I will first address the procedural objections. Although not raised by respondents, I also note that, insofar as petitioner alleges that the public is excluded from Millenium Project advisory board meetings, I lack jurisdiction over alleged violations of the Open Meetings Law. Respondents also correctly note that I have no jurisdiction under Education Law 310 to review the actions of the governing authorities of counties or cities. Therefore, to the extent petitioner challenges decisions by Oneida County or the City of Utica to expend funds in support of the Millenium Project or establish tuition policies for MVCC, I am without jurisdiction to review those challenges. Petitioner claims resident taxpayer standing, and I find that petitioner has standing to raise challenges to respondents' use of district funds.
Petitioner lacks standing, however, to assert the rights of students attending respondents' schools.
I reject respondents' claim that the petition does not comply with 275.10 of the Commissioner's regulations. Although the petition consists mainly of conclusory allegations, the petition provides adequate notice of the claims raised by petitioner and respondents were able to respond and present a defense to these claims. Addressing the merits of the remaining claims, I find that petitioner has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that respondents have engaged in improper actions or that petitioner is entitled to relief. Petitioner has failed to sustain this burden as to the claims raised in the petition. Petitioner has not rebutted respondents' assertion that it has paid no funds to MVCC for such courses, and that any funds used to defray the cost of such courses were provided directly to MVCC by the county, the city and private donors.