California OAH special education order · August 31, 2020
Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference
OAH Case No. 2020060885, 2020060931 · ALJ Chris Butchko
OAH set a three-day videoconference hearing on whether the charter schools had to fund an independent psychoeducational assessment or file to defend theirs, and noted Student's motion to quash expert subpoenas was withdrawn.
This case went to decision
Student v. Pacific Charter Institute et al. (consolidated): Pacific Charter Institute and Valley View Charter Prep must pay $8,350 for an independent evaluation after a 10-month delay. (2021)
Summary
After a prehearing conference, OAH set a September 15-17, 2020 videoconference hearing in consolidated cases. Student's issue is whether Pacific and Valley View failed to either fund an independent educational evaluation or file to defend their assessment after Parent's April 24, 2020 request. The schools' issue is whether their February 12, 2019 psychoeducational assessment was appropriate. Student's motion to quash four expert-witness subpoenas was resolved at the conference. The schools withdrew three subpoenas and agreed to limit the fourth, to Katherine Eng, to information about Student only. Student then withdrew her motion.
Why it matters
A subpoena to a family's expert that sweeps in communications about siblings can be challenged as overbroad. Raising it at the prehearing conference may get the district to narrow it to the student without a formal ruling.
Key authority cited
- Ed. Code § 56505, subd. (e)(7)
- Ed. Code § 56505.1, subd. (h)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g)
- Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
- M.C. v. Antelope Valley Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189
People named in the order
- Katherine Eng, Student's expert witness
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,
v.
PACIFIC CHARTER INSTITUTE AND VALLEY VIEW CHARTER PREP,
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020060885
and
VALLEY VIEW CHARTER PREP,
v.
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020060931
ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE FOR
HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE
AUGUST 31, 2020
On August 31, 2020, Administrative Law Judge Chris Butchko, Office of Administrative Hearings, held a prehearing conference by videoconference. The Administrative Law Judge is called an ALJ. The Office of Administrative Hearings is called OAH. The prehearing conference is called a PHC.
Natashe Washington, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Student.
Tilman Heyer, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Pacific Charter Institute and Valley View Prep. 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 September 15 through 17, 2020, and continue day to day at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 AM each day and generally end at 3:30 PM, unless otherwise ordered. The parties anticipate it will take three days to complete the hearing. Additional hearing dates will be discussed with the ALJ during the hearing if necessary.
HEARING LOCATION
OAH is authorized to conduct due process hearings by videoconference or telephone. (5 C.C.R. § 3082, subd. (g).) Based on state and federal guidance to address safety procedures due to the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, OAH will conduct the due process hearing by videoconference using the Microsoft Teams application. Unless otherwise ordered, participants are required to appear by videoconference using a webcam and Microsoft Teams.
The parties shall immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates, and shall subpoena witnesses, if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will appear to testify. A party’s failure to notify or subpoena a witness to testify will not be considered good cause to continue the hearing.
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 PHC are:
ISSUES
STUDENT’S ISSUE IS:
1. Did Pacific and Valley View fail to comply with their duty to either provide
an independent educational assessment at public expense or file to defend their psychoeducational assessment following Parent’s request on April 24, 2020?
PACIFIC AND VALLEY VIEW’S ISSUE IS:
2. Was the February 12, 2019 psychoeducational assessment of Student
appropriately conducted?
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
As remedy, Student seeks an independent psychoeducational assessment at public expense.
As remedy, Pacific and Valley View seek an order finding that they need not fund an independent psychoeducational assessment at public expense.
Pacific and Valley View answered Student’s complaint on July 3, 2020. (M.C. v.
Antelope Valley Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189, 1199-1200.)
EXHIBITS
The parties shall serve their exhibits on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). Timely uploading electronic hearing exhibits five business days before the first day of hearing constitutes that party’s timely exchange of evidence on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7).
Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not timely exchanged as required by Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7) shall not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless the ALJ rules that it is admissible.
