Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference

BEFORE THE

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE MATTER OF:

PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,

v.

MONROVIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.

OAH CASE NUMBER 2021120214

ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE FOR

HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE

AUGUST 12, 2022

On August 12, 2022, 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.

Rhonda Krietemeyer, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Student. Vivian Billups, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Monrovia Unified School District. The PHC was recorded. Based upon discussion with the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:

PROCEEDINGS DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATION

MEDIATION

At the commencement of the prehearing conference, the parties jointly requested that a mediation be scheduled. A mediation was previously set for July 7, 2022, but was cancelled by Monrovia. The parties reported they were both willing and available to mediate the matter prior to the hearing date, so no continuance would be required. They proposed holding the mediation on Friday, August 19, 2022, at 9:00 AM through 4:30 PM. As OAH is able to accommodate the request, mediation will be held as requested.

DUE PROCESS HEARING

The hearing will take place on August 30 and 31, 2022, and September 1, 2022, 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 more than two weeks to complete the hearing. Additional hearing dates will be discussed with the ALJ during the hearing.

HEARING LOCATION

OAH is authorized to conduct due process hearings by videoconference or telephone. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) OAH will conduct the due process hearing by videoconference using the Zoom application. Unless otherwise ordered, participants are required to appear by videoconference using computer or device with video capability and Zoom.

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. Instructions for issuing and responding to subpoenas and optional forms for subpoenas can be found on the website at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Case-Types/Special- Education/Forms/Subpoenas?search=special%20education%20subpoena.

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

1. Did Monrovia fail to appropriately assess Student in all areas of suspected

disability, including but not limited to:

a. psychoeducational functioning;

b. speech and language;

c. occupational therapy;

d. assistive technology;

e. social-emotional functioning, including educationally-related mental health

service needs;

f. behavior;

g. auditory processing; or

h. health needs

2. Did Monrovia fail to coordinate with the California Virtual Academy as

necessary and as expeditiously as possible, as required under California Education Code § 56320 (3)(i) and 20 U.S.C. § 1414(b)(3)(D), in providing assessment records and protocols, thereby denying Student a free appropriate public education, known as FAPE, and denying his parents meaningful participation in the planning of Student’s educational program?

3. Did Monrovia deny Student FAPE during the period of Distance Learning by

failing to:

a. implement his IEP services;

b. conduct a triennial assessment;

c. provide assistive technology so that Student could access distance

learning; or

d. adjust Student’s IEPs services, goals, and accommodations?

4. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia fail to provide

appropriate speech and language, including but not limited to services, goals, and accommodations?

5. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia fail to provide

appropriate occupational therapy, including but not limited to services, goals, and accommodations?

6. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing , did Monrovia fail to address

Student’s behavior/social-emotional needs, including educationally related mental health service needs?

7. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia fail to provide

appropriate assistive technology, including but not limited to services, goals, and accommodations?

8. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to adequately address Student’s learning disability in reading and writing, including but not limited to providing appropriate services, goals, and accommodations?

9. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to provide appropriate services, goals, and accommodations for mathematics?

10. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to conduct an adequate educationally related mental health assessment or provide appropriate services, goals, or accommodations to address Student’s mental health needs, including those caused by bullying?

11. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to address Student’s social skills needs?

12. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to draft a health services plan or have a school nurse attend his IEP team meetings?

13. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Student a

FAPE by failing to provide transportation services to and from his school of attendance as a related service?

14. From December 16, 2019 to the date of filing, did Monrovia deny Parents

meaningful participation in the creation of Student’s educational plan by:

a. notifying parents that they would take action against parents if they did

not withdraw their due process complaint;

b. failing to provide Parents with their procedural safeguards in either English

or Spanish at the September 24, 2019 IEP team meeting;

c. failing to completely translate Student’s IEP team meeting and assessment

reports into Spanish? Student’s complaint contained two additional causes of action. Issue 15 alleged violations under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Issue 16 asserted violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. OAH’s jurisdiction is limited solely to actions seeking relief under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. Accordingly, issues 15 and 16 are dismissed from the action and are exhausted before OAH.

PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

As relief, Student seeks Independent Educational Evaluations at public expense in psychoeducational functioning, Autism, social-emotional functioning, behavior, educationally-related mental health service needs, speech and language, occupational therapy needs, assistive technology needs, auditory processing, and health needs.

