California OAH special education order · March 1, 2022
Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference
OAH Case No. 2022020085 · ALJ Charles Marson
OAH set Lucerne's IEP case for a three-day video hearing and denied Parents' request to wait for an independent assessment, because no assessor was chosen and results were likely months away.
This case went to decision
Lucerne Elementary School District v. Student: Lucerne Elementary may implement its IEP placing a first grader in a moderate-to-severe special day class without parental consent. (2022)
Summary
Lucerne filed to show that its October 27 and November 16, 2021 IEP offers Student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment so it can implement the IEP without parental consent. At the prehearing conference, Lucerne withdrew a second issue about assessing Student without consent, and the parties stipulated that only placement is disputed. The ALJ ruled that this stipulation does not relieve Lucerne of proving that the entire IEP offers a FAPE. The ALJ denied Parents' request to continue the hearing until an agreed independent educational assessment is finished, because no assessor had been agreed on and results were likely several months away.
Why it matters
When a district seeks to implement an IEP over parental objection, it must prove the whole offer is a FAPE, even if parents only dispute placement. Parents should not expect a hearing to be delayed for a pending independent assessment that has not yet started.
Key authority cited
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (e)(7)
- Ed. Code, § 56505.1, subd. (h)
- Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
People named in the order
- Damara L. Moore, Attorney for Lucerne Elementary School District
- Charles Marson, Administrative Law Judge
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:
LUCERNE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022020085
ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE FOR
HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE
MARCH 1, 2022
On February 28, 2022, Administrative Law Judge Charles Marson, 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.
Damara L. Moore, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of the Lucerne Elementary School District. Student’s Father and Mother appeared on behalf of Student. 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 March 8, 9 and 10, 2022, and continue day to day at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 a.m. each day and generally end at 3:30 p.m., 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. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) 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. 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.
ISSUE AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION
A free appropriate public education is referred to as a FAPE. An individualized education program is referred to as an IEP.
The issue at the due process hearing, and proposed resolution, as alleged in the complaint and clarified by the parties and the ALJ during the PHC, is:
ISSUE
Does Lucerne’s IEP, dated October 27 and November 16, 2021, offer Student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment such that Lucerne may implement it without parental consent? Lucerne’s complaint and prehearing conference statement listed a second issue seeking to conduct an assessment without parental consent. Lucerne withdrew that issue during the PHC. In addition, the parties stipulated that there is no disagreement about any part of the disputed IEP except for placement. However, stipulating that no other components are contested is not equivalent to stipulating the IEP offers FAPE.
Lucerne must establish that its entire offer constitutes FAPE such that it can be implemented over parental objection. Should the parties wish to limit the hearing’s scope, the ALJ will consider a complete stipulation at the time of hearing.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
Lucerne seeks an order that its IEP dated October 27 and November 16, 2021, offers Student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment such that Lucerne may implement it without parental consent
EXHIBITS
The parties shall upload their exhibits electronically according to the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically.
The parties shall serve their exhibits on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). Timely uploading of 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. Lucerne 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 Lucerne’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 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.
Lucerne’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 p.m. 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 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. 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 webcam. Witness ability 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. 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 and the time allowed for witnesses’ 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 Thursday, March 3, 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 and electronically viewing exhibits during the hearing, or 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 authenticity and admissibility of documents to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.
As part of the meet and confer process, Lucerne shall inform Student which proposed witnesses are district employees. Lucerne shall also identify the witnesses on Student’s list that require a subpoena. Lucerne 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 p.m. 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 case Lucerne requested the hearing and bears the burden of proof. Lucerne’s case-in-chief shall be presented first, followed by Student’s, 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. Lucerne 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).) At present neither party anticipates presenting a witness by audio only or telephone. 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:
1. the OAH recording is the only official recording;
2. participants shall not use Teams to record the hearing;
3. the parties shall turn their recording devices on and off at the same time
that the ALJ is on and off the record to avoid recording conversations while off the record;
4. operation of a party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay
the hearing;
5. a party’s recording may not be given, provided or played to a witness, or
potential witness;
6. the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process
hearing;
7. use of the chat function in the videoconference is prohibited and shall not
be part of the official record; and
8. participants shall not take screenshots of the videoconference or share or
publish any portion of the videoconference or audio recording.
Neither party has made a request to audio record the hearing. If either party wants to record the hearing, the request must be made before the hearing.
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
At present, neither party proposes to introduce all or part of a recording of an IEP team meeting. 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.
MOTIONS
At the PHC, Student requested a continuance of the hearing until the results of an independent educational assessment became available. The motion was denied.
While Lucerne has agreed to the independent assessment, no assessor has been agreed upon yet. It is likely that it will be several months before those results are available.
No other 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 other than the one limiting the issues, described above, 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 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. 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
At present, neither party anticipates that any participant in this case, such as a witness, will require any reasonable accommodation to participate in the hearing. If any such need appears, the parties or person involved 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 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.
Charles Marson Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
