.,: - _ .- .- .. .. - -i I I 1 ,. " 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHEm'l DISTRICT OF. CALITOfu'll." 8 9 1'MI\'L~c:; enu ., ...... . ._--... 10 Plaintiffs, 1\ vs. 12 ~JORDERRE:~AL APPROVAL OF FIRST AMENDED CONSENT DECREE Al'ID STJPPLEME!'.'TS THERETO DELAINE EASTIN, er aI. 13 Defendants. 14 Date: Time: Dept: '---'15 16 March 31, 2003 10 :00 a m. Courtroom 121 19th Floor (!-ion. Tbelton E. Henderon) 17 18 .' By Order dated March 13, 2003, the Court concluded that it could determine whether the First 19 Amended Consent Decree, including Exhibit A (Board Resolution 103 102) and Exhibit B (Ravenswood 20 Self-Improyement Plan) (collectively, the "Amended Consent Decree''), is fair, adequate, reasonable and, 21 thus, suitable for final approval wIthout the need for notice to class members pursuant to Federal Rule of 22 Civil Procedure 23(e). The C ourt concluded that it could make its determination based upon the 23 presentatioru; of counsel rather than proceeding in accordance with the notice requirement set forth in 24 Rule 23(e). Nonethe less l the Court invited any party to request reconsideration oftbe Court' s ,<, preliminary conclusion if they believed that notice was necessary o r otherwise appropriate in this m atter . 26 No party requested that the Court reconsider its conclusion that notice is not required in this matter. ?7 Thus, the Court held a hearing on March 31,2003, at 10:00 a.m. to consi der the parties joint request for 28 final approval of the Amended Consent Decree . .~ Case !Jo, C-96-4 179 TEH !?ROPOSED] ORDER RE: FINAL APPROVAL OF FIRST A.~fE0.'DED CONSENT DECREE AND . SUPPLEMENTS nrERETO ,· ,, !i I \1 --- ,,,/ 2 3 Having considered the presentations of counsel for all part:es, and based upon the Court's leng-J1y 1 experience with, and intimate kno\vledge of, this case, and good cause appearing, it is HEREBY 1 ORDERED THAT the Amended Consent Decree executed among the parties on March II, 2003, is 4 approved. The Court hereby enters the Amended Consent Decree and the supplements thereto as a tina! 5 order of the Court that shall be enforced as an order of the Coun. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 T~ERSON UNITED STATES DlSRlCT COURT JUDGE 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 " 2 , , 3 200J 4 5 6 7 , ,-,/ 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERl\ DISTRICT OF CALIFOR'IIA 10 11 EMiVlA. c., by and through her Guardian Ad Litem, e[ aI. , each one individual1y and on behalf of all other similarly situated children, Case NQ. : C-96-4179 (TER) STIPULATION AND w.Il.<1~ ORDER .v v , ' 'I Y 12 Plaintiff, Judge: Dept: 13 VS. - HOTI. Thelton E. Henderson 12 14 15 16 17 DELAD1E EASTIN, individually and in her official capacity as Superintendent of Public Instructions for the State ofCalif.)rni a, et aL , Defendant. 18 19 20 21 22 ?' _ 0 24 ?- )- 26 27 28 Stipdation and (Proposed] Order Emma C '". Delaine Eastin C-96-4 \79 (TEH) ORIGINAL I,I I,'I I il 2 1Superintendent of Public Education, Jack O'Connell in his individual capaciL,the Staie Beard : 'I The Plaintitl Class, the State Defendants (the California Department of Education, the of Education and any past or present member of the State Board of Education in their indi vidual capacities) and the District Defendants (the Ravenswood City Elementary School 5 6 7 I District, Dr. Floyd Gonella, Adam Mitchell, Todd Gaviglio, Iaqueli ne Green, Marcelino Lopez, Chester Palesoo, the Board of Trustees of Ravenswood, and any past and present 8 member of the Board of Trust ees of Ravenswood) hereby submit the following StipUlation and 9 [proposed] Order. 