Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

SD 15 Bad Behavior

There's an infuriating article in this week's Jewish Star, but I can't link the article, so I'm going to have to recap much of it.

As I first posted about here, there was a request made to the Board of Education of School District 15 by district parents who wished to have their special needs children placed in Kulanu Torah Academy, as they felt their children's special education needs were not being adequately met by district public schools. The Board of Education came to a confidential settlement with the parents to reimburse them at the tuition cost of $22,500 per child. This amicable settlement would seem to have been a win-win situation, as quotes in the article would indicate:
In fact, the amity with which the settlement was reached represents a departure from past practice when virtually every dispute over private special ed placement resulted in a court battle.

“Last year the special ed litigation costs were in excess of $750,000,” said school board President Asher Mansdorf, who ordered the district’s legal team to seek settlements, in conformity, he said, with recent directives from Albany. “I can tell you that the estimate is that every time we have to go to litigate a [special ed] case, the starting cost is in the area of $18,000 dollars,” he said. “Whether you win, lose or draw you’ve spent at least 18-thousand dollars.

Aside from saved legal fees, Mark Honigsfeld, the chairman of the board of Kulanu, said the settlement represented a significant savings to the district in tuition, alone. “It’s public knowledge that it costs the district over $50,000 per year to educate a special needs child,” he said. “Some of these students,” he continued, “were being sent outside the district, which required a matron on a bus, and hours a day on a bus, and those situations cost the board over $70,000 a year.”

“My general approach to life is mediation and conciliation,” Mansdorf said. “Just think about any civil lawsuit that takes place anywhere in the country. What’s the first thing anyone does? The lawyers sit down and try to resolve it without going to court. Isn’t that what everyone tries to do. Am I the only one?”

In any event, Honigsfeld said, “Governor Spitzer has mandated that districts settle
these cases and parents should have major input. Only this district is going against the tide, because of this election.”
Despite the fact that the settlement seemed to have been in everyone's best interests, board members Pamela Greenbaum and Stanley Kopilow chose to oppose the settlement, and unfortunately, they chose to publicly air their disagreement with this confidential settlement, which had initially been discussed only in a private session completely closed to the public - violating the policy of confidentiality with which these matters are expected to be treated:
Both men also objected to the way in which confidential matters concerning special ed students have now become topics of public discussion. A person familiar with the district’s legal affairs, whose request for anonymity was granted, said “anything involving a special ed child is so confidential that the board never sees the names of the kids — they only see a number — and the number is known only to the office of pupil personnel and services.”

“Certain board members who have voiced their objection to this out-of-court settlement, in my opinion, are totally uninformed as to the sensitivity required when publicly discussing issues related to families and children who have disabilities,” Honigsfeld said. “So, bringing this to a public forum was inappropriate and, as I understand it, the full board was made aware of all the circumstances in executive sessions.” The upcoming election has played a role, he said. “It is only these individuals who are contrary to the private school sector looking to use this settlement as a platform for their campaign.”
Accusing the board members who oppose this settlement of doing it only to curry favor with voters in advance of an election campaign might seem a bit harsh, but it's hard to see what else the motivation here could be. It's clear that this settlement saved the district money. It's also noted in the article that the move had support of the district superintendent, school attorney, and special ed supervisor. In addition, it is pointed out in this earlier article on the subject that at the same meeting, a similar settlement was made for a public school student to attend an outside special ed program - yet somehow was not mentioned by Kopilow and Greenbaum when they chose to bring these previously confidential cases under public scrutiny. It's also hard to make the case that publicly raising an issue that is so clearly meant to remain confidential is in the best interests of the concerned district children. How are we to believe that Greenbaum and Kopilow are looking out for the best interests of every district child when they display a willingness to break confidentiality for special needs district children simply to make a political point? Doing what's best for one group of district children should not entail harming a different group of district children - shouldn't that be very clear to all, especially those who are elected to provide for the needs of all district children?

