Order Following Prehearing Conference

BEFORE THE

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE CONSOLIDATED MATTERS OF:

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,

v.

LOMPOC UNIFIED HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT,

OAH CASE NUMBER 2019040859

and

LOMPOC UNIFIED HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT,

v.

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,

OAH CASE NUMBER 2019060122

ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE

On October 14, 2019, Administrative Law Judge Chris Butchko, Office of Administrative Hearings, held a telephonic prehearing conference. The Administrative Law Judge will be referred to as an ALJ. The Office of Administrative Hearings will be referred to as OAH.

Andrea Marcus and Dan Robinson, Attorneys at Law, appeared on behalf of Student. Sarah L. Garcia, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Lompoc Unified School District. The PHC was recorded. Based upon discussion with the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:

HEARING DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATION

DUE PROCESS HEARING

The hearing will take place on Wednesday, October 23, 2019, and Thursday, October 24, 2019, and continue day to day at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 AM on the first day of the hearing and at 9:00 AM on all other days, unless otherwise ordered. The parties anticipate that the hearing may take more than six days to complete.

HEARING LOCATION

The hearing will be held at the Lompoc Unified School District offices located at 1301 North A Street, Lompoc, CA 93436.

The parties shall immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates, and shall subpoena witnesses if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will be available to testify. A witness will not be regarded as unavailable for purposes of showing good cause to continue the hearing if the witness is not properly notified of the hearing date or properly subpoenaed, as applicable.

District facilities shall fully comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.), the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51 et seq.), and all laws governing accessibility of government facilities to persons with disabilities. Districts are required to file written certification with OAH that the facilities provided comply with these laws.

Lompoc filed the required certification on June 3, 2019. Lompoc shall notify OAH within three business days of the date of this Order if it is unable to provide facilities that comply with the laws governing accessibility of government facilities to persons with disabilities.

Before the beginning of the hearing, Lompoc shall ensure that the hearing room is configured into a courtroom setting and shall contain:

• a table for Student and her representatives;

• a table for Lompoc’s legal representative and special education

representative;

• a table for the witness;

• a table for the ALJ, near an electrical outlet with a chair that adjusts to an

appropriate height for typing at the table provided; and

• water and facial tissue available for the participants.

The same hearing room shall be used for each day of hearing and shall be available at least one hour before the beginning of the hearing each day. The hearing room shall be locked following the hearing each night. Lompoc shall ensure that the hearing room and access to it are in compliance with the all laws governing accessibility of government facilities to persons with disabilities.

Lompoc shall also ensure that one parking space is available on each hearing day for each of the following: the ALJ, Parents, Student’s attorneys, Lompoc’s attorneys, and witnesses.

ISSUES AND PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

The issues at the due process hearing, and proposed resolutions, as alleged in the complaint and clarified by the parties and the ALJ during the prehearing conference are:

STUDENT’S ISSUES

Issue 1. From April 2017 to the present, did Lompoc deny Student a free appropriate public education, referred to as FAPE, due to its failure to address her needs for behavior support? Issue 2. From April 2017 to the present, did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE due to its failure to address chronic bullying? Issue 3. From April 2017 to the present, did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE due to its failure to assess her in all areas of need:

a. Psychoeducational functioning,

b. Speech and language,

c, Functional behavior, or

d. Assistive technology?

Issue 4. From approximately March 5, 2019, did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE by making educational decisions outside of an individualized education program team meeting? Issue 5. For each of the 2016 to 2017, 2017 to 2018, and 2018 to 2019 school years, did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE due to its failure to offer services during the extended school year? Issue 6. Did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE by its failure to hold an annual individualized education program team meeting in April of 2019? Issue 7. From April 2017, did Lompoc deny Student a FAPE by failing to offer individualized educational programs reasonably calculated to provide Student with educational benefit?

STUDENT’S PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

As remedy for these violations, Student seeks independent educational evaluations in psychoeducational functioning and speech and language ability. In addition, Student seeks compensatory and prospective educational services in mental health and intensive behavioral support.

Lompoc filed its response to Student’s amended complaint on August 15, 2019.

(M.C. v. Antelope Valley Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189, 1199-1200.)

On the caption page for Student’s complaint were assertions that Lompoc had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and Title 42 U.S. Code Section 1983. As such matters are outside of OAH’s jurisdiction, these claims are dismissed from this action.

LOMPOC’S ISSUES

Issue 1. Was Lompoc’s psychoeducational assessment, presented at the January 23, 2018, individualized education program team meeting, appropriately conducted? Issue 2. Was Lompoc’s speech and language assessment, presented at the January 23, 2018, individualized education program team meeting, appropriately conducted? Issue 3. May Lompoc conduction a functional behavior assessment of Student as described in the March 19, 2019 assessment plan without Parent’s consent? Issue 4. May Lompoc implement the offer of counseling services made in the March 19, 2019 individualized education program amendment without Parent’s consent?

