ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

July 27, 2022

Challenging the removal, and the subsequent denial of an application for reinstatement, of a member of a school board

In this ruling Commissioner of Education Betty A. Rosa consolidated two separate appeals brought by a former member of a school board [Petitioner] in which similar issues of law and fact were involved. 

The first appeal concerned Petitioner's efforts seeking a stay her removal from the board pursuant to Education Law §1709(18) while the second appeal concerned Petitioner's seeking reinstatement to the board following her removal from the school board after being found guilty of two charges filed against her.*

With respect to Petitioner's efforts to "stay her removal from the board," Petitioner sought to have "the removal hearing heard by the Commissioner rather than the board" or, in the alternative, that the Commissioner's issuing an order directing the recusal of the school board president. Petitioner's requests were both denied and following an administrative hearing, the Petitioner was removed from her position on the board.

Regarding Petitioner's challenging her removal from the board and her seeking reinstatement in the instant consolidated proceeding, after addressing two procedural matters, the Commissioner considered  the merits of Petitioner's appeal. In so doing, the Commissioner noted that "in an appeal to the Commissioner, a petitioner has the burden of demonstrating a clear legal right to the relief requested and establishing the facts upon which he or she seeks relief."

With respect to the charges of “official misconduct” served on Petitioner, the Commissioner determined  that the two allegations of such misconduct met the standard for official misconduct set out in Education Law §1709(18). Such misconduct, said the Commissioner, constituted "wrongdoing committed in [Petitioner's] capacity as a school officer," which the Commissioner characterized as "quintessential" official misconduct.

The Commissioner found that the record supported the school board’s determination that Petitioner engaged in official misconduct, noting that board members “have a fiduciary obligation to act constructively to achieve the best possible governance of the school district” and Petitioner's actions in this instance "violated this duty."

Further, noted the Commissioner, official misconduct within the meaning of Education Law §1709(18) "is not dependent upon a violation of statute or district policy," citing 61 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 18,116 and other Decisions of the Commissioner of Education.

*  The penalties imposed: The board [a] admonished Petitioner for the misconduct alleged in Charge One, improperly disclosing confidential information, and [b] determined that the misconduct alleged in Charge Two, official misconduct, warranted her removal.

Click HERE to access the text of the Commissioner's decision.

 

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
NYPPL Blogger Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard. Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com