Fox C-6's State Audit Results Not Expected Until Late This Year or Early Next Year

It was reported in The Rock newspaper this month that the state audit of the Fox C-6 School District won't be completed until the end of the year or the beginning of next year. Originally, the community was told that the results of the audit would probably be released in September 2015.

The time to complete the state audit is pretty impressive considering how long the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights in Kansas City has been investigating the school district for a District Wide Compliance Review.

5+ Years and Still Under Investigation
On July 28, 2015 I received a response from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) to my June 2, 2015 Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request regarding the status of Fox C-6's March 2010 District Wide Compliance Review.

The response came from Bill Dittmeier, the Director of the the Kansas City ED OCR office.

Bill Dittmeier's response stated that Fox's District Wide Compliance Review is still "an open investigation".

It's difficult to understand how Fox can still be under "an open investigation" after five and a half years considering that the Memphis City School District in Tennessee underwent the exact same compliance review investigation in March 2010 which resulted in the Memphis City School District signing a Resolution Agreement in January 2012.

ED OCR's Growing List of Open Compliance Reviews
It appears that the Kansas City ED OCR office has a documented pattern of compliance reviews and complaints that have remained open for years. An August 22, 2012 FOIA request to ED OCR was responded to on May 3, 2013 which listed 3 open compliance reviews in the Kansas City ED OCR office. Two of the open compliance reviews had been open investigations from 2009. They were for the Bayless School District and the Cape Girardeau School District. The third compliance review was the Fox C-6 compliance review which was opened in March 2010.

I recently made a FOIA request to obtain an updated list of open compliance reviews in the Kansas City ED OCR office compared to other ED OCR Regional Offices.

A Lingering Problem
Two years ago at the June 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting, I asked Fox's school board about the status of Fox's District Wide Compliance Review investigation and the status of the district's Resolution Agreement with ED OCR that Dan Baker signed in May 2009 during Public Comments.

I wrote about these open in issues with ED OCR in a July 6, 2013 article. That article also listed the numerous "monitoring letters" sent to the district over the years following up on the district's May 2009 Resolution Agreement. Charges from Fox's former law firm document fees related to responding to those ongoing "monitoring letters".

Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements

at June 2013 Board Meeting

Using the link below, you can read several years of FOIA request responses from the Kansas City ED OCR office regarding Fox's open district wide compliance review. The July 28, 2015 FOIA response was the first response from Bill Dittmeier who succeeded Angela Bennett as the Director of the Kansas City ED OCR office in 2014.

Below is an excerpt from Bill Dittmeier's FOIA response:

The compliance review concerning the Fox C-6 School District is an open investigation. OCR has determined that the release of the information you have requested at this time could reasonably be expected to interfere with our enforcement activities. In addition, the information you have requested includes personally identifiable information that, if released, could be unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Therefore, OCR is denying your request.

July 28, 2015 ED OCR FOIA Response Letter

You may be wondering why Fox would still be under investigation after five and a half years.

Is this something that our community should be concerned about?

From a financial point of view, it is a concern because the district has spent tens of thousands of dollars over the past 6+ years in legal fees related to the compliance review and the still open May 2009 Resolution Agreement as well as other OCR complaints from others in the district.

District attorneys responded to monitoring letters, worked on updating district policies to get the district in compliance with federal law and prepared Dan Baker, school staff and the Fox C-6 school board for interviews in the fall of 2010. District attorneys also charged Fox C-6 taxpayers to respond to my Public Comments at board meetings as well as emails sent to the school board and administrators. There were also charges in the legal bills for reading this blog.

The legal bills are very interesting to read. The disappointing thing about the legal bills was that the former law firm didn't break out their billable time on Fox's bills like they did for the Wentzville school district. This makes it much more difficult to analyze how much was actually spent on various issues since many line items are grouped into lump sum billings.

I requested copies of the Fox C-6 legal bills via Sunshine Law in August 2014. I had made numerous requests before dating back to 2009 for the legal bills but had always been given excuses as to why the district couldn't or wouldn't make them available. I should also note that I didn't receive copies of the legal bills until April 2015 after I contacted the Attorney General's Office for help in obtaining them.

