptune BOE, the information provided by College Achieve did not include

the number of students tested, the test setting, or the information used as the

baseline for assessing progress.

      Additionally, Neptune BOE noted that although College Achieve had

claimed its chronic absenteeism was reduced to 2.6 percent in 2020-2021, its

school performance reports did not include any information for 2019-2020 and

otherwise reflected no assessment of the factor for 2020-2021. Neptune BOE

also asserted that College Achieve had consistently over-estimated its

enrollment and thereby adversely affected Neptune BOE's budget planning.

      In a January 14, 2022 letter, Neptune BOE's counsel submitted an

additional letter on the board's behalf opposing College Achieve's charter

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                      12
amendment request. In pertinent part, counsel noted the November 30, 2021

letter request was based solely on conclusory assertions of academic

improvements; did not include any "supportive documentation"—as required by

the Charter Amendment Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated by the

Department7—supporting College Achieve's claims; included admissions

College Achieve did not satisfy Performance Framework standards for working

capital ratio and cash flow; and relied on College Achieve's belief it would

satisfy the standards in the future.

      Counsel further averred College Achieve had inaccurately represented

that its three facilities could accommodate 961 students in grades kindergarten

through grade twelve because one of its facilities—located on West Banks

Avenue—is approved only for use for kindergarten through grade eight.

Counsel also asserted College Achieve had failed to include information

required under the Guidelines detailing the "key components of the educational

7
    See Charter Amendment Guidelines, N.J. Dep't of Educ. [hereinafter
Guidelines], https://www.nj.gov/education/chartsch/about/info/amendment_gui
delines.shtml (Aug. 2022) (providing in part an application to amend a charter
school application must include "[a] formal cover letter of request to the
Commissioner . . . that includes the rationale for the requested amendment and
other supportive documentation").
                                                                         A-2195-21
                                       13
model" and "the team's individual and collective qualifications for

implementing" the addition of grades ten through twelve.

      In a February 8, 2022 letter, Commissioner Allen-McMillan approved the

charter amendment, explaining she did so after considering the public comments

received by Neptune BOE and the Asbury Park Board of Education and after

evaluating the application based on the Performance Framework.           As to

academic performance, the Commissioner found College Achieve had improved

to a Tier 2 rank for the 2018-2019 school year and its rank had not been

redetermined during the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years due to a lack of

"statewide assessment[] results" available during those times.

      The Commissioner concluded the "2021 Start Strong and interim and end-

of-year assessments results[] suggest[ed]" that College Achieve "maintains data

systems to continue measuring academic achievement and progress" and

"ongoing presentation of locally administered assessments over the terms of the

charter signals significant growth."

      Addressing the financial performance metric of the Performance

Framework, the Commissioner found that College Achieve "met many standard

rated measures" in the Performance Framework. The Commissioner also found

College Achieve would meet all "fiscal performance indicators" because the

                                                                         A-2195-21
                                       14
Department "believes" College Achieve will do so "through the reduction in

charter enrollment" it had proposed as part of the requested charter amendment.

      The Commissioner further found College Achieve satisfied the

organizational performance metric, accepting College Achieve's representation

that it had added a high school principal, certified high school teaching staff,

and will implement a high school program with advanced placement courses and

also because the Department believes College Achieve will implement the

requisite educational programs for the proposed added grades—ten through

twelve.

      On March 3, 2022, the Commissioner issued a modified decision granting

the charter amendment. With one minor exception, the modified decision is

identical to the February 8, 2022 decision; it differs only in that it includes a

different calculation of projected student enrollment not relevant to the issues

presented on appeal. The March 3, 2022 decision constitutes the Department's

final agency decision addressing College Achieve's charter amendment request.

