Respondents argue that petitioner's sons received the due process to which they were entitled, that both the academic and athletic suspensions are supported by the record, and that there is no basis for removing respondents Byars, Brown and Rishel. As a preliminary matter, respondents raise a procedural argument. In this case petitioner's request for a stay was denied. In light of the fact that the 1992 varsity wrestling season ended soon after this appeal was initiated, I must dismiss that part of the appeal as academic. To the extent petitioner seeks expungement of the academic suspensions from his sons' records, the matter is not moot.
Petitioner raises two procedural challenges with respect to the suspensions.
Although the board eventually considered petitioner's appeal, respondents' failure to provide a timely appeal was indeed improper. Respondents are admonished to ensure that, in the future, parents are promptly advised of their right to appeal an administrative decision to the board of education and, further, to ensure that such an appeal is promptly addressed by the board. The record establishes that, prior to the students' suspensions from school, petitioner met with respondents Byars and Brown to discuss the incident. There is no evidence, however, that petitioner was afforded the opportunity to question the students whose complaints gave rise to the suspensions. In addition, there is no indication that the principal was present at any of the conferences, as required.