State Education Commissioner Dismisses Removal Petition Against RCSD Board Member

New York State Education Commissioner Betty A. Rosa has denied an application seeking the removal of Rochester City School District Board of Education Commissioner Isaiah Santiago, concluding there is insufficient evidence to warrant his removal from office.

Isaiah Santiago, James Patterson

The decision, dated Feb. 17, 2026, stems from a petition filed by former board member James L. Patterson under Education Law § 306, which allows the commissioner to remove a school board member for willful violation or neglect of duty.

Patterson alleged that during a verbal disagreement on Feb. 3, 2025, while the board was meeting to interview candidates for superintendent, Santiago directed a racial slur toward him. According to the petition, the exchange occurred as the two were walking to a conference room, and two witnesses submitted statements claiming they heard Santiago refer to Patterson using “the n-word” multiple times

Santiago denied the allegation in his formal response.

The commissioner initially found that Patterson had demonstrated sufficient cause to proceed to a hearing. A hearing was scheduled for Dec. 18, 2025, before a designated hearing officer in Albany

However, during the course of the proceedings, Santiago delivered a public apology at a Dec. 9, 2025, board meeting. In that statement, included in full in the commissioner’s decision, Santiago acknowledged the February disagreement and apologized to Patterson, fellow board members and the community for the distraction caused by the incident.

“In the heat of the disagreement, my colleague believes I used an iteration of a word I didn’t say; but the heat of a disagreement or a split-second reaction does not excuse any behavior that pulls focus away from the children we are here to serve,” Santiago said in the statement. He added that he was committed to learning from the experience and moving forward “with integrity”

The hearing officer allowed Santiago to submit the apology as evidence and to file a motion to dismiss the application. Patterson was given an opportunity to respond but did not meet the deadline set by the hearing officer, according to the decision

Upon review of the record, Rosa determined that removal was not warranted. In her written decision, she noted that while the commissioner has authority to remove a board member for willful violation of law, “an isolated intemperate remark generally is not grounds for removal.”

Rosa also cited prior cases in which removal was upheld only where a board member demonstrated continued lack of remorse or appreciation for the inappropriateness of their conduct. In this case, she found that Santiago had issued a public apology concerning the single incident at issue

“The application is denied,” Rosa wrote in the concluding section of the decision

The ruling brings to a close a yearlong dispute between two sitting board members that unfolded amid broader leadership transitions within the Rochester City School District. The February 2025 incident occurred while the board was engaged in the process of interviewing candidates for superintendent.

Patterson is no longer serving on the board. After filing the removal petition, his own reelection effort was derailed when his designating petitions were successfully challenged, preventing his name from appearing on the ballot. His term subsequently concluded, leaving Santiago to remain on the board following the commissioner’s decision.

Under state law, the commissioner’s decision is final unless challenged through an Article 78 proceeding in state Supreme Court.