I didn't receive all of the bills I requested because according to Fox's current CFO, the bills were destroyed prior to the 2010-2011 school year.

Fox's Compliance Review Noted in Report to the President
In 2012, Fox's 2010 compliance review was referenced in ED OCR's FY 2009-2012 Report to the President and Secretary of Education that was issued in 2012 by former Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Russlynn H. Ali. Fox C-6's compliance review is listed on the map on page 5 as FAPE 2010 as a Section 504 compliance review. I'm surprised that Russlyn Ali included Fox's Compliance Review in the report since the investigation hasn't been completed yet.

2009-2012 ED OCR's Report to the President and Secretary of Education

It's interesting to read ED OCR's statements in the 2009-2012 Report to the President about how OCR must vigorously enforce the nations's civil right's laws.

I'm not sure how many people consider an investigation lasting more than 5 years, "vigorously enforcing the nation's civil rights laws".

Randolph Wills the Director of Enforcement over the Kansas City ED OCR office wrote a letter to Fox C-6's former legal counsel on April 7, 2010. He informed Fox that compliance reviews are designed to address systemic issues and to ensure that violations are readily identified and promptly eliminated:

As OCR explained in its notification letter to the District, compliance reviews are designed to address systemic issues and to ensure that violations are readily identified and promptly eliminated. The instant compliance review is consistent with the stated purpose and goals of OCR compliance review activities. Accordingly, I have determined that the compliance review will proceed.

What's even more interesting is the fact that the other school district, Memphis City School District in Tennessee, that was investigated for the same issue was investigated and agreed to sign a Resolution Agreement with ED OCR in January 2012. ED OCR posted a Press Release in April 2012 about the Memphis City School District's Resolution Agreement along with the Resolution Agreement itself.

April 2012 ED OCR Press Release

about Memphis City Schools Compliance Review Agreement 

Memphis City School District Compliance Resolution Letter

Memphis City School District Compliance Resolution Agreement

It's amazing how quickly the Atlanta ED OCR office was able to conduct and resolve the issues in the Memphis City School District considering the fact that the Memphis City SD had 110,361 students and 191 schools in their district when the investigation was opened compared to Fox having roughly 11,000 students and only 18 schools. It causes one to question the abilities and/or ethics of some of the Regional ED OCR Offices.

Concerns Over Which OCR Office Handles Investigations

In 2010, the Kansas City ED OCR office was assigned to conduct Fox's District Wide Compliance Review. I voiced my concerns to the Washington, D.C. ED OCR office back then about assigning the compliance review to the Kansas City ED OCR office. My concerns were based upon the fact that there didn't appear to be much enforcement effort out of the Kansas City ED OCR office based upon my conversations with many other advocates and individuals who had been dealing with the KC ED OCR office for years.

The fact that Fox C-6 has been given extension after extension to meet their obligations on the still open May 2009 Resolution Agreement and the fact that Fox's District Wide Compliance Review is still "an open investigation" after five and a half years, I think my concerns have been validated.

According to Fox's legal bills Fox's former law firm prepared the district and board prior to the interviews and then represented them during the ED OCR interviews in 2010.

So how long will it take for ED OCR to complete their March 2010 investigation?

According to Fox's legal bills, it appears that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) was able to conduct and complete a compliance review of the district sometime in 2012 or 2013 that I was unaware of. There were charges in the legal bills to review the findings.

There was never any mention of a USDA Compliance Review in any of the board meeting minutes that I recall. However there was never any mention of the March 2010 ED OCR Compliance Review in board meeting minutes either.

I've made a FOIA request to obtain a copy the USDA compliance review findings.

Fox's Ongoing District Wide Compliance Review

On July 28, 2015 I received a response from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) to my June 2, 2015 Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request regarding the status of Fox C-6's March 2010 District Wide Compliance Review.

The response came from Bill Dittmeier, the Director of the the Kansas City ED OCR office.

Bill Dittmeier's response stated that Fox's District Wide Compliance Review is still "an open investigation". It's difficult to believe that Fox is still under "an open investigation" after five and a half years considering that the Memphis City School District in Tennessee underwent the exact same investigation in March 2010 and resulted in the district signing a Resolution Agreement in January 2012.