IDENTIFYING EXHIBITS AND PAGE NUMBERS
Each exhibit must be identified by a letter and number. Student must use the letter S before the number to identify Student’s exhibits. Pacific must use the letter P before the number to identify its exhibits. Valley View must use the letter V before the number to identify its exhibits. For example, S-1 means Student’s exhibit 1, P-1 means Pacific’s exhibit 1 and V-1 means Valley View’s exhibit 1. If Pacific and Valley View submit a joint exhibit binder, they may just use one letter to designate the joint exhibits.
Parties may either number each page within each exhibit or number each page in the binder consecutively beginning with the cover page before exhibit one as page 1, through the last page of the last exhibit. For example, if there are 100 total pages in the binder the first cover page in front of the first page of the first exhibit is page 1 and the last page of the last exhibit in the binder is 100.
CONTENT
Each exhibit must 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. Exhibits should be in chronological order.
Parties should include resumes or curriculum vitae for each witness who is expected to testify as an expert.
Pacific and Valley View’s exhibits must include a copy of the school calendar for each school year in question.
ELECTRONIC COPIES OF EXHIBITS
Electronic copies of exhibits filed with OAH shall be filed by 5:00 PM at least five business days before the first day of hearing. OAH issued a separate Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically on August 7, 2020, that included instructions for how to file exhibits electronically.
WITNESSES
The parties shall serve their list of witnesses on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505. No party shall be permitted to call any witnesses not timely disclosed except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.
Parties are responsible for ensuring that all participants are familiar with and follow the Instructions for Joining the Online Due Process Hearing provided with this Order. Participants that have not previously used the MS Teams platform may also find informative videos available like the one at this link from Microsoft:
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/join-a-teams-meeting-078e9868-f1aa-4414- 8bb9-ee88e9236ee4.
The parties are responsible for ensuring that witnesses join the virtual hearing room at the designated date and time to testify. Witnesses are required to join the due process hearing by computer and appear by videoconference unless they do not have the necessary computer equipment. In that situation, the ALJ may permit the witnesses to appear by audio only or by telephone. “Audio only” means using a computer without webcam. Witness ability to attend the hearing by videoconference shall be discussed at the start of the hearing.
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 must schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order. Neither party will 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 may 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 Wednesday, September 9, 2020, to discuss scheduling witnesses and how much time each witness will take. The parties shall discuss any issues pertaining to the parties, counsel and witnesses appearing by videoconference for hearing and electronically viewing exhibits during the hearing. The parties should attempt to eliminate duplicate exhibits from their hearing exhibits. The parties shall discuss whether they can produce a written stipulation as to pertinent facts, contentions, resolutions and authenticity and admissibility of documents to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.
As part of the meet and confer process, Pacific and Valley View shall inform Student which proposed witnesses are district employees. Pacific and Valley View shall also identify the witnesses on Student’s list that require a subpoena. Pacific and Valley View may agree to accept service for witnesses under its control or provide Student with the witness’ most recent contact information.
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM
Both parties have an ongoing obligation to ensure that OAH has current information on the Participant Information Form filed with OAH, and shall file an updated Form as necessary. The Participant Information Form is not served upon the opposing party. The ongoing obligation to ensure that the Participant Information Form filed with OAH is current does not change the parties’ statutory obligation to timely disclose their witnesses to the other party(s) at least five business days prior to hearing.
The parties must file an updated Participant Information Form to inform OAH of any changes, additions, or deletions, including the required information no later than 5:00 PM at least two business days before the first day of hearing.
Any contact information provided shall be used for the limited purpose of issuing subpoenas or for contacting the witness(es) for purposes of attending the hearing and shall not be disclosed to any other person(s).
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 case, Student bears the burden of proof as to her claims, and Pacific and Valley View bears the burden of proof as to their claims. Student was the first party to file, so her case-in-chief shall be presented first, followed by Pacific and Valley View, unless otherwise ordered.
WITNESS LISTS
The parties must provide a joint proposed witness list to the ALJ on the first day of hearing. The list should include the first and last name of the witness, which party(s)
are calling the witness to testify, and include dates and time estimates of each witness’ expected testimony. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, each party shall prepare a separate written list. Pacific and Valley View must have witnesses available in case there is no agreement.