10 II \Vbereas the Class Members, Plaintiffs in the Emma C. C1ass Action, are chi ldren v,-ith disabilities who were, are now, o r will be in the future residing within the jurisdiction of 12 Ravenswood, and who were, are now , or will be in the future entitled to a free appropriate 13 14 15 pub lic educ ation ("F APE") under fe deral and state laws, and Whereas counsel fo r Plaintiffs filed a complaint initiating this Class Action by and 16 through Plaintiffs' respective guardians ad litem (aU Class Members' parents andlo r guardians 17 shall oe referred to herein as "Parent/Guardian(s)"), against CDE and R avenswood on 18 November 18, 1996 (hereinafter the "Complaint") , and 19 Vlhereas Plaintiffs alleged in the Complaint, among other things, that Ravenswood 20 failed to comply with federal and state laws which protect children with disabilities. Such laws 21 22 include the Individuals with Disabilities Act ("IDEA") and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation 23 Act of 1983 ("Section 504"). Plaintiffs further alleged that Ravens,\\,ood 's failure to comply 24 with such la'\vs results in the denial ofF APE in the least restrictive environment ("LRE"):o 25 Class Members. Plaintiffs furthe:- alleged that CDE fai led to moni tor and ensure that all Class 26 Members received F APE and Co=npensatory Education services; and 27 28 Stipulation alld [Proposed] Order Emma C. v. Delaine Eastin C· 96·4 179 fT EH ) -\ - C:\,'lirPor(b I\PA l lB I \ K DP\12)6549_I .DOC II I, " 2 3 4 Whereas an original Consent Decree was agreed to by the Parties on or around I, September 2, 1999 and approved by Judge Thelton Henderson o f the United States Distric~ Court for the Northern District of California and adopted as an order of the Court on J anu&}' 18, 2000, and that original Conser.t Decree incorporated a corrective action plan fo r 5 Ravenswood (the "RC}\P") which was developed by monitors hired by the CDE; and 6 7 Vlhereas on March 19, 200 I, Plaintiffs fi led a motion fJ r an order to s how cause why 8 Ravenswood should not be held in contempt for violation of the provisions of the original 9 Consent Decree (including the ReAP), ultimately resulting in an Order by the Court of 10 11 October 4, ~OO 1 finding Ravenswood in contempt and delaying any decision on remedy until after March 3 1, 2002; and 12 'iVhereas the issues of whether Ravenswood has purged itself of contempt and, if not, 13 14 the appropriate remedy, have been the subject of extensive litigation during the last several 15 months, and the Panies wish to settle and resolve these issues ~i thout further contempt 16 proceedings; 17 NOW THEREFORE , to senle and resolve the contempt proceedings, the Parties agree 18 to request that the Court enter the attached First Amended Consent Decree, including Exhibit A 19 (Board Resolution 103 102) and Exhibit B (the Revised RCAP), as a final order o f lhis Court. 20 21 ~i"- Dated: Eobmary ~2003 WILS ON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI P ro fess.i~o_,""" 22 23 24 25 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 26 27 28 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Emma C. v_Delaine Eastin C-96-4179-f fE H) -2- C :-8rPortb!1J' AU B t \KD?\22 3654~ _ ! _DOC i, ~! KROl-.1CK YfOSKOVITZ TlEDM-Au'IN & GIRARD BY:~~>;;;~ ' ~~ 3 4 5 I I Ann M. Murray Attorneys for CD E 6 7 Dated: February _ , 2003 8 SAN MATEO COll)ITY COUNSEL'S OFFICE 9 By: _-""'-:-:--~:--""_ _ _ __ Thomas F. Casey ill i\1iguel Marquez 10 11 Attorneys for Ravenswood 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 The Honorable Thelton E. Henderson United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Emma c . y. Delaine Eilstin C-96.4179 (T EH) -3- C:lNrPortbllJ' ALIS i \KDP',2236549 _ !.DOC - -- _ . I I IDated: February ~ 2003 ~ - 2 KRONICK MOSKOVITZ TIEDMANN & GIRARD 3 By: 4 Ann M. Murray 5 Attorneys for CDE 6 7 Dated: February)? , 2003 8 SAN MATEO COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE 9 By: 10 11 Attorneys for Ravenswood 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. ~/_- 14 15 The H rable Thelton E. Henderson United States District Judge 16 j;/o/ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -' 28 Stipulation and [proposed) Order Emma ~, Y. Rliilainlii EIUtin C·96-4179 (TEH) -3- C:\NrPonbN' AUB IIKDP\2l36549_ ILOC First Amended Consent Decree In The Maner of Emma C v, Delaine Eastin, et af. Case No , C ~ 9 6 -4 17 9 a certified class action pending in the United States District Court for the r-:orthern District of California C :\Nr Port b!IP." U BtIKDPI1 !6}064 t 1.00(' J f l 2!200J II 'J6 A\.1 - 1 