There seems to be a pattern of compliance reviews remaining open for years that were handled by the Kansas City ED OCR office. An August 22, 2012 FOIA request to ED OCR was responded to on May 3, 2013 which listed 3 open compliance reviews in the Kansas City ED OCR office. Two of the open compliance reviews had been open investigations from 2009. They were for the Bayless and Cape Girardeau school districts. The third compliance review was the Fox C-6 compliance review which was opened in March 2010.

Two years ago at the June 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting, I asked Fox's school board about the status of Fox's District Wide Compliance Review investigation and the status of the district's Resolution Agreement with ED OCR that Dan Baker signed in May 2009 during Public Comments.

I wrote about these open in issues with ED OCR in a July 6, 2013 article. That article also listed the numerous "monitoring letters" sent to the district over the years following up on the district's May 2009 Resolution Agreement:

Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements

at June 2013 Board Meeting

Using the link below, you can read several years of FOIA request responses from the Kansas City ED OCR office regarding Fox's open compliance review. The July 28, 2015 FOIA response was the first from Bill Dittmeier who succeeded Angela Bennett as the Director of the Kansas CIty ED OCR office in 2014.

Below is an excerpt from Bill Dittmeier's FOIA response:

The compliance review concerning the Fox C-6 School District is an open investigation. OCR has determined that the release of the information you have requested at this time could reasonably be expected to interfere with our enforcement activities. In addition, the information you have requested includes personally identifiable information that, if released, could be unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Therefore, OCR is denying your request.

July 28, 2015 ED OCR FOIA Response Letter

You may be wondering why Fox would still be under investigation after nearly five and a half years.

Is this something that our community should be concerned about?

From a financial point of view, it is a concern because the district has spent tens of thousands of dollars over the past 6 years in legal fees. District attorneys responded to monitoring letters, worked on updating district policies to get the district in compliance with federal law and prepared Dan Baker, school staff and the Fox C-6 school board for interviews in the fall of 2010 according to Fox's legal bills that I received via a Sunshine Law request in August 2014. I didn't receive copies of the legal bills until April 2015. I also didn't receive all of the bills I requested because according to Fox's CFO, bills were destroyed prior to the 2010-2011 school year.

I wondered the same thing considering that Fox was only 1 of 2 school districts out of more than 13,000 school districts in the United States that were chosen to undergo a District Wide Compliance Review for one particular issue in 2010.

It's also interesting that in a 2013 FOIA request to ED OCR made by someone in Kansas City Missouri that it was documented that there were 2 other school districts in our state that had "open compliance reviews" dating back to July 2009. There were for the Bayless School District and the Cape Girardeau School District. So Fox is not alone in this matter. I have also been told that there are open compliance reviews in the Kansas City ED OCR office in Kansas and Oklahoma as well.

Fox's Compliance Review Noted in Report to the President

In 2012, Fox's 2010 compliance review was referenced in ED OCR's FY 2009-2012 Report to the President and Secretary of Education that was issued in 2012 by former Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Russlynn H. Ali. Fox C-6's compliance review is listed on the map on page 5 as FAPE 2010 as a Section 504 compliance review. I'm surprised that Russlyn Ali included Fox's Compliance Review in the report since the investigation hasn't been completed yet.

2009-2012 ED OCR's Report to the President and Secretary of Education

It is interesting to read ED OCR's statements in the 2009-2012 Report to the President about how OCR must vigorously enforce the nations's civil right's laws.

I'm not sure how many people consider an investigation lasting more than 5 years, "vigorously enforcing the nation's civil rights laws".

Randolph Wills the Director of Enforcement over the Kansas City ED OCR office wrote a letter to Fox C-6's former legal counsel on April 7, 2010. He informed Fox that compliance reviews are designed to address systemic issues and to ensure that violations are readily identified and promptly eliminated:

As OCR explained in its notification letter to the District, compliance reviews are designed to address systemic issues and to ensure that violations are readily identified and promptly eliminated. The instant compliance review is consistent with the stated purpose and goals of OCR compliance review activities. Accordingly, I have determined that the compliance review will proceed.

