DURHAM — A $50,000 settlement was recently reached between the Oyster River School District and the parents of a former special needs student in the district.
The settlement pertains to the attorney fees incurred by Lisa Brady, as she successfully battled the district over when her son, Miles Brady, could graduate.
Miles Brady suffers from Asperger's Syndrome and entered his fifth year at Oyster River High School last fall.
The district was seeking to have Miles graduate in January 2010, while his parents argued that he needed a full year of school and should graduate in June. The case was heard by the New Hampshire Department of Education.
During the hearing parties on both sides argued about whether or not Miles was ready to leave high school and enter college.
Miles' psychiatrist Dr. Eileen Spitzer testified that the extra six months in school would be crucial for his development, particularly his goal of attending the University of New Hampshire in the fall.
"The student must increase skills to be able to manage life at UNH. In Dr. Spitzer's opinion, the student will not be ready for college by January 2010 and the student is not ready to leave high school at this time and lose the supports that are in place," according to the hearing report prepared by Hearing Officer John LeBrun.
Lisa Brady also argued that her son needed to finish a full year of Spanish and take physics in order to reach his goal of attending UNH.
The district argued that Miles had enough credits to graduate and made sufficient progress, despite not meeting all the goals in his individual education plan. The state DOE ultimately disagreed.
"The District made a commitment to provide a full year for the Spanish course and graduation in January 2010 would not allow that to occur," LeBrun's final ruling stated. "In addition, the transition plan goals and objectives have not been met, including independent living goals, community participation goals, prevocational goals, vocational goals, such as securing employment."
Lisa Brady couldn't be reached for comment on Wednesday.
The Oyster River School district declined to comment on the case when contacted on Wednesday. Superintendent Howard Colter described the settlement as the district's best option.
"In the end we all felt it was the best of our alternatives," Colter said. "Overall, it was the best option we had."
The district paid $30,000 of the settlement from it legal expenses account within the special education budget, while the district's insurance company picked up $20,000 of the settlement.
Miles Brady graduated from Oyster River High School last month.
I'm curious about the comments that Ms. Brady (I believe it was Ms. Brady) made in a June board meeting about the special education coordinator position change as well as legal expenditures in the district for special education. Does anyone know about this and how it has affected the program?
ReplyDeleteI don't know what the impact has been but would be very interested to see what we are spending on attorney fees for these legal interactions within our district. I am also wondering how often does this occur, how much it is costing the district in legal fees, and is the school board aware of these particular costs?
ReplyDeleteAnyone can request information under the public right to know law. The school is not allowed to release confidential information related to a student but they certainly can release the amount they have spent in legal fees.
ReplyDeleteIt is time for the public to know how much Colter's bad decisions are costing the taxpayers. Thank you so much, Ms. Portalupi, for giving Howard a three year contract so that we can't get rid of him.
ReplyDeleteThe Brady's legal fees were settled for 50,000.00 but how much did the school pay out to the district's attorneys? I am shocked that our administration would spend such a large amount of money to fight something they committed to doing.
ReplyDeleteIf Mrs. Brady's legal fees were $50,000, are we to assume that the district fees were comparable? I think we have just found the gulf leak in our district finances. Does the district get charged every time Howard calls the lawyer for an opinion?
ReplyDeleteWe need to have more transparency within our school district; all legal bills involving public money should be reported and analyzed with much greater scrutiny than currently exists.
ReplyDeleteI believe the responsibility for the public expense in the Brady case is on the district's decision makers to litigate rather than simply provide the services they agreed to provide in the student’s IEP (individualized educational plan). Sometimes you have to step away from the financial side and look at what's right for the student and sometimes it takes that extra person in the room that doesn't have an opinion to get to a decision. It is fiscally immoral to spend public money in secret. If our district has incurred significant legal bills similar to the present case, it may indicate that school officials have taken a contentious relationship with parents.
We are seeing an increase in the severity of disabilities in school-aged children because more babies are surviving challenging medical conditions. Autism spectrum disorders are on the rise and tend to require more intensive educational interventions. Our school needs to embrace the challenge and create programs that keep students in district and collaborate rather than dictate to parents. Additionally, our school board must begin to familiarize themselves with special education laws. A school board is less apt to question our administrators if they lack insight related to the laws that govern special education. Finding ways to fund special education is a growing problem however; without comprehensive school reform that encompasses general and special education, we can expect to struggle even more. Litigation should be avoided; it is a waste of district resources and compromises the mission of our school district. We need to expend our energies thinking about ways to meet our student’s needs and doing the job that the public has paid us to do.
