DW obo SD v Bridgewater-Raritan Regional BOE | Case 08915-19 | 2019-07-08

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer State of New Jersey OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DECISION SUFFICIENCY OF PETITION OAL DKT. NO. EDS 8915-19 AGENCY DKT. NO. 2020-30283 D.W. on behalf of S.D., Petitioner, v. BRIDGEWATER-RARITAN REGIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION, Respondent. ________________________ Moshood Muftau, Esq., for petitioner David B. Rubin, Esq., for respondent Record Closed: July 3, 2019 Decided: July 8, 2019 BEFORE EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR., ALAJ:

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 8915-19 2 On July 1, 2019, petitioner filed a due process petition with the Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). On July 2, 2019, respondent filed a notice asserting that the petition is insufficient for the following reasons: 1. The due proce ss petition alleges that the district violated S.D.’s rights by arbitrarily requiring her to undergo a medical examination based on evidence that she was under the influence of drugs. The petitioner suggests that the administration was remiss in not condu cting a more thorough inquiry into the basis for the staff member’s accusation. The petition states that S.D. is a student with a disability an d that a manifestation determination was conducted, but nowhere alleges that S.D.’s behavior was a manifestation of her disability. S.D.’s disability is entirely beside the point of petitioner’s allegations. 2. Petitioner is not alleging any denial of rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or N.J.A.C. 6A:14. Petitioner urges that this is an “EDU” case, not an “EDS” one. The petition should be dismissed for failure to allege any violation “relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of [S.D.], or the provisions of a free appropriate public education” under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 20 U.S.C. § 1415 (b)(6)(A). The Office of Special Education Programs transmitted this case to the Office of Administrative Law, where it was filed on July 2, 2019. In order to obtain a hearing on a due process petition or to engage in a resolution session based upon a due process petition, the petition must provide information including the following: the name of the child; the address of the residence of the child, or, if homeless, available contact information for th e child; the name of the school the child is attending; a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to the proposed or refused initiation or change; the facts relating to the problem; and a proposed resolution to the problem, i.e., relief sought, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. 20 U.S.C. § 1415 (b)(7)(A); 34 C.F.R. § 300.508(b) and (c).

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 8915-19 3 Upon review of the petition, there is a lengthy recitation by petitioner of the nature of the complaint and the facts re lating to S.D. Petitioner has also outlined the relief that she is requesting in the conclusion section of the petition. As such, the petitioner has presented a basic platform sufficient to allow the school board, the District, and a reviewing tribunal t he ability to understand the dispute that petitioner is raising. The trouble wi th petitioner’s filing is that the allegations and statements of grievances are outside the scope of a due process petition challenging violations of the IDEA . The challenges are to general education disciplinary actions only, and do not invoke the special education issues and/or violations thereof covered by the IDEA. Respondent is correct that this matter is properly an “EDU” matter, and not an “EDS” matter. As such, I am not satisfied that petitioner has sufficiently outlined the facts relating to a special education problem, and that is fatal to the petition. Specifically, the petition does include the following: _X_ the name of the child. _X_ the address of the residence of the child. _X_ the name of the school the child is attending. _N/A_ the available contact information for a homeless child. __ a description of the nature of the problem relating to the proposed or refused initiation or change. _X_ the facts relating to the problem. _X_ a proposed resolution to the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. Therefore, h aving reviewed the petition for due process , I CONCLUDE that it does not include the information required by statute and regulation for a special education matter, and that it is therefore, insufficient. There is an insufficient description of the nature of the problem relating to the proposed initiation or change, that is, that the description of the issue does not invoke the special education issues and/or violations

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 8915-19 4 thereof covered by the IDEA. Petitioner has not sufficiently outlined the facts relating to a special education problem, and that is fatal to the petition. Therefore, I therefore CONCLUDE that the petition is insufficient, and I ORDER the due process petition DISMISSED. This decision is final pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(g)(2) and is appealable by filing a petition and bringing a civil action either in the Law Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey or in a district court of the United States. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(g)(2). July 8, 2019 DATE EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR., ALAJ Date Received at Agency: _______________________________ Date Sent to Parties: /lam