What's even more interesting is the fact that the other school district, Memphis City School District in Tennessee, that was investigated for the same issue was investigated and agreed to sign a Resolution Agreement with ED OCR in January 2012. ED OCR posted a Press Release in April 2012 about the Memphis City School District's Resolution Agreement along with the Resolution Agreement itself.

April 2012 ED OCR Press Release

about Memphis City Schools Compliance Review Agreement 

Memphis City School District Compliance Resolution Letter

Memphis City School District Compliance Resolution Agreement

Atlanta OCR Completes Compliance Review in 2 Years

It is amazing to how quickly the Atlanta ED OCR office was able to conduct and resolve the issues in the Memphis City School District considering the fact that Memphis City SD had 110,361 students and 191 schools in their district compared to Fox having roughly 11,000 students and less than 20 schools. It causes one to question the abilities and/or ethics of the different Regional ED OCR Offices. It's also notable that Cynthia G. Pierre who signed the Memphis City School District Compliance Resolution letter was recently promoted to the Chief Operating Officer of the EEOC.

In 2010, the Kansas City ED OCR office was assigned to conduct Fox's District Wide Compliance Review. I voiced my concerns to the Washington, D.C. ED OCR office back then about assigning the compliance review to the Kansas City ED OCR office based upon the fact that their didn't appear to be much enforcement effort out of the office based upon my conversation with many other advocates and individuals who had been dealing with the KC ED OCR office for years. But, the fact that Fox has been given extension after extension to meet their obligations on the still open May 2009 Resolution Agreement and the fact that Fox's District Wide Compliance Review is still "an open investigation" after nearly five and a half years, I think my concerns have been validated.

According to Fox's legal bills that were finally provided to in April after multiple Sunshine Requests, Dan Baker and some Fox C-6 staff and Fox's school board was interviewed by ED OCR in 2010. Fox's former law firm prepared the district and board prior to the interviews and then represented them during the ED OCR interviews.

Please note that I wasn't provided all of the legal bills that I had requested which dated back to the 2007-2008 school year. Those bills would have covered the time that Fox first started dealing with ED OCR in August 2008 on issues in our district.

Legal Bills Destroyed

According to Fox's CFO, John Brazeal, who fulfilled my Sunshine Request in April 2015, he stated that "after an exhaustive search", it has been determined that all paid invoices from the 2007-2010 school years (including invoices from Fox's former law firm) have been previously destroyed.

Legal Bills for Press Release

Reading through the legal bills has been very interesting and very eye opening. Back in May 2010, when the Post Dispatch contacted us out of the blue to do a story on complaints filed in Missouri with ED OCR, there were charges from Fox's former law firm for conferencing with Dan Baker about interviewing with the Post Dispatch. The legal bills noted it as a "press release". There were similar charges referenced as "press release" in August 2010 when the article was published in the Post Dispatch. Dan Baker was quoted saying that he,

"strongly believes the district has handled the situation appropriately. He said the district had spent a lot in legal fees during the dispute, but he did not know an exact amount."

Legal Bill Entries

I found it interesting that the legal bill charges referred to Dan Baker's interview with the Post Dispatch as a "press release".

5/3/2010 - TBG  - Telephone conference with Mr. Dan Baker regarding telephone call from Post-Dispatch.

5/6/2010 - TBG  - Telephone conference with Mr. Dan Baker regarding media contact; review press release. 

8/19/2010 - TBG  - Telephone conference with Mr. Dan Baker regarding Post-Dispatch interview and press release.

There were many more charges related to the "media contact" regarding Sunshine Law requests, etc. in May 2010. But there's no need to list them all here.

Post Dispatch Article Fails To Mention Compliance Review

I also found it interesting when the Post Dispatch article was published in August 2010 that there was no mention of the May 2009 Resolution Agreement that Dan Baker signed legally binding the district to make corrections agreed to with ED OCR in order to become compliant with Section 504 and the ADA AA. Nor was there any mention in the article about Fox undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review which had been initiated in March 2010. Perhaps those were simple oversights or the information just wasn't deemed that important at the time.

