[Vision2020] Supreme Court to Hear Oregon Special Education Case & Idaho budget cuts.....
Sue Hovey
suehovey at moscow.com
Sun Jan 18 12:56:15 PST 2009
Donovan,
You are correct, of course, the governor's proposal to cut these services is a "penny wise, pound foolish" idea if ever there was one.
I've been pondering the court case and its Idaho implications: Not many special needs students in Idaho go to private schools paid for by school districts, I think for two reasons: schools maintained for any population need to have a critical mass of potential students before they can envision turning a profit, or if non-profit, provide a service to a significant number, so there isn't much potential for that. Small districts work collaboratively to provide special education services, as well. Additionally, Idaho has a mediation system that seems to work and must be used prior to a parent's going to court over a disagreement with a student's placement. Special Ed law requires that parents be involved in the formulation of an IEP. That gives parents a lot of leverage they might not have otherwise. Not long ago I read that Idaho has one of the lowest ratio of special ed court cases to special ed student population of any state. The author credited our system of mediation for that.
On the other issue: What worries me about the governor's proposal is that it creates an educational double bind. All students are still entitled to a free public and appropriate education, and the funding for special education programs has never been adequate. When the original federal law (94-142) was enacted in the early 70s there was a promise that sufficient money would accompany the act, yet for every dollar local districts spend on special education, the federal reimbursement has historically been less than 15% and generally closer to 10%. With state cuts in early childhood programs the need for special education programs will rise while funding certainly won't.
And then there is the issue of cuts in the services for adult citizens with disabilities, which is another travesty. It's often difficult for this group to access the system in the way members of the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry, or even large public entities are able to, so their voices and those of service providers are more easily ignored, and of course the governor knows that. Ironic, too, the longer one lives, the more likely he/she will need to access services for the disabled--even policy makers and former governors.
Sue H.
----- Original Message -----
From: Donovan Arnold
To: vision2020 at moscow.com ; Tom Hansen ; Sue Hovey
Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2009 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Supreme Court to Hear Oregon Special Education Case
Sue,
All of the parents that I work with in Idaho, and social workers, are very worried about the cuts the governor is proposing to special needs and services to those with disabilities.
Unfortunately, you would think that school districts and public officials would follow the ADA, and always be willing to do what is in the best interests of special education needs children, but they do not.
I think Governor Otter will face not only huge criticism for cutting special needs programs, but also he will find that cutting special needs services and education will definitely result in an actual increase to Idaho's costs in the following years.
I am not totally familiar with this particular case. However, many parents are reimbursed for sending their children to a private school. Often times, the school districts ignore the special needs of the student. Parents don't want to send their children to a school that will not accommodate their needs, they will not even try because they are confident in knowing the needs of their child will not be meet because they are not in their IEP.
I believe that every child is entitled to a free and appropriate education. If the district cannot provide it, then they need to bus and pay for it someplace else.
Best Regards,
Donovan
--- On Sat, 1/17/09, Sue Hovey <suehovey at moscow.com> wrote:
From: Sue Hovey <suehovey at moscow.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Supreme Court to Hear Oregon Special Education Case
To: vision2020 at moscow.com, "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
Date: Saturday, January 17, 2009, 9:21 PM
My question here pertains to the district's appeal: Did the parents give
the public schools a try before deciding to ask for private school
reimbursement? It seems not, if the district's question is relevant.
This has some application for us in Idaho, too. If the legislature does
indeed cut early childhood programs (as the governor is recommending,) and
special needs children get neglected early on, then will the public schools
be required to expend funds to allow parents to send those children to
private schools, because their needs cannot be met locally?
Sue H
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2009 4:15 AM
Subject: [Vision2020] Supreme Court to Hear Oregon Special Education Case
> "Federal law calls for school districts to reimburse students or
their
> families for education costs when public schools do not have services that
> address or fulfill the students' needs."
>
> Courtesy of today's (January 17, 2009) Spokesman Review.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Supreme Court to hear Oregon special ed case
> Family sued district for cost of private school
>
> PORTLAND - The U.S. Supreme Court will use a Forest Grove case to try
> again to decide when taxpayers must foot the bill for private schooling
> for special education students.
>
> The Supreme Court heard a similar case from New York in 2007 but split
> 4-4.
>
> On Friday, the court agreed to hear an appeal from the Forest Grove School
> District, which was sued by the family of a former high school student
> diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
>
> The school failed to address properly the student's learning problems,
the
> parents said, and sought reimbursement for the student's private
> schooling.
>
> Federal law calls for school districts to reimburse students or their
> families for education costs when public schools do not have services that
> address or fulfill the students' needs.
>
> Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the nation's
> special education students are entitled to a "free and appropriate
public
> education."
>
> In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the school district says students
> should at least give public special education programs a try before
> seeking reimbursement for private school tuition.
>
> "We just believe we have a comprehensive offering in our school
district,"
> said Jack Musser, Forest Grove superintendent. "We have programs in
our
> special education department to address every type of disability. We
> educate many, many students."
>
> Paying for special education students' private education would
financially
> strain the district, said school officials, who also added the teen's
> problem sprang at least in part from a marijuana habit. In court papers,
> the student is identified only as T.A.
>
> Mary Broadhurst, the family's lawyer, declined to comment except to
say
> that arguments are set for April and a decision is expected in June.
>
> "My clients are still of the position that this is a private matter
to
> some extent," she said.
>
> When the family took the district to court, an administrative judge ruled
> in the family's favor, saying the district failed to recognize the
teen's
> poor performance as a disability and offer him proper services.
>
> The judge ordered the Forest Grove district to pay legal fees and
> reimburse the 19-year-old's family for about $65,000 in tuition and
fees
> at Mt. Bachelor Academy, a Prineville boarding school for students with
> learning problems.
>
> The teen spent 18 months at the academy, graduated in 2004 and enrolled in
> a community college.
>
> School officials appealed the order to U.S. District Court, which ruled
> the Forest Grove district was not liable for the fees. The family took the
> case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in their favor.
>
> Musser said the district has spent more than $100,000 on legal fees for
> the case.
>
> "Whether we are in tough economic times or not, we need to watch
every
> penny," he said. "People having their choice of placing anywhere
and
> coming back to the district to seek payment is a very huge financial
> impact on the school district."
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> "For a lapsed Lutheran born-again Buddhist pan-Humanist Universalist
> Unitarian Wiccan Agnostic like myself there's really no reason ever to
go
> to work."
>
> - Roy Zimmerman
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
> http://www.fsr.com/
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090118/726558a8/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list