Agenda - Council - 04/08/2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Look is not likely to prevail on the merits; (2) an injunction would disrupt, not preserve, the status quo; (3 )an injunction would not balance the harms because the harm to Look is not certain to occur and would not be irreparable if the injunction is denied; whereas, harm to other pupil applicants, present pupils, P ACT and the public would be. substantial if the injunction is granted; (4) the public interest would not be served by rewriting the legislature's decision to limit the resident preference to towns or by retroactively ordering reconsideration of past admissions and denying sibling preferences to non-residents; and (5) the administrative burden on the court to supervise a retroactive review of past admissions would likely be great. PACT requests that Look's motion for a temporary injunction be denied and that summary judgment be entered to dismiss Look's case in its entirety. This Memorandum of Law supports PACT's position on both motions. BACKGROUND As a part of PACT's enrollment policy, PACT applies a Sibling Preference to siblings of a student(s) currently enrolled and in attendance at PACT. Affidavit of Daniel DeBruyn in Opposition to Temporary Injunction and in Support of Motion to Dismiss, ~~ 3,6, Ex. A. (hereafter "DeBruyn Aff."). Siblings include: 1) All children of a family unit related biologically, by marriage or adoption to one or both parents. 2) All children in 'long term' placement within a foster-care situation. Id., ~ 6. PACT also applies a Proximity Pref~rence to a student who lives within two miles. of PACT Charter School's location (as the crow flies) if the next closest public school. (which serves their grade level) is more than five miles away from the student's home. Id. A student qualifying for the Proximity Preference will receive equal preference to that of a student qualifying for the Sibling Preference. Id., ~ 7. 4 -131-