In any event, now this hue and cry as raised by Greenbaum/Kopilow has turned litigious. (Not shocking, as Greenbaum is involved). A former special education teacher from Long Beach, Ruth Radow, has filed a petition in objection to the settlement agreement. It seems that she is claiming it's unlawful:
In early April, the state education department received a petition, known as a ‘310 appeal’ asking that the education commissioner to vacate the board’s decision on the grounds that Kulanu is not an “approved” school and that proper procedures were not followed in allowing the case to be settled without the customarily lengthy appeals process.
The fact that a "customarily lengthy appeals process" is being presented as a positive, desirable goal for either the district or more importantly, for district children, is simply shocking - and Dr. Mansdorf's explanations above for settling and saving both the parents involved as well as the district time and money seem right on target. The fact that the school is claimed to be not "approved" is also debunked here:
Honigsfeld also pointed out that “there is no such thing as a quote-unquote ‘approved’ school,” he said. Kulanu is chartered by the NYS Board of Regents.
Dr. Mansdorf also takes issue with the suggestion that the settlement was unlawful:
"You have to realize that they’re also implying that our attorney, our special ed supervisor and our superintendent all broke the law,” Mansdorf pointed out. “That we said, fellows, lets go ahead and break the law, and they said, ‘OK, let’s go ahead
and do it.’ It’s just ludicrous.”
It is ludicrous, and quite sickening. It's as if a certain segment of the community who have an agenda to protect the public schools at any cost seem to think that such an agenda should come at the expense of fair, just, and equitable treatment of all district children.

It's a damn shame.

24 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

People have way to much time on their hands. My issue is not with the school that was picked. My objection is the forum. If the board approved these settlements, they have opened the door, especially with the new special education laws. I know six people who now won't accept anything this district offers. I do have a problem with the boards statistics, I searched high and low to find those supposed settled cases last year. I camed up with one case, and Lawrence one. Perhaps you can straighten this out orthomom.
http://www.sro.nysed.gov/2006/06-051.htm

2:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am always curious as to why the baord goes to executive session and then comes out and fights. What did they do for an hour? Jello shots?? Also, this should have never been brought out in public. It is not so simple, especially since there is a case in front of the supreme court right now, about tuition. The court is going to rule if the Public School Districts in this country are responsible to pay for private school tuition. Either way below find link to The law. Also, For those of us who were in the meeting where all this went on. Pam and Stanley asked to speak to pupil personnel, before they made a decision. I am curious how the board and the super were quoted in the herald talking about how we get so much money in tuition, because we have such an amazing special education program. You cannot have it both ways!

2:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mansdorf is right. It is illegal.

Just imagine for a minute if every single parent has a special needs child and decided to send them to Kulanu. It would severely impede the finances of the school district and the community via taxes.

Kulanu is NOT a charter school. You can look up all charter schools here:

http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/psc/csdirectory_newest.html

Kulanu is not an accredited or approved program by the NYS Education Dept.

Dr. Mansdorf (and Hattan) are the only people of reason on that board. I will miss Dr. Mansdorf.

8:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The tuition was posted in the minutes of the board meeting as well as the amount and the school.

8:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're right. The school is not a certified school. Kulanu operates within an established and approved school.

8:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just found the private charter, established in 2005 (by merging with another corporation) in the tax files. So it is a chartered, private school.

10:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was at the meeting too. Trustee Kopilow stated that he had concerns as it appeared that certain procedures had not been followed in considering, in a group, this settlement for six children. He asked to table the matter and discuss it in executive session. He asked for clarification of the district expert's opinion on the propriety of the placement, as to each of the six kids. He was ignored, the request to table was not granted, and the board voted to approve the settlement, leaving us all wondering if where there's smoke there might be fire. Too bad Dr. Mansdorf and crew didn't want to take the extra time to call back the expert, and clarify the concerns in private; now our district has to litigate.

12:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off, there are HIPAA privacy laws to protect the identity of the students involved. They were NOT violated.

Second, the parents need to prove WHY the school services are not enough and why the Kalanu services are superior to those offered by the district. Strictly special education is involved. Nothing else.

The district can ask for reimbursement from Medicaid for special education when they involve therapies. Kalanu cannot, but rather the individual therapists, if Medicaid providers, can do this. They may be able to bill insurance companies privately as well.

1:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't Kapilow & Greenbaum consider the school attorney, superintendent & Director of Special Education experts? OR are THEY the only experts in all matters in the district?

They sre experts in one area, being obstructionists. They are anti anything the other BOE members propose!! A good example would be the proposed budget which provides for ALL the children and reasonable tax increases for the community. They oppose the lowest budget in years. Thye probably object because they couldn't think outside the box when they were part of the majority BOE.

If Mrs Greenbaum is reelected the district will have 3 more years of the same nonsense.

1:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"as they felt their children's special education needs were not being adequately met by district public schools"

This was the most important point of your entire post, OM. Whether or not they feel like the public schools are not adequately meeting their child's needs should not be a determining factor. Considering the size and varied population of the district's special ed. program, I find it hard to belive that the district does not adequately provide their child's necessary services. If it is indeed so, it needs to be proven, in which case, I wouldn't object to the settlement. However, currently, anon 2:05 is correct. The board is opening Pandora's Box and hiding behind the guise of fiscal responsibility. Kopilow and Greenbaum have the forethought to realize that while litigation will cost the district more money in the short term, it could save the district a substantial sum in the long term. The ruling majority are using politics to holler about the fiscal irresponsibility of Kopilow and Greenbaum when they know full well that their intentions are not to deny children an appropriate education, but to make sure that the district is paying for education appropriately.

3:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have contributed to Kulanu and have attended some of their fundtions-but what SD 15 did appears to be payment of religious education under guise of settling a lawsuit-anyone feel like it would be apppropriate to pay for Rev Farakkhan's schoiol for kids.

5:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

QWDQDSQS
QW
Bush Defends Iraq War; Republicans Blast Harry Reid for Saying Fight Is 'Lost'

5:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:44 PM. I agree with you. Would this also mean that the tuition is tax deductible as a medical expense as well? The implications are quite deep here.

7:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OM, I know it's the Sabbath, but perhaps you could reply to the points made by anons 3:08, 5:51, and 7:19 when you get the chance? You lambast Mr. Kopilow and Mrs. Greenbaum for their opposition to the Kulanu payments, but haven't replied to the salient points made above. Thanks.

11:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"OM...perhaps you could reply to the points made by anons 3:08, 5:51, and 7:19 when you get the chance?"

I guess not.

2:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1) I responded to a post of yours awhile back and never received a reply. It was in response to your post about the tuition payments for the special ed. yeshiva. I'm reposting my comments here.

"as they felt their children's special education needs were not being adequately met by district public schools"

This was the most important point of your entire post, OM. Whether or not they feel like the public schools are not adequately meeting their child's needs should not be a determining factor. Considering the size and varied population of the district's special ed. program, I find it hard to belive that the district does not adequately provide their child's necessary services. If it is indeed so, it needs to be proven, in which case, I wouldn't object to the settlement. However, currently, anon 2:05 is correct. The board is opening Pandora's Box and hiding behind the guise of fiscal responsibility. Kopilow and Greenbaum have the forethought to realize that while litigation will cost the district more money in the short term, it could save the district a substantial sum in the long term. The ruling majority are using politics to holler about the fiscal irresponsibility of Kopilow and Greenbaum when they know full well that their intentions are not to deny children an appropriate education, but to make sure that the district is paying for education appropriately.

2) I agree about your comments regarding Super Saturday/Sunday and Reading Recovery. However, the rest of the cuts are real and are the result of four straight austerity budgets.

3)I have no problem with the second ad EXCEPT for the quotes from the Herald that appear to be attributed to Dr. Blisko and Marcus. It's deceptive and dirty.

4) Is the use of the term Orthodox repeatedly really anti-Semitic? I'm not sure. In a way, I respect their use of the term instead of hiding behind phrases like "private school parents", etc.
However, I guess I have to agree with you hear as well. Using terms like Hispanic or black would be unacceptable, so Orthodox should be as well.

5) I'm not sure how the board violated the teachers' contract, but if they did, and it cost the district money, then it was wrong. It doesn't matter if the board doesn't like the contract. Contracts need to be followed.

That's it for now. Too tired to keep thinking.

10:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OM, ref. to 10:55 #5 how did board violate the teacher's contract? By going over the class sizes, knowing months ahead of time, the board solution? Just move the 3rd graders from their building to another building. And move 2nd graders, to another building. How would they pick the children that would have to move to another building? Please think about this, JUST MOVE the kids, from all the kids they know, teachers,etc. They are not animals.
Ref. the only public school child placed out of state by the board, do you really think this child is at some resort?? The child was sent out of state because it is the only- ONLY- school that can met the childs needs!! HARD to believe? Ask the childs's parents how hard it has been on their family. ALL other schools in New York, and all other (closer) states were sent this child's file, and only VT. can HANDLE and educate the student.
OM,in regards to special ed, Special ED is a service, yes a service, not, a place. How sad for the children who parents choose a place instead of the proper services. Oh they will get O.T., Speech services, P.T. if needed, they are provided by the school district, yes the school district, not the private school, it's the program of the private school, does it really meet all the needs of the child, or is the child meeting the needs of the program? OM do you think the other Lawrence district parents who send their children to private special ed schools are not going to ask for the same tution money for their own kids come Sept.? I know how important the Yishiva environment & eduction is.
I know now how important education is to a special needs child. The need of the child MUST come before anything else. Example, a private school parent fighting a school district for an all day aid for their child. Why would a district pay for only half a day, a need is there, why only half, because the second part of day is religious study. (Seperation of church and state.) The child's need is he or she is BLIND. Why, is this child not at the Helen Keller School? The parent feels this is not the right school for her child. Her right as a parent, however how is the school going to help this child in the future? ABove all else the child is blind, the school district has to keep the child safe in school, the religious portion- the parent needs to keep the child safe,(they pay the aid) because that is the parents right to choose where her child goes to school, however, the school district cannot pay for the aid, second part of day because, the placement is not appropriate.

9:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so this is where our rightful tax paying money goes. to those not even in the district. BULLSHIT. if u feel they should be payed, why dont u pay it orthomonster? while our children suffer with old textbooks and unsufficient equipment, each child in these "institues" recieve everything with a silver spoon, even RELIGIOUS EDUCATION. Seperation or church and state? i belive they should create a way to revoke your bill or rights.

1:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

cb affiliate blueprints -
combat the fat -
conversationalhypnosis -
conversational hypnosis -
cure angular cheilitis -
directory of ezines -
dirty talking guide -
dish tv for pc -
dog training online -
domain sales machine -
driver robot -
earth4energy -
earth 4 energy -
easy tech videos -
eatstopeat -
eat stop eat -
error killer -
error smart -
evidence eraser -
evidence smart -
fatburningfurnace -
fat burning furnace -
fatloss4idiots -
fat loss 4 idiots -
fitnessmodelprogram -
fitness model program -
fit yummy yummy -
flattenyourabs -
flatten your abs -
flat to fab -
forex derivative -
gas 4 free -
get better grades -
golf swing guru -

9:38 AM  
Anonymous www.burgos-3d.com said...

It cannot have effect in reality, that is what I consider.

2:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right hеге iѕ the гight web
site for anуbоdу ωhο гeally
wants to find out about this topic. You κnow a wholе lоt its аlmost tοugh to argue wіth you (not that I reаlly would want to…HaHa).
You certainly рut a bгand neω ѕpin on
a subjeсt which hаs bеen discussed fоr ages.
Grеat stuff, just excellent!

Look into mу site Bucket Truck
Also visit my webpage : bucket trucks for sale

11:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not posіtive where уоu
are getting your information, but good toρic. Ӏ
nеeds to spenԁ а whilе finding out more οr ωorking
out more. Τhanks foг greаt info
I used to be οn the lookοut foг this info foг mу
mіssion.

My web sіte :: http://www.utilitytruck1.com/

10:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for the gοod ωгiteup.
It in fact was а аmusement асcount іt.
Look adѵanced to morе adԁed agreeable from yοu!

Ηoωeveг, hоw cοuld we communiсate?



My blog post - seo agency dallas

1:32 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

WWW1017
nike shoes
christian louboutin
ray ban sunglasses
coach outlet online
canada goose outlet
kate spade handbags


canada goose outlet
louboutin shoes

5:22 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home