Publications and Alerts

Subscribe to Publications and Alerts via RSS

CABE Journal
March 2015

The Residents Against New Taxes (RANT) launched a new high tech online campaign this year to recruit new members in Nutmeg. RANT members attend every meeting of the Nutmeg Board of Education, and in large numbers they sign up for Public Comment. However, they then “yield” their time to Ralph Retiree, their flamboyant President, who then carries on for twenty minutes or more each meeting. RANT loyalists videotape Ralph’s speeches during Public Comments each meeting, and they then post the video on the RANT website, cleverly edited as Ralph talks with cuts back and forth of embarrassing shots of the Board members yawning or worse.SeeYouInCourtImage

This week, Ralph claimed that the Board was somehow in violation of the law by not making line-item transfers at each meeting. “Every month I come to the Board meetings,” Ralph proclaimed, “but I never hear a thing about transfers. I guess the Board of Education just lets its accounts run willy-nilly into deficit.”

This claim was too much for Board member Penny Pincher, and she interrupted Ralph’s rant. “Careful, Ralph. You don’t know what you are talking about. Each month we receive a report from Mrs. Superintendent, who tells us what transfers she made and how are accounts are all up to date and in the black. If you keep it up, you might find yourself on the other end of a defamation lawsuit.”

Ralph was unperturbed, and he simply told Penny “quid est demonstratum.” Penny had no idea what he was talking about, but she didn’t like it a bit.

Veteran Board member Bob Bombast went home that night and took at look at the RANT website. He was shocked by the disrespectful and intentionally embarrassing videos of the Board members as they scratched, stretched or otherwise looked bored. Moreover, the posts of Ralph’s speeches on behalf of RANT during Public Comment were even more annoying online than hearing them live. Bob vowed to put an end to this assault on his beloved Board of Education.Continue Reading SEE YOU IN COURT! – March 2015

SafetyFirstImageThe Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (DEMHS) within the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) recently released revised school security…
Continue Reading New School Security and Safety Standards Encourage, but no Longer Mandate, ICS Courses for All Employees

Agencies, courts signal a new focus on civil rights violations

Connecticut Law Tribune
January 26, 2015
Download: Article PDF

Connecticut has some of the finest educational institutions in the country, including award-winning public school systems, internationally famous private schools and elite public and private colleges and universities. Connecticut also has great day care centers, summer camps, trade schools and other such institutions. Despite providing quality education and training, recent events suggest that these institutions will be under increased federal and state scrutiny regarding their compliance with civil rights laws.

When acting as employers, educational institutions are subject to laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act. They also are places of public accommodation, which makes them subject to requirements to make their facilities and programs open and accessible to individuals with disabilities. These requirements place significant compliance burdens on educational institutions, and federal and state agencies have announced that they will be increasing their monitoring efforts in 2015.

I recently attended a dinner where a representative of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities spoke about the agency’s focus for the year ahead. Among other things, the representative noted that the agency was looking for more cases involving educational institutions, from both employment and student perspectives. These comments are supported by a review of the CHRO’s new blog, which recently highlighted the CHRO’s sponsorship of an October 2014 panel discussion at the Legislative Office Building regarding campus sexual assault. A second blog post responded to discriminatory events at two high schools in Connecticut, and quoted Cheryl Sharp, deputy director of the CHRO, as saying: “We are deeply troubled by the reports of discriminatory conduct at school functions.”
Continue Reading Educational Institutions Face Heightened Scrutiny

CABE Journal
February 2015

After the trauma he suffered during the last budget season, Mr. Chairperson vowed that this year would be different.  “The Nutmeg Board of Education is an independent agent, responsible for implementing the educational interests of the state,” he announced in an email pep talk to his Board colleagues.  “We must do the right thing and make our decisions in the best interest of the children of Nutmeg.”

Red Cent, another Board of Education member, forwarded this email to Seymour Dollars, long-serving Chairperson of the Nutmeg Board of Finance.  Seymour responded to Mr. Chairperson in an email to the entire Board of Education.  “In response to Mr. Chairperson’s diatribe, let me make one thing perfectly clear.  The Board of Education is powerless without the funding the Board of Finance provides.  You are anything but independent, and we expect you to listen carefully to us.”

Mr. Chairperson was upset by the threat implicit in Seymour Dollars’ response, so he called up each Board member and encouraged them to hang tough and support the Superintendent’s budget.  “United we stand,” he concluded each conversation.

At its next meeting, the Nutmeg Board of Education received the Superintendent’s budget, and Mr. Chairperson asked for a motion to approve the proposed budget immediately after Mr. Superintendent concluded his presentation.

“Wait a minute,” responded veteran Board member Bob Bombast.  “I thought that we are supposed to pick this budget apart.  Isn’t that why we were elected?”

“As we all discussed, Bob, I think that it is time for the Board to show solidarity and not kowtow to Seymour Dollars and his threats.  Is there a motion?”
Continue Reading SEE YOU IN COURT! – February 2015

Earlier this school year, the Connecticut State Department of Education (the “Department”) issued a memorandum to all directors of special education concerning making technical edits to clerical errors in the documentation of an individualized education program (“IEP”).  Through this memorandum, the Department outlines very specific requirements for making edits to the IEP documentation after such document has been finalized and sent to the parents.

For purposes of the memorandum, the Department defines a “clerical error” as “information inaccurately recorded in, or omitted from, the IEP document,” and provides that “[t]he correction of a clerical error within an IEP document that has already been sent to the parents is referred to as a technical edit.”  The Department then clarifies that minor technical edits may only be made to portions of the IEP document that are not required components of the IEP under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”).  If a district wishes to make any changes to sections of the IEP that are required components under the IDEA, or if the district wishes to make changes that are not minor technical edits, the district must either: (1) hold a planning and placement team (“PPT”) meeting; or (2) execute a written amendment to the IEP outside of the PPT meeting, which process requires the consent of the parent and a school administrator.

The Department provides additional requirements if the district makes minor technical edits to components of the IEP document that are not required components under the IDEA.  If the district makes minor technical edits, the district must follow these steps:
Continue Reading State Department of Education Issues Guidance on Technical Edits to the IEP Document

On December 24, 2014, the State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education (the “Bureau”), issued guidance on a school district’s ability to send student…
Continue Reading Bureau of Special Education Issues Guidance on a School District’s Ability to Send Records to Out-of-District Placements

With the new year, the amendments to the Connecticut Paid Sick Leave Act (“PSLA”) the legislature enacted last year are now effective.  We explained the details in our legislative update last summer, but here is a quick refresher:  (1) the PSLA only applies to employers of 50 or more, and the amended method for determining coverage simply requires an October 1st annual “snapshot,” and any non-manufacturing business meeting the 50-employees threshold on its payroll for that week must comply with the law’s requirements; (2) the amendments prohibit firing, dismissing, or transferring an employee from one job site to another to avoid the 50-employee threshold, and workers can complain to the Department of Labor if they think this rule was violated; (3) the requirement for applying the PSLA on a calendar year approach is gone, and employers can now choose any 365-day period for PSLA implementation; and, (4) radiologic technologists have been added to the list of covered service workers.
Continue Reading New Year Ushers in Changes to Paid Sick Leave Act and Minimum Wage