Legal Bills For Reviewing My Blog

Some of the other notable charges in the legal bills were from July and August 2013 after I made public comments about the Compliance Review and the Resolution Agreement at the June 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting. Fox's former law firm contacted ED OCR to get a status on the Resolution Agreement and Compliance Review and prepare a memorandum regarding the Resolution Agreement with ED OCR and the District Wide Compliance Review.

The law firm also charged the district to "Review media postings regarding status of OCR matters" and "Review patron media blog" perhaps to check my facts about the Compliance Review and the Resolution Agreement.

Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting!

After I spoke during Public Comments at the June 2013 Fox C-6 School Board meeting regarding an open Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and a Final Agency Decision from the USDA Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) finding Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE non-compliant with Section 504, ADA and the ADAAA, Superintendent Dianne Critchlow made the following statement:

"We are in compliance with every complaint to date and one is in litigation and we cannot discuss it." 

If you read the Monitoring Letters issued by the ED OCR and the Final Agency Decision from USDA OCR using the links below, you'll find that Superintendent Critchlow's statement was FALSE.

Why would our Superintendent say that we cannot discuss these issues?

The ED OCR Monitoring Letters and USDA OCR's Final Agency Decision don't reflect well on her, the school board or our district. And, if she made a statement at the school board meeting it must be true.

If Superintendent Critchlow is truly keeping our school board informed on these issues, I would think that the board would want to know why it has taken our District more than 4 years to meet the obligations of the Resolution Agreement they signed with ED OCR in May of 2009. Our school board should also be asking why our District is spending tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees rather than correcting their documentation and complying with the law.

I'm sure our Superintendent had no idea that ED OCR would find a lot more problems in our District than just not wanting to properly follow Section 504 law. If you read the ED OCR Monitoring Letters below, you'll find that there are a number of problems with the district's policies and handbooks complying with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA. It was such a systemic issue that the Washington D.C. Office for Civil Rights decided to conduct a District Wide Compliance Review of Fox C-6.

The District Wide Compliance Review was initiated in March of 2010 by ED OCR. Fox's attorneys argued that ED OCR was picking on our District and harassing them. Needless to say, ED OCR denied their request to rescind the District Wide Compliance Review. However, the District has done a very good job of dragging things out while spending a lot in legal fees.

Nearly 4 Years and Counting Despite Reassurances
It should be noted that Fox didn't accomplish what they originally agreed to do by August 31, 2009. By reading through the original Resolution Agreement and then the Monitoring Letters and attorney responses, you'll find that our District informed ED OCR that it would have the policies and procedures updated by July 31, 2010 after the district didn't meet the original 2009 dates.

In 2012, the District informed ED OCR that they planned on having the updated policies and procedures completed by July of 2012. Well, that didn't happen either! So, here we are in July of 2013 and the District still hasn't updated their documentation.

Now that the USDA OCR has asked the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for assistance in bringing Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE into compliance, it appears to demonstrate the fact that our school district and many like ours simply ignore the federal agencies. I think this is mostly due to the fact that ED OCR "allows" the District to "voluntarily comply". And, since ED OCR just issues new deadlines and doesn't actually perform any enforcement, school districts ignore them. It will be interesting to see how much money our school board plans to allow our Superintendent to spend on these issues before they decide to comply with the rulings and fulfill their obligations of the Resolution Agreement.

Below you will find some of the documentation showing the District's compliance problems. Our Superintendent has a tendency to just throw out statements thinking or hoping everyone believes her.

I provide the documentation that shows that what she says isn't always true!

Letters from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the USDA OCR document the fact that our district is NOT in full compliance.

Fox and Missouri DESE Found Non-Compliant by USDA OCR
The complaints I spoke of at the June 2013 board meeting are not in litigation. Only the Department of Justice can litigate a complaint with the District. Currently the USDA is working with Missouri DESE hoping that MO DESE will bring our district into compliance with the USDA's Final Agency Decision. If MO DESE fails to do so, the DOJ will then step in to bring about compliance. At that time, the District may possibly end up in litigation. But, at the moment, these complaints are not in litigation. Superintendent Critchlow throws out the litigation claim to so she can keep things behind "closed doors" rather than speaking about them in the public session of the board meetings.