Student also seeks to be provided with intense, multi-sensory remediation in the areas of reading, writing, and math, compensatory academic tutoring, compensatory and ongoing speech and language services, compensatory and ongoing occupational therapy services, compensatory and ongoing educationally related mental health services, including counseling, wraparound mental health services, compensatory and ongoing assistive technology services, and compensatory and ongoing social skills instruction by a speech and language pathologist, psychologist, or another qualified individual. Further, Student requests an order that all of his IEPs and assessments be translated into Spanish at public expense. Student also seeks placement at a non-public school once he is stable enough to return to in-person schooling and transportation to and from school, as well as transportation or mileage reimbursement for transportation to services and non-public school placement. Lastly, Student requests an order directing Monrovia to provide training from an outside agency for Monrovia personnel in the areas of IEP and assessment compliance.

Monrovia filed its response to Student’s amended complaint on August 12, 2022.

(M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High 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). The parties shall upload their exhibits electronically according to the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically.

Timely uploading electronic hearing exhibits five business days before the first day of hearing constitutes that party’s timely exchange of evidence 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. Monrovia must use the letter D before the number to identify its exhibits. For example, S-1 means Student’s exhibit 1 and D-1 means Monrovia’s exhibit 1. A cover sheet with this identifying letter and number should be the first page of each exhibit. The electronic evidence program will automatically number the exhibits and additional page numbering or Bates stamping should not be added.

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 only 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 expected to testify as an expert.

Monrovia’s exhibits must include a copy of the school calendar for each school year in question.

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. Please refer to the General Order OAH issued with the Scheduling Order that contains the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically. It includes instructions for how to file exhibits electronically.

Beginning three business days before the hearing, the electronic evidence system will not allow parties to upload exhibits unless permitted by the ALJ during the hearing at the ALJ’s discretion.

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 who have not previously used the Zoom application, may find informative instructions online, like Getting Started with Zoom, available at https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/categories/200101697.

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. If a witness does not have the necessary equipment, the ALJ may permit the witnesses to appear by audio only or by telephone.

“Audio only” means using a computer without video. A witness’s inability to attend the hearing by videoconference will be discussed at the start of the hearing.

The 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.

The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses and the time allowed for testimony. Education Code, section 56505.1, subdivision (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 5:00 PM on Thursday, August 25, 2022, to discuss scheduling witnesses and how much time each witness will take. The parties shall discuss any issues related to counsel and witnesses appearing by videoconference for hearing, electronically viewing exhibits during the hearing, and subpoenas, if any. 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 the authenticity and admissibility of documents to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.

As part of the meet and confer process, Monrovia shall inform Student which proposed witnesses are District employees. It shall also identify the witnesses on Student’s list that require a subpoena. Monrovia may agree to accept service for a witness under its control or provide Student with the witness’s 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 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.

Monrovia shall provide last known addresses or other contact information for any of its former employees designated by Student as prospective witnesses. Any contact information provided shall be used for the limited purpose of issuing subpoenas or for contacting a witness to attend the hearing. Any contact information shall not be disclosed to any other person or used for any other purpose.

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 case, Student requested the hearing and bears the burden of proof. Student’s case-in-chief shall be presented first, followed by Monrovia, 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 is calling the witness to testify, and include dates and time estimates of each witness’s expected testimony. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, each party shall prepare a separate written list. Monrovia 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 of each witness.

SCOPE OF WITNESS EXAMINATION

Each witness will be called to testify only once, except for rebuttal purposes. All parties must examine a witness on all issues when the witness is first called to testify.

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 the following conditions:

1. the OAH recording is the only official recording;

2. 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;

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

the hearing;

4. a party’s recording may not be given, provided or played to a witness, or

potential witness;

5. the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process

hearing; and

6. participants shall not take screenshots of the videoconference nor share or

publish any portion of the videoconference or audio recording.

District’s request to make an audio recording of the hearing is granted.

Permission to audio-record, only, is granted to student on the same terms.

VIDEO RECORDING

No party, witness, or anyone else may videorecord any part of the proceedings or stream live through any means.

RECORDINGS AS EXHIBITS

Recordings may not be uploaded electronically without the ALJ’s permission. 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.

No party proposes at this time to include recordings with its 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. Documents offered as evidence to support a request for reimbursement must be separated by vendor.

MOTIONS

No prehearing motions are pending. Student may seek to have an in-person interpreter assigned for the hearing. 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. No other prehearing motions are contemplated.

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 PARTICIPANTS AND HEARING ROOM DECORUM

All participants to the videoconference should observe the same decorum as in an in-person due process hearing. Participants 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. Participants should appear from a private location, unless otherwise ordered. Participants should take reasonable efforts to minimize background noise and 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. The parties, their representatives, and all 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

A Spanish-language interpreter is needed. OAH will provide the interpreter.

A party or participant in 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/Request-Reasonable-Accommodations-for-OAH-Legal- Proceedings.

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 by visiting OAH Secure e-file 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