Petitioner also alleges that respondent intentionally provided her with inadequate notice of her scheduled interview with the committee. Petitioner alleges as well that respondents improperly considered age as a factor in filling the position and that her constitutional rights were violated. Petitioner further alleges that respondents acted improperly in failing to investigate and correct the alleged condition of the guidance office records and to take action against the retired guidance secretary for her alleged failure to properly maintain such records. Petitioner requests that I remove Superintendent Greene for her alleged misconduct and that I vacate respondent board's appointment of the individual currently serving in the Office Typist position. Petitioner also requests that an independent investigation be conducted by the District Superintendent.
Respondents deny petitioner's allegations and raise several affirmative defenses.
Respondents contend that the appeal should be dismissed for petitioner's failure to join as a necessary party the individual appointed as Office Typist. Respondents also contend that the appeal must be dismissed because petitioner lacks standing to raise claims and seek relief relating to the maintenance of the guidance office records. In addition, respondents contend that I lack jurisdiction to hear petitioner's constitutional claims, as well as her claim that they improperly considered a candidate's age as a selection criterion for the Office Typist position. As a threshold matter, respondent requests that I disregard material set forth in petitioner's reply, which is not found in the petition and is beyond the scope of what may be included in a reply. To the extent petitioner seeks review of respondent board's determination to appoint another individual to the position of Office Typist, she has standing since she is aggrieved by respondent's failure to appoint her.