      Neptune BOE appealed from the Commissioner's final agency decision

approving the charter amendment.        The Commissioner later submitted a

Statement of Items Comprising the Record on Appeal (Statement of Items),

which included two reports that post-dated the initial February 8, 2022 decision

                                                                           A-2195-21
                                      15
granting College Achieve's request. More particularly, the Statement of Items

included a February 24, 2022 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the

College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School of New Jersey for the

Fiscal Period Ended June 30, 2021 (the February 24, 2022 CAF Report), and a

March 8, 2022 College Achieve Paterson Charter School Auditors Management

Report on Administrative Findings Financial Compliance and Performance for

the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2021 (the March 8, 2022 AFFC Report). Neither

College Achieve nor Neptune BOE moved to settle the record based on the

inclusion of the two reports that post-dated the Commissioner's February 8, 2022

decision. See R. 2:5-5 (permitting a motion to settle the record on appeal).

                                        II.

      Our scope of review of the Commissioner's decision is narrow. We "may

reverse an agency decision if it is arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable ," In re

Proposed Quest Acad. Charter Sch. of Montclair Founders Grp., 216 N.J. 370,

385 (2013) (citing In re Petitions for Rulemaking, N.J.A.C. 10:82-1.2 & 10:85-

4.1, 117 N.J. 311, 325 (1989)), or "when 'it is clear that the agency action is

inconsistent with its mandate[,]'" ibid. As our Supreme Court has explained:

            [A]lthough sometimes phrased in terms of a search for
            arbitrary or unreasonable agency action, the judicial
            role [in reviewing an agency action] is generally
            restricted to three inquiries: (1) whether the agency's

                                                                             A-2195-21
                                       16
            action violates express or implied legislative policies,
            that is, did the agency follow the law; (2) whether the
            record contains substantial evidence to support the
            findings on which the agency based its action; and (3)
            whether in applying the legislative policies to the facts,
            the agency clearly erred in reaching a conclusion that
            could not reasonably have been made on a showing of
            the relevant factors.

            [Id. at 385-86 (second alteration in original) (quoting
            Mazza v. Bd. of Trs., 143 N.J. 22, 25 (1995)).]

      We also owe deference to a commissioner's findings because of his or her

expertise in the educational field. See id. at 389. In our review of a decision

concerning a charter school's application for a charter amendment, we must

recognize the Commissioner performs a quasi-legislative function.         In re

Renewal Application of TEAM Acad. Charter Sch., 247 N.J. 46, 74 (2021). In

fulfilling that role, the Commissioner is not required "to provide 'the kind of

formalized findings and conclusions necessary in the traditional contested

case.'" Ibid. (quoting In re TEAM Acad. Charter Sch., 459 N.J. Super. 111, 140

(App. Div. 2019)). The Commissioner's "reasons [for her decision] need not be

as detailed or formalized as an agency adjudication of disputed facts; they need

only be inferable from the record considered by the agency." In re Englewood

on the Palisades Charter Sch., 320 N.J. Super. 174, 217 (App. Div. 1999), aff'd

as modified, 164 N.J. 462, 476-77 (2000). "For 'more policy-driven, quasi-

                                                                          A-2195-21
                                       17
legislative acts' such as those at issue here, 'the record may be less extensive'

than the record of a contested case." Renewal Application of TEAM Acad., 247

N.J.   at   74   (citation   omitted).    Nonetheless,   "[t]he   basis   for   the

determination . . . 'must be discernible from the record' considered by the

agency." Id. at 75 (quoting In re Red Bank Charter Sch., 367 N.J. Super. 462,

476 (App. Div. 2004)).

       A reviewing "court's determination [of] whether the record contains

'substantial evidence to support the findings on which the agency based its

action' requires 'a sifting of the record, and the ability to find support for the

conclusions reached by the Commissioner under the statutory framework within

which she [or he] must act.'" Id. at 75 (citation omitted); see also Red Bank,

367 N.J. Super. at 476. For example, in Englewood the Court explained the

manner in which the Commissioner is to assess the racial impact a charter school

would have on the district in which the charter school operates. 164 N.J. at 329.

The Court explained that it did not express a "view on the formality or structure

of that analysis except to state that it must take place before final approval is

granted to a charter school applicant." Ibid. The Court otherwise left "the form

and structure of that analysis to the Commissioner and State Board to

determine." Ibid.

