Town Square

Post a New Topic

School Board Prez Buries OCR Report, Cancels Discussion of PAUSD Bullying Policy

Original post made by Curious, Fairmeadow, on May 6, 2013

In a hastily scheduled Tuesday morning "study session," the PAUSD school board will hear the first public report on the district's compliance with settlement agreements with the US Department of Education's Office for Civil Right for violating the civil rights of disabled students. School board president Dana Tom and VP Barb Mitchell chose to schedule the report for the just-announced 10:00 am session on a "Safe and Welcoming Schools Action Plan" rather than for the regular Board of Eduction meeting scheduled for Tuesday evening.

The action follows an apparent abortive attempt to discuss the OCR investigation in a closed session on April 23. Tom and Mitchell were forced to cancel that discussion "on advice of counsel" because it would have been illegal under the state's open meetings law, the Brown Act. The Tuesday morning report will be immediately followed by a closed session to discuss the Superintendent's performance, last discussed in a closed session in late January.

Notice that OCR compliance will be discussed Tuesday morning does not appear on the agenda on the PAUSD web site (see Web Link), but instead in the downloadable "board packet" (see Web Link).

The session also includes a "Lessons Learned" report from Dr. Charles Young, the Associate Superintendent. Young is the designated Compliance Officer who was charged with assuring that the District followed applicable state and federal law on protecting student civil rights. It was those laws that OCR found were systemically violated.

In related action, Tom cancelled the planned discussion of the new PAUSD bullying policy that had been scheduled for Tuesday evening's board meeting. As noted in an earlier post, the district has so far failed to secure OCR approval for the new policy. The sticking point is likely PAUSD's unwillingness to conform its "site-based control" method of handling harassment and discrimination complaints to the requirements of state law and its settlement agreements with the federal government.

Also on the school board agenda for Tuesday evening is a request by staff to commit $140,000 for legal services from the law firm of Laurie Reynolds, who gave a public presentation to the Board of Education on the OCR investigation that the Weekly described as so inaccurate and misleading as to amount to "pure obfuscation" (see Web Link).

The school board will also discuss adopting new PAUSD strategic plan, which reaffirms the board's commitment to full public transparency.

Comments (12)

1 person likes this
Posted by IB Brockovich
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 6, 2013 at 9:36 am

Curious: Keep being curious as there will be many more things to investigate in the near future. The truth could set the district free if they would just quite stonewalling. Thanks for your continued postings in here. I am so glad that those parent groups have decided to sponsor a meeting with the Office For Civil Rights. They are all doing our district a service.

Where is that guy Ken Dauber now? He was advocating for all of this stuff before the election and look what we wound up with. It is truly pathetic!

I will continue to walk my walk in pursuit of the truth as well Curious! Curiosity killed the the cat is really out of the bag!

1 person likes this
Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on May 6, 2013 at 11:09 am

There are other OCR complaints and resolution agreements from last year. The board knows about them but has not released info to the public. Under Skelly PAUSD has had a pattern or practice of discrimination against students with mental disabilities. Skelly has forced parents to complain to OCR and then has stonewalled the federal government believing that OCR is a paper tiger. The board knows and supports this policy. The truth will come out.

1 person likes this
Posted by Lanferelle
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 6, 2013 at 11:11 am

The school board prez obviously has some ulterior motive in protecting Kevin Skelly ( self-preservation, perhaps?). Hence the secret meetings, cancelled meetings, lies and coverups.

The longer the board allows Skelly to stay, the worse the board looks, and the more we regret Ken Dauber's loss on election day.

Like this comment
Posted by you said it!
a resident of College Terrace
on May 6, 2013 at 12:27 pm

Oh Lanferelle, you sure did say it. If only Ken Dauber had won! But then the fact that he was running is a big reason why the community did not know about these OCR investigations since that is why Skelly and the Board didn't tell the public about them, and I guess now there are even more that have yet to come out. Wheels within wheels...If Dauber had won we would have a new sheriff in this town. And that is what we need so badly.

1 person likes this
Posted by Reality check
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on May 6, 2013 at 4:49 pm

I think we can guess how well the compliance is going from the story about how OCR sent Skelly a nasty note about PAUSD's behavior in the Duveneck case. Another reason why this got scheduled in the morning: Skelly and Tom knew that this story was coming out, and didn't want to deal with more unhappy constituents.

Like this comment
Posted by village fool
a resident of another community
on Jul 8, 2014 at 12:53 am

Sorry, I am confused. I could not follow the bullying policies changes/versions.

What can a child or parent do in case of bullying? Should an overweight/freckled/short child expect a different type of support/help depending on the child's race?

Like this comment
Posted by reality check
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jul 8, 2014 at 8:17 am

No. They just can just get it resolved at the site level without having to raise it to the district. They can still raise it to the district if they wish.
This is different to protected classes where it must be raised to the district level even for minor cases of "Jane pushed Joe".

Like this comment
Posted by SiteRetaliation
a resident of Addison School
on Jul 8, 2014 at 11:19 pm

...and because the district doesn't investigate "normal" bullying, you get to deal with dysfunctional sites. Including retaliation for ratting out the sites incompetence, and ten rounds of stalling, denial, and deflection by the site.

Eventually you will realize nobody is in control and you are expected to give up. AND the district hopes you go away.

Wonder why 1/3 of Addison attempts to go private? They are parents in the know...

Like this comment
Posted by reality check
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jul 9, 2014 at 8:50 am

"Wonder why 1/3 of Addison attempts to go private? They are parents in the know..."

Castilleja being closer than Jordan has nothing to do with it. Oh, and they also have an awful lot of money.

1 person likes this
Posted by former Addison parent
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 9, 2014 at 9:40 am

"Wonder why 1/3 of Addison attempts to go private?"

Jordan kind-of stinks academically
It's also really big
It's is fine to go to your local elementary school, but the presage of a private school is important for middle and high school
Parents have more control/influence in a private school
Oh yeah, Jordan kind of stinks academically

Like this comment
Posted by skelly elementary
a resident of another community
on Feb 23, 2015 at 6:40 pm

Is school open tomorrow morning

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of another community

on Feb 23, 2015 at 9:52 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 15 comments | 4,033 views

Eat, Surf, Love
By Laura Stec | 4 comments | 1,283 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 911 views

One-on-one time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 327 views

This time we're not lying. HONEST! No, really!
By Douglas Moran | 0 comments | 122 views