I agree with above blogger. The board needs to be more education in special education laws and know what it going on behind the scenes. Clearly you can't just leave it up to the "management" as Joanne Portalupi calls it as look what occurred with the Brady Family. How many other families has this happened to that we are NOT hearing about?
ReplyDeleteThat is a fantastic question. It would be nice to hear from other families who have gone through similar intimidation. There must be others who simply didn't want to make their stories public or didn't have the money to legally fight the district.
ReplyDeleteTrust me, there are others who have not come forward or fought the fight.
ReplyDeleteYes, and then there are others who have tried to fight the fight and had to make backroom deals with the district.
ReplyDeletePlease encourage those people to share their stories here.
ReplyDeleteIt is not possible to share these stories due to intimidation tactics of the district's lawyers. Lisa Brady has a rare courage to be able to hold her own ground against these monsters all the way to due process. Her victory is a victory for all that came before her and were bullied into going away.
ReplyDeleteAnyone interested in the Facts?
ReplyDeleteCheck out the actual due process hearing listed on the NH Department of Education website at the following link:
http://www.education.nh.gov/legislation/documents/1008007OysterRiver.pdf
Wow!! The district should be sticking their head in a pile of sand over this one. It is very obvious that the school district had agreed to keep the student for the entire school year and tried to graduate him early. Amy Whicher-Therrien (H.S. Spec. Ed. Coordinator) testified as follows:
ReplyDelete“Ms. Therrien acknowledged that SD1 (the 2008/2009 IEP), at page 23 provides for the transition plan which includes a year long Spanish class, yet the 2009/2010 IEP calls for the Student to complete education in January, which would not allow for the full year class.”
The School District hired a transition specialist who testified that she did not feel the Student’s transition plan was adequate and:
“She prepared a questionnaire for the team/school district personnel and it was never completed.”
How professional is this? Is this the kind of behavior that we should tolerate from our highly paid staff?
High School Special Educator, Sandra Devins was obviously instructed by her superiors to write an affidavit when she did not even know the student. She stated the following:
“She further acknowledged that she met with the Student approximately three hours before preparing her Affidavit and that she has never seen the Student in the community or with a group of peers and finally acknowledged that she does not know the Student very well.”
How professional is this?
It seems the staff was not fully invested in the due process and most likely an agenda driven by Meredith Sumner Nadeau and Howard Colter.
This really gives us a perspective for what some families have to endure in special education. I always thought Oyster River had a great reputation for treating students with special needs very well. I am not so sure I would agree anymore. I miss the days when Superintendent Carroll was running the show. Our district didn't seem so toxic. People seemed more respectful.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I can't share stories here due to possible intimidation tactics and fear of retribution. I know many other families who have been through spec education issues with the school district as well and these intimidation tactics were used and/or they discouraged the parents to the point that they wore them down from continuing to advocate for their child. It's very helpful that Lisa Brady fought like she did and shared her experience. This opened the doors so the community and others can see an example of what can/does go on
ReplyDeleteThis case does not make sense; legally (seems an agreement was already in the IEP),financially (legal battle versus the expense of the student staying 6 months at Oyster River), and ethically (just doing what was right for a student to transition). My youngest is on an IEP and I don't feel confident with the way our current administration operates.
ReplyDeleteFoster's Editorial:
ReplyDeleteArticle published Jul 19, 2010
OR IDEA case went too far
Depending on how you look at it, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has been a blessing or a burden — albeit a just one.
For parents, it has been a godsend in helping their children overcome debilitating handicaps. For school districts, it has been expensive and time consuming.
But in either case, IDEA has been in place long enough that the Oyster River School District should not have found itself being ordered to pay out $50,000 to settle a dispute over when Miles Brady would be able to graduate.
The telling admission that the case should never have gone this far appeared in Thursday's report in Foster's Daily Democrat when the district conceded Brady's individual education plan would not be met in time for an January graduation, rather than one in June.
IEPs, as they are called, are worked out between the district and families. For the most part they are mutually agreed upon plans to address a student's handicaps.
It is hard to believe the district didn't know Brady's IEP had not been met before being dragged before Hearing Officer John LeBrun. IDEA has been in place too long for district officials to make such an expensive mistake.
And for what? A few months of classroom time?
"Engaging every learner"??? Howard Colter violated OR's core goal. Colter needs to go.
ReplyDelete