                                                                            A-2195-21
                                         18
      Measured     against   these   standards,   we   are   not   persuaded    the

Commissioner's findings and conclusions concerning the academic, financial,

and operational prongs of the Performance Framework, or the March 3, 2022

final agency decision granting the requested charter amendment, were arbitrary,

capricious, and unreasonable. Neptune BOE challenges the Commissioner's

reliance on, and questions the validity of, the local assessments, including the

Fastbridge, Start Strong, and ESSA data, as proper measures of College

Achieve's academic performance under the Performance Framework, in the

absence of available statewide assessments for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021

school years.

      We recognize Neptune BOE argues the data is, for various reasons, not a

reliable indicator of College Achieve's academic performance and progress at

the school, but the results of the various assessments are included in the record

and we must defer to the Commissioner's expertise in interpreting the data and

applying it in fulfilling her quasi-legislative role of determining College

Achieve's satisfaction of the academic performance metric of the Performance

Framework.      See generally In re Stallworth, 208 N.J. 182, 194-95 (2011)

(citation omitted) (explaining a reviewing court may not substitute its judgment

for an agency's, "particularly . . . when the issue under review is directed to the

                                                                             A-2195-21
                                       19
agency's special 'expertise and superior knowledge of a particular field'").

Stated differently, we discern no basis to conclude the Commissioner's reliance

on the data, and conclusions based on the data, are arbitrary, capricious, or

unreasonable.

      We similarly reject Neptune BOE's claim the Commissioner arbitrarily,

capriciously, or unreasonably assessed the organizational performance metric of

the Performance Framework. Neptune BOE argues College Achieve failed to

submit information in its charter amendment request that is required under the

Guidelines. More particularly, Neptune BOE claims College Achieve did not

supply, and the record does not otherwise include, information concerning

educational approaches, instructional strategies, the individual and collective

qualifications of the school's leadership, administration, and governance,

staffing and recruiting, performance management, and curriculum, instruction

and assessment as required by the Guidelines.

      We reject this argument because it is based on a misinterpretation of the

Guidelines. The Guidelines' requirement for submission of the information

Neptune BOE claims is lacking is inapplicable to College Achieve's request to

amend a charter to permit the addition of grades ten through twelve. Those

grades are within the nine-through-twelve-grade band, and the Guidelines'

                                                                         A-2195-21
                                     20
requirement on which Neptune BOE relies is expressly limited to requests to

amend a charter to add "another grade span." Guidelines (Increasing Enrollment

or Expanding Grade Levels). Thus, by its plain terms, the guideline cited by

Neptune BOE does not apply where, as here, a charter school seeks a charter

amendment to allow only additional grade levels within a grade span.

      We are also not persuaded the Commissioner acted arbitrarily,

capriciously, or unreasonably by concluding College Achieve satisfied the

operational performance metric of the Performance Framework.                 The

Commissioner accepted College Achieve's representations it had added a high

school principal and social workers and had certified high school teaching staff,

its high school program would be consistent with the Department's graduation

requirements and included advanced placement courses and dual enrollment,

and it had hired a shared services business professional to support its

expenditure of funds from various sources. Given the nature of the requested

amendment to the charter—adding grade levels progressively over a multiyear

period—the    Commissioner      reasonably    relied   on   College    Achieve's

representations as to what it had done, and what it committed to doing in the

future, to ensure satisfaction of the operational performance metric. And the

Commissioner's determinations concerning the operational performance metric

                                                                           A-2195-21
                                      21
are "discernable" and "inferable from the record," and therefore are not arbitrary,

capricious, or unreasonable. Englewood, 320 N.J. Super. at 217.

      The record also supports the Commissioner's determination concerning

the financial performance metric of the Performance Framework.                 The

Commissioner found that College Achieve "met many standard rated measures

in the [f]iscal Performance Framework."           In its brief on appeal, the

Commissioner relies on, and cites extensively to, the February 24, 2022 CAF

Report as evidence supporting the Commissioner's determination under the

financial performance metric. 8

      Neptune BOE argues the Commissioner could not have considered the

February 24, 2022 CAF Report because it was issued following the

Commissioner's February 8, 2022 decision approving the charter amendment.