UPDATED: On Friday July 12, 2013, Missouri DESE's assistant legal counsel Kris Morrow sent an email stating that "It remains DESE's position that 504 Compliance within the public schools falls under the purview of the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights." following questions sent to Karen Wooton, Missouri DESE's Food Nutrition Director regarding the USDA's August 2011 Final Agency Decision that found MO DESE non-compliant.

Apparently, Ms. Morrow hasn't read the legally binding agreement that Missouri DESE signs with the USDA each year in order to receive their federal funding from the USDA. Ms. Morrow would be well advised to read the April 2011 memo from the USDA OCR office which MO DESE has posted on their website.

Not to rule out any possibilities! But, perhaps Superintendent Critchlow is simply having a difficult time accepting the fact that the Monitoring Letters from ED OCR and the USDA Final Agency Decision aren't accolades for our District. If you're curious, give them a read and see what you think. How would someone document this on their resume as an accomplishment?

The links below open the documents from ED OCR, USDA OCR and our school district attorneys to get an understanding of how compliant or non-compliant the Fox C-6 School District really is with these agencies. Our school district has certainly invested a lot of money in legal fees just to keep from filling out paperwork like 504 Plans for students in our District!

Documentation From Federal Agencies Contradicts

Superintendent's Statements

May 1, 2009 Fox C-6 School District Resolution Agreement with ED OCR

December 8, 2009 ED OCR Issues First Monitoring Letter to Fox C-6 for May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement

February 26, 2010 Fox C-6 District Attorney Teri Goldman Response to ED OCR's December 2009 Monitoring Letter and Conference Call

March 11, 2010 ED OCR Complaint Notification to Fox C-6 Regarding Due Process Hearing Officer Selection

March 19, 2010 Fox C-6 District Wide Compliance Review Notification Letter from ED OCR

March 29, 2010 Fox C-6 District Attorney Teri Goldman's Letter to Russlyn Ali, Assistant Secretary of Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education Regarding District Wide Compliance Review

April 7, 2010 ED OCR Enforcement Director Randolph Wills Notifies Fox C-6 that District Wide Compliance Review Will Proceed

April 21, 2010 Fox C-6 Makes Request for Due Process Hearing

August 18, 2011 - Fox C-6 and MO DESE Found
Non-Compliant with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA

This ruling was handed down from the USDA after reviewing the Due Process Hearing that was put on by the District and heard by the District attorney's former law associate who was hired by the District as a Due Process Hearing Officer. The same attorney was hired by the District in January 2009 as a Due Process Hearing Officer for another case in the District and the hearing officer ruled in favor of the District on that case too. I wonder how truly "Fair and Impartial" former law associates are in hearing cases? You'll have to read the USDA's take on the Due Process Hearing Officer's decision.

August 18, 2011 USDA OCR Final Agency Decision Finding Fox C-6 and MO DESE Non-Compliant

March 13, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
ED OCR points out a lot of flaws in our District's student handbooks and school board policies that need to be updated. They also point out the fact that there are at least 7 different people identified in the District documentation as the District's 504 Coordinator on page 12. One of the persons listed hasn't worked for the District since 2008. I have to say that ED OCR is fairly thorough in their reading over of  our District's Policies, Procedures and Student Handbooks.

March 13, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement


August 3, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
More of the same but with a little more detail of what needs to be corrected starting on page 10 of the document.

August 3, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement


April 25, 2013 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
The following April 25, 2013 ED OCR Monitoring Letter informed the Fox C-6 School District that it still has not met its obligations from the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement signed by Dan Baker. There have been 4 monitoring letters sent to the district since May 2009. Deadlines for were given and never met. Therefore Fox C-6 IS NOT in compliance as Superintendent Critchlow stated at the June 2013 board meeting.

It seems that our district has a serious problem with being able to update its school board policies and regulations. It has now been 3 years since our district informed ED OCR that it would complete the updates of board policies and regulations.

How long does it take to update documentation?

