Petitioners filed this appeal on June 17, 1992. The other petitioners are advocates acting on behalf of similarly situated children in the district. Accordingly, petitioners request that this matter be maintained as a class appeal on behalf of 100 similarly situated children. Petitioners also allege that respondent acted improperly when it excessed the instructional aides without public input and approval. Petitioners argue that if the public had been properly informed about respondent's decision to abolish the instructional aide positions, the budget would have been defeated.
Petitioners also allege violations of the Open Meetings Law.
Petitioners seek, among other things, an order prohibiting respondent from removing instructional aides from the resource room programs and an order nullifying the school district budget vote. Respondent contends that it acted properly when it abolished the instructional aide positions. Respondent asserts that it properly considered the impact of its decision on individual children with handicapping conditions by reviewing the proposed change of program at each child's annual review. Before reaching the merits, I will address petitioners' request to treat this matter as a class appeal. Section 275.2 of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education provides for class appeals where the class is so numerous that joinder is impracticable and where all questions of fact and law are common.