Again my optomism kicked me in the ass---I guess I thought that maybe the Chaffey Joiny Union High School District might--just might--do the right thing--OH SILLY ME!
Now I will seek out and find a pit-bull attorney to help me --- I will not take my marbles and go home. Its about Dakota and whats right for him as well as others-I will press on I am naming names and I am pulling out all the stops-- I have gone to the television stations and a couple of Stae Senators-- next are the newspapers.Hopefully I can fix this--- Here is the explanantion as briefly as I could write it--- To Whom ever Will Listen and Take Interest;
I don't know where to go or whom to talk to but I need help and I willing to ask anyone who can offer a positive solution--- This involves a School District, the promises they made to my son who is Autistic along with several other Anxiety Disorders and a situation that I believe is unfair, potentially unlawful and plain ridiculous.
My son will turn 22 in September and is technically "aged out" in the eyes of the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. This is according to their interpretation of the California Ed Code 56026[c][4][B]and more importantly [D].
For the past 2 to 3 years when we held our IEP's {individual education plan} there has been repeated discussions about Dakota's completion of school and graduation. During these meetings we discussed over and over about the fact that Dakota's birthday was in September but "protocol" within the CJUHS district has been that if a students birthday occurred after the start of the year that student was allowed to complete the semester he was in---{and there is at least one student I know of that in fact did just that 2 years ago I believe there are several others I just don't have their names}
Over and Over again the district told him "You will be able to go thru Fall 2008" and "Complete school in January 2009" He repeats this quite often at school as well as home---It is his mantra---his plan---his schedule---his routine. It is programmed into his head like a hardwired electronic device.
On July 31st 2008 I received a letter from the CJUHS district stating that Dakota could not return to school --- 25 days before school starts. I immediately contacted CJUHS district to try to straighten this mess out---surly there must be either a misunderstanding.
There had been no exit strategies planned, no exit IEP's written, no transitional goals written. No participation in the senior activities like the Senior Breakfast and the Senior Luau, No preparation for walking in graduation June of 2008 and no Certificate of Completion. As a matter of fact I contacted the Vice Principle in charge of Special Education Sandra Cooke on the campus of Alta Loma High School in FEBRUARY 2008--- 3 different times to inquire how Dakota's graduation would be handled since he would be attending first Semester in Fall 2008-Not once did anyone from the school or the district contact me to dispute that Dakota would return in Fall 2008 AND I was told {by Sandra Cooke} that since he would be returning in Fall 2008 he would complete his semester first and participate in all the activities June of 2009.
In the past 30 days I have been turning myself inside out trying to "reason" with the district to do "the right thing". Repeatedly they have taken the position Ed Code- is Ed code and Dakota is "aged out" He CANNOT return to school. I was summoned to a "mock" IEP to discuss Dakotas situation - on the agenda it clearly states Dakota cannot return --- a decision made before the meeting even convened-a violation of law; I was not allowed to present all my evidence of exceptions in the law that could be considered as a way to allow Dakota to complete his school as planned-again a violation of law; and there were no decisions made by the "team" they all sat there and let the district do what they intended to do. I refused to sign this "IEP" and went home devastated. What will happen to my son when he learns that he can't go back to the place he has been promised and looking forward too?
I then contacted the Assistant Superintendent Bill Bertran and asked for the district to reconsider this absolutely horrible decision. I also presented additional evidence to support the possibility of an "open door" in the ED Code that would allow Dakota to finish his semester as planned. California ED Code56026[c][4][D] where it states in the second half of the provision that the eligibility dates cannotbe extended SOLEY on the BASIS that the individual did not meet his goals or objectives----
Meaning that they could extend them for other reasons-In my interpretation. It does not use the word "Inclusive" which would then indicate no exceptions. Mr. Bertran agreed that he understood how a person could read that interpretation but he had to take it to the "council"-including the Superintendent Mathew Holton and 4 other "cabinet members"---2 days later I received a phone call from Mr.Bertran indicating that they looked at this and decided that they still would not allow Dakota to return to school-that they felt that if they did that it would set precedent-{hello they already did it in years gone by} Again I am in disbelief.
I now have filed a Due Process and filed with the office of Civil Rights again with the hope that this would place Dakota in a "stay- put" mode allowing him to remain in his classroom until the matter was resolved AND again the District is refusing to allow him this placement - another violation of law.
I am at my wits end and I need help.
I need a champion; I need someone to understand that this is a young man who will be severely affected by the actions of this district and their failure to deliver as promised---
Its one Kid and one Semester--- It is that simple
What has happened to making decisions that benefit the individual? Why are they so adamant about this? It seems like there is more to this than meets the eye.
Is there anyone out there able to help me??
Thank You for Your Consideration
T
No comments:
Post a Comment