We need not address that contention because the final agency decision in this

8
   For example, in support of its claim the Commissioner's determination and
conclusions concerning College Achieve's financial performance satisfied the
financial performance metric in the Performance Framework, the Department
relied on the following information gleaned from College Achieve's February
24, 2022 CAF Report: College Achieve's fund balance grew from fiscal year
2019-2020; College Achieve's fund increased $134,885, or 2.4 percent, from
fiscal year 2019-2020; College Achieve's unreserved, unassigned fund balance
for 2021 was four percent of its total operating budget and its working capital
ratio increased from 1.02 in fiscal year 2019 and 1.39 in fiscal year 2021;
College Achieve met the standard for debt service and did not have any debt;
and the school's enrollment substantially increased from fiscal year 2019-2021.
                                                                             A-2195-21
                                       22
matter was issued on March 3, 2022, and, as such, the information in the report

was available to the Commissioner prior to the issuance of the final agency

decision from which this appeal was taken.

      We defer to the Commissioner's interpretation of the data included in the

report as supporting College Achieve's charter amendment application.

Although the report shows—and College Achieve admits—the financial data

does not precisely satisfy all the standards in the financial performance metric

under the Performance Framework, Neptune BOE offers no basis to conclude

that any deviation from the standards requires a rejection of a charter amendment

when, in the exercise of the Commissioner's discretion and expertise, there is

evidence supporting a conclusion the deviations will be remedied. Indeed, the

Commissioner noted College Achieve satisfied "most" of the financial standards

in the Performance Framework metric and determined College Achieve's

financial performance otherwise supported the charter amendment in part

because the requested amendment would improve its financial performance by

decreasing enrollment from 961 to 858 students.        Again, we defer to the

Commissioner's expertise on such issues. See Proposed Quest Acad., 216 N.J.

at 389.

                                                                           A-2195-21
                                      23
      A proper analysis of each of the three criteria—academic, financial, and

organizational performance—that the Commissioner is required to evaluate

under the Performance Framework is essential to a valid determination of a

whether a charter school is entitled to a charter amendment. See N.J.A.C.

6A:11-2.6(b) (requiring in part that the Commissioner "review a charter school's

performance data in assessing the need for a possible charter amendment"); see

also N.J.A.C. 6A:11-1.2 (explaining a charter school's performance data is

determined under the three criteria included in the Performance Framework).

As we have explained, the Commissioner's evaluation, reasoning, conclusions

concerning academic, financial, and operational criteria of the Performance

Framework appear supported by the record and are subject to deference based

on the Commissioner's expertise and fulfillment of the quasi-legislative role she

played in the assessment of the charter amendment application. We therefore

find no basis to conclude the Commissioner's final decision is arbitrary,

capricious, or unreasonable. See Stallworth, 208 N.J. at 194-95.

      Neptune BOE also argues the Commissioner's decision granting College

Achieve's charter amendment request should be reversed in part because the

Commissioner failed to consider the comments and evidence included in

Neptune BOE's January 13, 2022 letter opposing the amendment. Neptune BOE

                                                                           A-2195-21
                                      24
claims the failure to consider the comments and evidence is established by the

fact that the original Statement of Items does not include Neptune BOE's January

13, 2022 submission.      Neptune BOE argues that if the Commissioner had

considered the comments and evidence in granting the charter amendment, they

would have been included in the Statement of Items.

      In the March 3, 2022 decision granting the amendment, the Commissioner

expressly noted she had considered the public comments submitted by Neptune

BOE. Moreover, we are not persuaded the record establishes the Commissioner

did not consider Neptune BOE's January 13, 2022 submission. Following the

filing of the original Statement of Items, the Attorney General's Office advised

that the statement erroneously failed to include Neptune BOE's submission in

opposition to the requested charter amendment. The Attorney General's Office

then submitted an Amended Statement of Items that included Neptune BOE's

January 13, 2022 submission. Neptune BOE offers no basis to suggest the

failure to include the submission in the original Statement of Items was the

product of anything other than an inadvertent failure to include it, and we

therefore reject the claim that the failure to refer to the submission in the original

statement established the Commissioner did not consider it in granting the

charter amendment.

                                                                                A-2195-21
                                         25
Affirmed.

                 A-2195-21
            26