LOMPOC’S PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

As remedy, Lompoc seeks a finding that it need not provide an independent psychoeducational or speech and language evaluations at public expense, a finding that it may assess Student pursuant to the March 19, 2019 assessment plan without parental consent, and a finding that it may implement the counseling services offered in the March 19, 2019 individualized education program amendment without parental consent.

EXHIBITS

BINDERS

Exhibits shall be pre-marked and placed in three-ring binders before the hearing.

Exhibit binders shall include a tab for each exhibit. Each binder shall contain a detailed table of contents which clearly identifies the tabs and documents. The ALJ and witnesses must be able to easily turn to exhibit tabs and to turn pages in the binders.

Multiple binders may be submitted if necessary.

TAB AND PAGE NUMBERS

The parties shall place a letter followed by a number on each tab to identify each exhibit. Student shall use the letter S before the number to identify Student’s exhibits.

Lompoc shall use the letter D before the number to identify its exhibits. For example, S- 1 means Student’s exhibit tab 1 and D-100 means Lompoc’s exhibit tab 100. Each page of each binder shall be numbered consecutively from the first page of the first exhibit to the last page of the last exhibit in the binder. Parties may use a Bates-stamp type system for numbering.

CONTENT

Each exhibit shall consist of one document. Separate documents may not be combined into one exhibit. Emails or letters may be consolidated into one exhibit if they are part of a single chain of messages, but significant documents should be provided as separate exhibits. Documents offered as evidence to support a request for reimbursement must be separated by vendor and should be internally chronological where possible. Exhibits in the binders should be in chronological order.

Parties should include resumes or curriculum vitae for each witness who is expected to testify as to their professional credentials. Notwithstanding the requirements of Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7), the parties shall exchange resumes not later than 24 hours before the witness is scheduled to testify.

Lompoc’s binder shall include a color copy of the school calendar for each school year in question and shall have witnesses available to explain the calendar if necessary.

COPIES OF BINDERS

The parties shall serve copies of their evidence binders on each other. This exchange is required by Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). Each party shall bring two additional sets of the binders containing their exhibits to the hearing.

One set will be used by the ALJ, and the other set will be used by witnesses. The parties may not serve exhibits on OAH before the hearing.

Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not timely exchanged shall not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless the ALJ rules that it is admissible.

WITNESSES

Parties are responsible for producing their own witnesses unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ. Parties shall make witnesses under their control reasonably available. The parties shall schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order. Neither party shall be permitted to call any witnesses not timely disclosed except for good cause shown, and at the discretion of the ALJ.

The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses who testify and the time allowed for witnesses’ testimony. Education Code, section 56505.1, subd. (h), empowers the ALJ to set a reasonable limit on the length of the hearing after consideration of four factors. The first two factors are the issues to be heard and the complexity of facts to be proven. The second two factors are the ability of the parties or their representatives to present their respective cases and the parties’ estimates of the time needed to present their cases.

MEET AND CONFER

The parties are encouraged to review and shorten their witness and exhibit lists before the hearing. Evidence will be excluded if it is repetitive, cumulative, or insufficiently probative to justify the time it would take to hear. The parties are ordered to meet and confer no later than close of business on Friday, September 13, 2019. The parties shall discuss the availability of witnesses, the order of witnesses and the length of witness testimony. The parties should attempt to eliminate duplicate exhibits from their binders. The parties may discuss whether they can produce a written stipulation stating basic facts to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.

EVIDENCE PRESENTATION

In an administrative proceeding, the burden of proof is ordinarily on the party requesting the hearing. (Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49, 62.) In this consolidated matter, Student requested hearing first. Student’s case-in-chief shall be presented first, followed by Lompoc.

WITNESS LISTS

The parties shall give the ALJ a joint proposed witness list for the first day of hearing. The list should include dates and time estimates of expected testimony. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, each party shall prepare a separate written list.

Lompoc shall have witnesses available in case there is no agreement. Before the hearing begins, the ALJ and the parties will discuss the length of time anticipated for direct and cross-examination of each witness and scheduling issues for individual witnesses. The ALJ will finalize the witness schedule. Parties shall be prepared at the end of each day to discuss the witnesses to be presented the next day and the estimated time the testimony each witness is expected to take.

SCOPE OF WITNESS EXAMINATION

Each witness shall be called to testify only once, except for rebuttal purposes. All parties shall examine witness on all issues when the witness is first called. Requiring a witness to appear only once takes precedence over the order in which parties presents their case in chief.

TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY

Whether a witness may appear by telephone is a matter within the discretion of the ALJ. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) Any party seeking to present a witness by telephone shall request for leave to do so before the hearing, unless the opposing party has stipulated that the witness may appear by telephone. The party offering the witness shall provide the witness with a complete set of exhibit binders from all parties before the hearing. The binders must be exact paper copies of all of each party’s exhibits. Electronic copies are not acceptable. The party presenting the witness shall ensure the witness testifies from a private location with no other persons present. The party offering telephonic testimony shall ensure that the witness has telephone equipment that allows clear testimony at a volume that allows clear transmission of what the witness is saying, allows the witness’ testimony to make a clear recording, and allows the witness to hear objections and rulings. Lompoc shall ensure that the hearing room has telephone speaker equipment that allows everyone in the room to hear the witness, and allows the witness to hear objections and rulings. No witness will be heard by telephone unless all these requirements have been fulfilled.

At this time, no witnesses are known to need to appear by telephone. If telephonic testimony is necessary, the requesting party shall confer with the other to attempt to reach agreement on the appearance. If agreement is not reached, the requesting party shall inform the ALJ of the request to appear telephonically at least one day prior to the proposed appearance.

ELECTRONIC RECORDINGS

Audio Recording A party may request permission to make an audio recording of the hearing.

Permission to make an audio recording is subject to the ALJ’s discretion and based upon certain conditions. Such requests are routinely granted on the following conditions:

• the OAH recording is the only official recording;

• the parties shall turn the recording device on and off at the same time that

the ALJ is on and off the record to avoid recording conversations while off the record;

• the recording device will be removed by the party recording during any

recess where the party leaves the room;

• operation of the party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay

the hearing;

• a parties’ recording may not be used to prepare the testimony of a witness

in the hearing;

• the recording shall not be shared with any non-party, possible witness, or

through social media;

• The parties shall not use the recording in any subsequent due process

hearing;

• the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process

hearing; and

• the parties shall dispose of the unofficial recording when the time for filing

an appeal has passed or, in the event of an appeal, when the time for submission of the record on appeal has passed.

Both parties are granted permission on these terms to record the hearing.

Video Recording No party, witness or anyone else may make any video recording of any part of the proceedings. Any person doing so shall be subject to sanctions.

Recordings as exhibits Excerpts of an audio record of an individualized education program team meeting must be transcribed and offered as documentary evidence. The portion of the audio record transcribed shall be provided to the opposing party with the transcript to allow an opportunity to verify the accuracy of the transcription. Transcription need not be done by a certified court reporter. Electronic recording of the excerpts of the audio record shall be included with the transcript, at the ALJ’s discretion, to allow the ALJ to listen to the recording as well as read the transcript.

No recordings are expected to be offered into evidence.

COMPENSATORY EDUCATION OR REIMBURSEMENT

Any party seeking reimbursement for expenditures shall present admissible evidence of these expenditures, or a stipulation to the amount of the expenditures. A party seeking compensatory education should provide evidence regarding the type, amount, duration, and need for any requested compensatory education.

MOTIONS

No prehearing motions are pending or anticipated. Any motion that was not filed three business days before the Prehearing Conference shall be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing good cause why the motion was not timely filed.

STIPULATIONS

Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions or resolutions are encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in writing.

CONDUCT OF COUNSEL AND HEARING ROOM DECORUM

Counsel, all parties, and all witnesses shall conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times. Cellular phones, recorders, and other noisemaking electronic devices shall be shut off or set to vibrate during the hearing unless the ALJ grants permission otherwise. No food or drinks other than water will be permitted in the hearing room during the hearing.

LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS

No interpretation services are expected to be necessary.

A party or participant to this case, such as a witness, requiring reasonable accommodation to participate in a hearing may contact OAH at (916) 263-0880 or send an email to OAHADA@dgs.ca.gov as soon as the need is known. The e-mail should have “Request for Accommodation” in the Subject Line. Additional information concerning requests for reasonable accommodation is available on OAH’s website at:

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Services/Page-Content/Office-of-Administrative-Hearings- Services-List-Folder/Accommodations-at-OAH.

HEARING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

The hearing is closed to the public. Special Education hearings are closed to the public unless Student requests the hearing to be open to the public.

SETTLEMENT

The parties are encouraged to continue working together to reach an agreement before the due process hearing. The parties shall inform OAH in writing immediately if they reach a settlement or otherwise resolve the dispute before the scheduled hearing.

In addition, if a settlement is reached within five days of the scheduled start of the due process hearing, the parties shall also inform OAH of the settlement by telephone at (916) 263-0880. At the same time, the parties should send the signature page of the signed agreement or a letter withdrawing the case to OAH at https://www.applications.dgs.ca.gov/oah/oahsftweb.

If a full and final written settlement agreement is reached after 4:00 p.m. the day prior to hearing, the parties shall leave a voicemail message regarding the settlement at (916) 274-6035. The parties should also leave contact information such as cellular phone numbers of each party or counsel for each party.

Dates for hearing will not be cancelled until the letter of withdrawal or signature page of the signed agreement has been received by OAH. If an agreement in principle is reached, the parties should plan to attend the scheduled hearing unless different arrangements have been agreed upon by the assigned ALJ. The assigned ALJ will check for messages before the hearing.

If the matter settles subject to board approval, in addition to a signed copy of the signature page of the settlement agreement, the parties shall provide the date of the next board meeting. The hearing dates will not be cancelled without this information.

FAILURE TO COMPLY

The failure to comply with this Order may result in the exclusion of evidence or other sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 15, 2019 Chris Butchko Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings