Department of Education
1 Matching Record
If you have questions contact Nicole Proesch, legal counsel for the Department and the State Board,
at 515-281-8661 or email@example.com.
March - 2017
Dissolution of a District
Dissolution of District
The Appellant, on behalf of his minor children, filed an affidavit of appeal under Iowa Code section 290.1, which was received by the State Board of Education on September 26, 2016. The Appellant appeals the August 23, 2016, decision of the Gladbrook-Reinbeck Community School District (''GRCSD'') Board (''Board'') finding that 1) there is evidence which calls into question the validity of the signatures on the petition for dissolution, 2) that evidence was sufficient to deem the petition does not meet legal requirements, and thus is not valid, and 3) that the establishment of the dissolution commission and initiation of the dissolution process void and of no further force and effect. Thus, the Board rejected a Dissolution Proposal submitted by the Dissolution Committee appointed pursuant to Iowa Code section 275.51. However, on October 25, 2016, another Petition for Dissolution was submitted to the District to cure the defects in the original petition. The Appellant signed the new petition.
On October 26, 2016, the Appellee
s filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and a Motion to Dismiss on the basis that the appeal is moot given the filing of a new petition. Oral Arguments were held on the motions on November 18, 2016. Iowa Code section 290.1 provides that:
An affected pupil, or the parent or guardian of an affected pupil who is a minor, who is aggrieved by a decision or order of the board of directors of a school corporation in a matter of law or fact, or a decision or order of a board of directors under section 282.18, subsection 5, may, within thirty days after the rendition of the decision or the making of the order, appeal the decision or order to the state board of education[.]
The State Board has previously ruled that in order to be an aggrieved party there must be a direct and immediate impact from the decision, as opposed to speculation. Simply being affected indirectly or remotely is not sufficient. First, we note that the decision of the Board to reject the Petition and the Dissolution Commission
s proposal did not have an articulated direct and immediate impact on the Appellant or his minor children. Thus, we do not find the Appellant
s children are aggrieved under the statute.
Consequently, we find the State Board does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under Iowa Code section 290.1. The request for appeal is therefore denied and the case is dismissed.