California OAH special education order · December 12, 2018
Order for Supplemental Briefing for Motion for Stay Put
OAH Case No. 2018110769 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH deferred ruling on Student's stay put request at a nonpublic school and ordered Los Angeles to file more evidence on its claim that a contract dispute with the school prevents placement there.
Summary
Student asked that Beacon Day School, the nonpublic school in his last agreed-upon and implemented IEP, remain his stay put placement. Los Angeles agreed that Beacon would normally be stay put. It argued that changed circumstances make that placement impossible: master contract talks with Beacon failed, Beacon did not comply with a mediation order, and Beacon disenrolled all Los Angeles students. OAH found the record insufficient and gave Los Angeles five business days to brief three questions: whether it could contract with Beacon for Student individually, the terms and legal effect of the mediation order, and the basis of the contract dispute. Student may reply within three business days after that.
Why it matters
A district that claims it cannot provide the stay put placement because its contract with a nonpublic school fell apart must back that claim with specific evidence. OAH will look at whether an individual contract for the student is possible and why the contract dispute arose.
People named in the order
- Deanna Peterson, Administrative Coordinator, Los Angeles Unified School District (declarant)
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. 2018110769 v. ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEFING FOR MOTION FOR STAY
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL PUT
DISTRICT.
On November 21, 2018, Parent on behalf of Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a request for due process, naming Los Angeles Unified School District. On November 27, 2018, Student filed a motion for stay put. On December 4, 2018 Los Angeles filed an opposition.
Based upon the pleadings, additional briefing is required to determine Student’s stay put placement.
The parties agree that Student’s last agreed upon and implemented placement is Beacon Day School, a nonpublic school, per Student’s individualized education program dated January 23, 2018. In his motion, Student requests that Beacon be provided by Los Angeles as his stay put placement during the pendency of this matter. In its opposition, Los Angeles confirms that Beacon would normally be considered Student’s stay put placement and that it is not providing Beacon during the pendency of this matter. Rather, Los Angeles argues that, because of changed circumstances, it is not able to provide Student placement at Beacon, including during the pendency of this matter.
Los Angeles asserts that it is required to maintain a master contract with nonpublic schools where it serves students. Beginning in May 2018, Los Angeles began its annual contract negotiations with Beacon. By July 2018, Los Angeles and Beacon were unable to agree to contract terms, and Los Angeles requested mediation to resolve the dispute.
Los Angeles’ opposition included a declaration from Deanna Peterson, Administrative Coordinator, declaring that Beacon refused to comply with a September 27, 2018 mediation order, and elected to disenroll all Los Angeles students from its program. Beacon and Los Angeles agreed to a contract extension, through the end of October 2018, to allow for the transition of Los Angeles’ students to alternative placements. At present, Parents have not agreed to an alternative placement, including an alternative nonpublic school, and Beacon has not agreed to a master contract with Los Angeles.
Given the foregoing, the following information is necessary to determine whether changed circumstances exist that would permit a stay put placement other than Beacon:
1. Whether Los Angeles is able to contract with Beacon individually for Student’s
placement;
2. The terms of the mediation order, its legal impact on the parties, and whether
Beacon’s failure to comply with the mediation order negates Los Angeles’ obligation to place Student at Beacon; and
3. The basis of the master contract dispute between Los Angeles and Beacon; e.g.
whether Beacon is unable to comply with statutory requirements for placement;
provide disability access; address health and safety issues; and/or substantially increased its costs.
ORDER
1. Within five business days, Los Angeles shall provide additional briefing,
including documentation and declarations, regarding:
a. Los Angeles’ ability to contract with Beacon individually for Student’s
placement;
b. The terms and legal impact of the mediation order; and
c. The basis of the master contract dispute between Los Angeles and Beacon.
2. Student shall have three business days from Los Angeles’ submission of
additional briefing to file a reply.
DATE: December 12, 2018
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings