California OAH special education order · May 13, 2019
Order Denying Lancaster School District's Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2019050394, 2019041161 · ALJ Deborah Myers-Cregar
OAH denied Lancaster's request to restore its May hearing dates after consolidation, because a May hearing would cut short Student's mandatory 30-day resolution period and Lancaster showed no new facts or law.
Summary
OAH consolidated the two cases, vacated Lancaster's May 21–23, 2019 hearing dates, and used Student's July 2019 hearing dates and timeline. Lancaster asked OAH to reconsider. It said the ALJ had ignored its partial non-opposition and that July hearings would hurt the district because teachers would be on summer break and not under contract. OAH denied the request because holding a hearing less than two weeks after Student filed on May 7 would bypass Student's right to a 30-day resolution session. Lancaster offered no new facts, circumstances, or law, had not requested mediation, and the parties had not jointly waived the resolution session.
Why it matters
When a student's case is consolidated with a district's earlier case, the student's procedural rights, including the 30-day resolution period, control the schedule. A district cannot push to an earlier hearing date just because summer staff availability is inconvenient.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
- Ed. Code, § 56501.5
- Ed. Code, § 56502
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 Consolidated Matters of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2019050394 v.
LANCASTER SCHOOL DISTRICT,
LANCASTER SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2019041161 v. ORDER DENYING LANCASTER
SCHOOL DISTRICT’S REQUEST FOR
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. RECONSIDERATION
On May 10, 2019, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an Order granting Student’s motion to consolidate, vacating the hearing dates set in Lancaster School District’s case, and adopting the 45-day timeline for issuance of the decision based upon the filing of Student’s case on May 7, 2019.
On May 13, 2019, Lancaster filed a motion for reconsideration, citing that the ALJ did not consider its ‘Non-Opposition In Part;’ and citing prejudice to Lancaster because its due process hearing dates of May 21, 22, and 23, 2019 were vacated, and replaced by Student’s due process hearing dates of July 9, 10, and 11, 2019, when Lancaster School District is not in session.
APPLICABLE LAW
The Office of Administrative Hearings will generally reconsider a ruling upon a showing of new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration, when the party seeks reconsideration within a reasonable period of time. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 11521; Code Civ. Proc., § 1008.) The party seeking reconsideration may also be required to provide an explanation for its failure to previously provide the different facts, circumstances or law. (See Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1199-1200.)
The Procedural Safeguards set forth in the California Education Code delineate the rights of the parties to file and respond to a request for a due process hearing and mediation.
(Ed. Code, §§ 56501, 56501.5, 56502, 56503.) When a student files a due process request, there is a mandatory resolution session which must be completed within 30 days, unless both parties state in writing that they jointly waive that session. The 45-day timeline starts the day after the 30-day resolution period ends. (Ed. Code, §56501.5 subd. (a)(4), (c), (d).)
DISCUSSION
Reconsideration Lancaster alleges the ALJ did not consider its Non-Opposition In Part, which objected to OAH using the July hearing dates in Student’s case. It reasoned the July hearing dates will create substantial prejudice because its teachers will be on summer break and not under a contract to appear at due process hearing.
However, Lancaster’s request to proceed with its original May 21, 22, and 23 hearing dates would circumvent the procedural safeguards, by holding a hearing less than two weeks after Student’s due process request was filed, on May 7, 2019.
Lancaster alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law which would waive the 30-day resolution session requirements. Lancaster has not requested a mediation, and the parties have not jointly waived the resolution session. Therefore, there is no justification for maintaining Lancaster’s original hearing dates and denying the Student the right to a resolution session under Education Code § 56101.5.
Accordingly, Lancaster’s request for reconsideration is denied.
ORDER
The Motion for Reconsideration is Denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: May 13, 2019
DEBORAH MYERS-CREGAR
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings