Shoreham-Wading River board approves retainer to join lawsuit challenging NYSED regionalization regulation

The Shoreham-Wading River Central School District Board of Education voted 7-0 on Nov. 19 to approve a retainer agreement with Regano LLC to join litigation challenging an emergency regionalization regulation issued by the New York State Education Department. The agreement was listed as resolution 2425091 on the special-meeting agenda and was approved after brief discussion and public comment.

Board Chair Tom said the board viewed the retainer as "a small investment against an attempt to clearly take away local control of our schools," and described the board's action as a response to what members called an unclear and fast-moving state directive. Superintendent Mr. Pool told the meeting that the regulation and its accompanying emergency rule were published Sept. 25 and require districts to submit material by Dec. 6, a deadline the board cited as a factor in convening the special session.

The board and speakers at the meeting said they were acting because the state rule lacks clear metrics and outcomes. One long-serving board member warned the plan "could possibly be the beginning of the end of the education system that we currently have in New York State," while other members emphasized the district's record of local responsiveness during the COVID era and the potential loss of locally run programs.

During public comment, resident Miranda asked what the district stood to gain from regionalization and whether residents would lose services. In response, the superintendent said many details remain unclear and that some purported benefits are already provided through Eastern Suffolk BOCES, which supplies shared services including special-education programming and pooled contracts. The superintendent explained that some shared services return expense-driven aid — noting that, as presented at the meeting, the district receives roughly $30 back for every $100 spent on certain BOCES services — and cautioned that withdrawing from BOCES contracts could have negative operational effects.

Board members also discussed the fiscal backdrop: the chair noted a Rockefeller Institute foundation-aid report due Dec. 1 and said foundation aid represents a meaningful portion of state aid to the district; at the meeting one speaker referenced the district's overall budget at about $80 million and suggested changes to foundation aid could materially affect local finances. The board did not produce a detailed financial breakdown at the meeting.

Before the vote, the board reviewed outreach options and agreed by consensus to add the district's name to a coalition rebuttal letter prepared by a group of school boards and to post both the coalition letter and the district's earlier opposition letter and links to state materials on the district website to help residents contact legislators. The board discussed that the attorney retained could seek temporary court relief (a temporary restraining order) to block the immediate effects of the emergency regulation while legal challenges proceed.

The board approved the retainer by voice vote after a motion and second were called; the meeting then moved to adjourn the public session and enter executive session to discuss matters related to proposed acquisition/sale/lease of real property or securities. No additional public votes were recorded after the litigation retainer vote.