ED OCR is still waiting for board policy updates and changes to its manuals. ED OCR has allowed the District to "voluntarily comply" for more than 4 years. The District has still not complied. Why not?

Perhaps it is time for our school board to ask Superintendent Critchlow why the District under her leadership hasn't been able to meet the obligations of their May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR.

It has also been nearly 3 years since District attorney Teri Goldman informed ED OCR that they should be completing the board policies and procedures updates by July 31, 2010. Taxpayer dollars are being spent by our District and ED OCR for failing to comply with the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement. Perhaps it's time for our school board to start looking for new leadership in our school district.

April 25, 2013 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent To Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement

Due Process Hearing Officer Selection Concerns
Would you be concerned if you were going to be forced to go through a Due Process Hearing against your school district and the school district gets to choose the Due Process Hearing Officer to hear the case? Would you be concerned if the school district chose a Due Process Hearing Officer that was a former law associate of the school district Attorney representing the school district in the Due Process Hearing? How about if you found out that the attorneys co-represented school districts together at law firms against parents? Would you be concerned if you found out that the two attorneys were presenters at a convention answering questions on the rules of Due Process and discussing topics such as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings"?

Section 504 Procedural Safeguards typically state that the parent or the school district can request a Due Process Hearing to resolve disputes with Section 504 decisions. The safeguards state that the school district will choose the Due Process Hearing Officer. The Due Process Hearing Officer is typically an attorney who acts like a judge to hear both parties on a matter and render a decision. A hearing officer is supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". A quick Google search of the hearing officer chosen by the District immediately raised red flags because the hearing officer chosen by the District was Mr. John Brink who was a former law associate of District attorney Teri Goldman in two different law firms. The choice of a hearing officer can easily sway the outcome of a hearing. I know that hearing officers are supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". But, as proof of my concern, I found several cases where Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman while working for the same law firms co-represented school districts on cases. What was more troubling was the fact that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were listed together as presenters at the 2007 Missouri Speech Language Hearing Association (MSHA) convention speaking about the rules pertaining to Due Process with one of their topics listed as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings". This is why we filed a complaint regarding our concerns over the school district's choice of the Due Process Hearing Officer with ED OCR.

District attorney Teri Goldman responded to ED OCR investigating our concerns. In her response to ED OCR she stated, "Since 2002, Ms. Goldman occasionally sees Mr. Brink at professional conferences (perhaps 1-2 times per year) and does converse with him at such conferences. Beyond that, she has no personal relationship with him. Since 2002, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink have not served as co-presenters contrary to the Simpson's representation. Neither Ms. Goldman nor the District know the basis for the Simpson's assertion in that regard." That's why I submitted the convention schedule brochure PDF document from the 2007 MSHA conference to ED OCR documenting our concern along with a photo of Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman seated together at the conference luncheon. These documents were found on the MSHA website along with the URL links. Shortly after ED OCR reviewed our complaint and responses from the District, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink, the documents were removed from the MSHA website where they had been posted for nearly 3 years. I found it odd that the documents disappeared so quickly after ED OCR investigated our concerns.

So, is Ms. Goldman's statement true about not serving as co-presenters with Mr. Brink? I kept a copy of the MSHA Convention brochure and photo from the luncheon just in case. The session description can be found on page 24 of the program schedule from the following link:

2007 Missouri Speech-Language Hearing Association (MSHA) Convention Schedule

Below is District attorney Teri Goldman's response to ED OCR regarding our concerns of the Due Process Hearing Officer selection. Mr. Dan Baker stated that he was originally concerned after I brought it to the attention of the District and ED OCR that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were former law associates. However, after speaking with District attorney Teri Goldman and she assured Mr. Baker that Mr. Brink would be fair and impartial, Mr. Baker was no longer concerned about the choice of the hearing officer. Apparently, Mr. Baker didn't know that Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink were former law associates during a January 2009 Due Process Hearing that Mr. Baker was involved in with another family at Fox that was decided in favor of the school district.

March 22, 2010 Fox C-6 District Attorney Teri Goldman's Response to ED OCR Regarding Due Process Hearing Officer Selection Complaint