At the beginning of the hearing, the ALJ and the parties will discuss the length of time anticipated for each witness and scheduling issues for individual witnesses. The ALJ will finalize the witness schedule. Parties must be prepared at the end of each day to discuss the witnesses to be presented the next day and the estimated time for the testimony each witness.
SCOPE OF WITNESS EXAMINATION
Each witness will be called to testify only once, except for rebuttal purposes. All parties must examine witness on all issues when the witness is first called. Requiring a witness to appear only once takes priority over the order in which parties present their case in chief.
AUDIO ONLY OR TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY
Whether a witness may appear by audio only or telephone instead of videoconference 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 audio only or telephone shall request permission to do so before the hearing. Any party seeking to present a witness who cannot access exhibits electronically must inform the ALJ at the beginning of the hearing.
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. The conditions are:
the OAH recording is the only official recording;
participants shall not use Teams to record the hearing;
the parties shall turn their 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;
operation of the party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay the hearing;
a parties’ recording may not be given, provided or played to a witness, or potential witness; and the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process hearing;
use of the chat function in the videoconference is prohibited and shall not be part of the official record;
participants shall not take screenshots of the videoconference, or share or publish any portion of the videoconference or audio recording.
All parties are granted permission to record the hearing on these terms.
VIDEO RECORDING
No party, witness or anyone else may make any video recording of any part of the proceedings or stream live through any means.
RECORDINGS AS EXHIBITS
Neither party proposes at this time to introduce all or part of a recording of an individualized education program team meeting. The ALJ has discretion to admit or exclude evidence in the form of a recording. Any request to submit a recording shall be considered at the time of hearing. The ALJ may grant or deny the request, or grant the request subject to certain conditions. The party offering the recording must establish that all or a part of the recording is relevant. The ALJ may request a transcript of the portion of the recording requested or have the party offering the recording to provide an exact identifiable portion of the recording the party seeks to admit. The identities of any person speaking on the portion of the tape being introduced must be established.
An ALJ may allow the opposing party to offer additional portions of a recording to establish the context, or to rebut, the recording.
MOTIONS
On August 31, 2020, Student filed a motion to quash four subpoenas directed at expert witnesses who Student was considering presenting at hearing. The motion to quash was discussed with the parties at the PHC. Student reported she would present only one of the experts, Katherine Eng, at hearing, and Pacific and Valley View withdrew the subpoenas directed at the other witnesses. Student explained that the subpoena to Eng was overbroad because it requested information concerning all communications with Eng, which would have included communications about Parents’ other children.
Pacific and Valley View agreed to clarify the subpoena to Eng to seek only information regarding Student, and Student withdrew her motion to quash.
No further prehearing motions are pending or contemplated. Any motion that was not filed three business days before the PHC 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, resolutions and authenticity and admissibility of documents are encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in writing prior to the start of the hearing.
CONDUCT OF COUNSEL AND HEARING ROOM DECORUM
All participants to the videoconference should observe the same decorum as in an in-person due process hearing. Counsel, all parties, and all witnesses must conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times. Cellular phones, telephones, and computer notifications must be shut off or set to silent during the hearing unless the ALJ grants permission otherwise. Counsel, parties, and witnesses shall appear from a private location, unless otherwise ordered. Participants should take reasonable efforts to minimize background noise maintain adequate room lighting. Use of virtual background images are at the discretion of the ALJ. Witnesses are prohibited from reading exhibits, documents, notes, text messages, telephones, or computers while testifying, unless permitted to do so by the ALJ. Parties, counsel, and witnesses are prohibited from passing notes to, exchanging electronic messages with, or signaling the witness in any way while the witness is testifying.
LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS
No language interpretation service is required.
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 PM 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 and processed 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.
ORDER INCLUDES ALL RULINGS
This Order includes all rulings made at the prehearing conference. Any discussion and conversation not referenced in this Order is not binding on the ALJ conducting the hearing and may not be relied upon by the parties. The parties should be aware that, at hearing, the ALJ conducting the hearing has discretion to reconsider any part of this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Chris Butchko Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
