California OAH special education order · July 27, 2015
Order for Additional Information on Motion for Stay Put
OAH Case No. 2015070341 · ALJ Caroline A. Zuk
OAH deferred ruling on Student's stay put motion and ordered District to submit sworn declarations identifying Parent's alleged Richmond address and the districts of residence, because District gave no specific address supporting its non-residency claim.
Summary
Student moved for stay put. District opposed, arguing Student actually lives in Richmond, outside District, based on a private investigator's reports and an address Student gave school staff in May 2015, even though Parent's Affidavit of Residency listed a San Rafael address. OAH found it could not rule because District never identified the specific Richmond address. It ordered District to file declarations under penalty of perjury by July 30, 2015, stating the Richmond address, its district of residence, and the high school district for the address on Parent's affidavit, with Student's response due August 4, 2015.
Why it matters
A district that opposes stay put by claiming the family lives outside its boundaries must back that up with specific, sworn evidence, not general claims from investigators. Parents should keep their residency affidavits current and be ready to respond to residency challenges.
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2015070341 v. ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON MOTION FOR
SAN RAFAEL CITY HIGH SCHOOL STAY PUT
DISTRICT
On July 20, 2015, Student filed a motion for stay put. On July 16, 2015, District filed an opposition on the ground that Student is not a resident of the District. 1 Student contends that he resides within District’s jurisdiction. District contends that Student resides within Richmond, California, outside of District’s jurisdiction, based on reports from a private investigator and Student’s May 2015 disclosure to school staff of the family’s address in Richmond. District’s opposition did not disclose the address that Student provided to school staff in May 2015. District noted that Parent’s Affidavit of Residency certified that Parent resided in San Rafael, but District nevertheless contends that Student resides in Richmond based on Student’s disclosure to staff and the reports from a private investigator.
Additional information is required before a ruling may be made on the pleadings as to Student’s motion for stay put. District did not provide evidence of Parent’s specific address in Richmond, California. Accordingly, District needs to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury regarding Parent’s specific, physical address in Richmond and the name of the corresponding district of residence. Further, District needs to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury regarding the name of the high school district for the physical address identified in Parent’s Affidavit of Residency.
District’s opposition preceded Student’s motion, because on July 16, 2015, District filed an opposition to Student’s sibling’s motion for stay put against District on the ground that Student’s sibling was not a resident of District. District correctly forecasted that Student’s motion for stay put would involve the same dispute regarding Parent’s residency.
ORDER
By 5:00 p.m., on July 30, 2015, District shall submit to OAH and Student a declaration under penalty of perjury regarding Parent’s specific, physical address in Richmond and the name of the corresponding district of residence in Richmond, and the name of the high school district of residence corresponding to the physical address identified in Parent’s Affidavit of Residency. Student’s response shall be submitted to OAH and District by 5:00 p.m., on August 4, 2015.
DATE: July 27, 2015
/ S/
CAROLINE A. ZUK
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings