A recent decision of the New York State Supreme Court for the County of Oneida reflects an apparent trend away from overly technical readings of the Open Meetings Law. There remain, however, pitfalls of which school districts and BOCES should be wary.
In a recent decision, the Commissioner of Education further emphasized the need to specifically comply with the procedural requirements for a suspension from attendance of 5 days or less, also called a “Principal’s suspension” and further defined who may be a “complaining witness” at the informal conference.
With the looming Board of Education elections and budget votes, school districts must contend with the growing public scrutiny surrounding elections. Doing so requires all election personnel to be aware of their duties, as well as limitations of those duties. These duties and limitations vary depending on the type of school district and its registration practices.
With school district annual meetings around the corner, it is prudent that districts remain mindful of impermissible campaign activities.
School districts may feel caught “between a rock and a hard place” when determining whether to permit a law enforcement officer or Child Protective Services (“CPS”) to interview a student at school without parental consent. Be mindful, law enforcement and CPS are treated differently under the law.
Showing 8 of 29 pages