Appeal of STEPHANIE DENNIS, on behalf of her child, from action of the Board of Education of the Deer Park Union Free School District regarding residency.

Decision No. 18,478

(August 20, 2024)

Frazer & Feldman, LLP, attorneys for respondent, Christie R. Jacobson, Esq., of counsel

ROSA., Commissioner.--Petitioner appeals the decision of the Board of Education of the Deer Park Union Free School District (“respondent”) that her child (the “student”) is not a district resident.  The appeal must be dismissed as untimely.

An appeal to the Commissioner must be commenced within 30 days from the decision or act complained of, unless any delay is excused by the Commissioner for good cause shown (8 NYCRR 275.16; Appeal of Saxena, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,239; Appeal of Lippolt, 48 id. 457, Decision No. 15,914).  The Commissioner has previously held that an appeal is timely when commenced within 30 days of receiving notice of the determination or act (Appeal of G.H. and S.H., 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,269; Appeal of C.S., 48 id. 497, Decision No. 15,929).  When the record does not reveal when a petitioner received notice, the date of receipt is calculated as the date of the determination or act plus five days for mailing, excluding Sundays and holidays (Appeal of G.H. and S.H., 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,269; Appeal of K.W., 48 id. 451, Decision No. 15,912).

Here, respondent made its final determination regarding residency on July 18, 2023.  The petition was not served until September 20, 2023, over two months later.  Petitioner offers no excuse for the delay in the petition, as required (8 NYCRR 275.16).[1]  While prior decisions of the Commissioner have excused delays in commencing residency appeals where the facts suggest residency in the district, the delay is minimal, and reapplying at the district level would be burdensome, those factors are not present here (see Appeal of N.H., 59 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,732; Appeal of Kowalewski, 56 id., Decision No. 17,013; Appeal of Manfredo, 56 id., Decision No. 16,943; Appeal of Jean-Louis, 49 id. 400, Decision No. 16,062).  Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as untimely (Appeal of N.J., 63 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 18,317; Appeal of N.H., 59 id., Decision No. 17,732).

In light of this disposition, I need not address the parties’ remaining contentions.

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

END OF FILE