New York State Education Department Commissioner Betty Rosa announced on November 26 that “non-substantial amendments” have been made to the New York State Education Regionalization Regulation (Subpart 124-2 Regulations). A law firm that participated in the Long Island school district’s resistance to the “education regionalization” regulation issued a memorandum on the same day, stating that the amendment did not change the mandatory nature of the “education regionalization plan”.
According to the memorandum from Rigano LLC law firm, the language contained in Section 124-2.5(a) of the regulation remains unchanged, stating that “each school district and supervisory district shall commence implementation of an approved regionalization plan no later than the 2026-2027 school year”.
Additionally, the law firm pointed out that the Commissioner’s statement did not alter the following provisions: 1. The Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) must submit proposed regionalization plans to the Commissioner by October 1, 2025, without incorporating the opinions of the school districts; 2. The Commissioner is obliged to approve or reject these plans within 30 days of receiving the plans submitted by BOCES, based on undisclosed criteria.
The law firm stated that the Commissioner’s letter merely changed school district participation in the “regional planning process” to voluntary – submitting written notice by January 15 to choose not to participate in the “regional planning process”. Despite the optional nature of the regionalization planning process according to the Education Department, the rules still maintain the mandatory obligation of school districts to implement the regionalization plan approved by the Commissioner, making it clear that districts must adhere to the regionalization plan approved by the Commissioner.
Furthermore, the lawyer pointed out that the Commissioner’s statement regarding the revision of the regionalization plan to ensure school districts have full control over the plans they develop is misleading. This is because the actual entities formulating the regionalization plans are the “supervisory districts” (i.e., BOCES), not the regular school districts, meaning regular school districts do not have control over the content of the regionalization plans. This provision only applies to the amendment of the regionalization plan itself, not the original plan.
Moreover, the law firm also mentioned that the Commissioner’s claim that these amendments are “non-substantial” is purportedly to avoid a public comment period. According to the State Administrative Procedures Act (SAPA), any “substantial amendment” must be publicly announced again, allowing for a 45-day public comment period.
The law firm stated that if the State Education Department does not withdraw the “education regionalization” rules, “731 public school districts may still lose local control, and local communities could be forever altered.” They will represent 19 school districts, multiple local governments, and a nonprofit organization in bringing a lawsuit against the Education Department and relevant officials, including Governor Hochul and Commissioner Rosa.