Respondent also contends that petitioners lack standing to seek review of respondent's employment decision and that they failed to join Judy Ogden as a party. Before reaching the merits of this appeal, I will address the procedural issues. Petitioners request that Judy Ogden's appointment be set aside and that respondent undertake the hiring process anew. There is no evidence that Ms. Ogden has been joined as a party in this appeal and, therefore, it must be dismissed. Respondent also maintains that this matter must be dismissed since petitioners lack standing to challenge an employment decision.
Petitioners are taxpayers and residents of the district.
However, there is no claim that they were individually affected by the hiring decision. Accordingly, petitioners lack standing to bring this appeal, and their claims must be dismissed on that basis as well. Although the case must be dismissed on procedural grounds, I will address the merits to provide guidance on matters of shared decision making. Petitioners claim that the selection of Ms. Ogden violated the Commissioner's regulations on shared decision making. Those regulations, which were promulgated in March 1992, were intended to foster a process of school-based planning and shared decision making to improve the educational performance of all students.