This First Amended Consent Decree (herein the "Decree") is agreed [0 as of this l2th day of March, 201)3, by and bem'een the California Department of Education, the Superintendent of Public Education, Jack O'Cormell in his individual capacity, the State Board of Educarion and any past or present member of the S tate Board of Education in their individual capacities (collectively referred to as "CDE"); and the Ravenswood Cit)' Elementary School District, Dr. Floyd Gone J: ~ Adam Mitchell, Todd Gaviglio, Jaqueline Green, Marcelino Lopez, Chester Palesoo, the Board of Trustees of Ravenswood, and any past and present member of the Board of Trustees of Ravenswood (collectively referred to as "Ravenswood" or the "District'); and Plaintiffs in Emma C. v. Easiin, et al. , United Stares District Court Case No. C-96-4179 (TEH), a certified class action (the "Class Action" or ''this Action"). Plaintiffs shall be referred to herein as either "Plaintiffs" or "Class Members." The Parties herein shall be referred to as the "P arti es. " \Vhereas the Class Members, Plaintiffs in the Emma C. Class Action, are children with disabilities who were, are now, or will be in the future residing within the jurisdiction of Ravenswood, and who were, are now, or will be in the future entitled to a free appropriate public education ("F APE") under federal and state laws, and Vlnereas counsel for Plaintiffs fi led a complaint initiating this Class Action by and through Plaintiffs' respective guardians ad litem (all Class Members' parents andlorguardians shall be referred to herein as " ParentiGuardian(s)"), against CDE and Ravenswood on November 18, 1996 (hereinafter the "Complainf'), and Vv11ereas Plaintiffs alleged in the Complaint, among other things , that Ravenswood failed to comply with federa l and state laws which protect children with disabilities. Such laws include the Individuals with Disabilities Act ("IDEA") and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1983 C:\NrPortbI"lPALIB \ IKDPIJ t 63064_t t .DOC 3/1 2i 2003 1:49 PM 2 ("Section 50.:!" ). Plainti ffs further ai\egec. that Ravenswood 's failure to comply with such laws I results in the denial ofF APE in the least restrictive env irorunent ("LRE") to Class Members. Plainti ffs funher alleged that CDE failed to monitor and ensure that all Class Members received FAPE and Compensatory Educaiion serv:ces; and Whereas an original Consent Dec:-ee was agreed to by the Panies on or around Septemb er 2, 1999 and approved by Judge Thelton Henderson of the United States District Court fo r the Northern District ofCalifomia and adopted as an order of the Court on January 18, 2000, and that original Consent Decree incorporared a corrective action plan for Ravenswood (the "RCAP") which was developed by monilors hired by the CDE; and Whereas on March 19, 200 1, Plaintiffs filed a motion for an order-to show cause why Ravenswood should not be he ld in contempt for violation of the provisions of the original Consent Decree (including the RCAP), ultimately resulting in an Order by the Court of October 4,2001 finding Ravenswood in contemp! and delaying any decision on remedy until after March 31, 2002; imd Wnereas the issues of whether Ravenswood has purged itself of contempt and, if not, the appropriate remedy, have been the subj ect of extensive litigation during the last several m onths, and the Parties wish to settle and resolve these issues without further contempt proceedings; and Whereas the Parties wish to amend and supplant the provisions of the original Consent Decree with this First Amended Consent Decree (including its attach:nents and any future supp lements and modifications made to it pursuant to the terms of this Decree); and Vlhereas the primary goals oftrus First Amended Consent Decree are to guarantee that each Class Member, including past, present and furure students who reside within the jurisdiction of Ravenswood, receives F APE in the LRE. C:IN rPorti}I\P ,.... U3 t \KOP\2 Iti306J._ t \ .ooc J/ l l'~OO3 I Uti AM 3 XOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree on the foilowing terms and conditions: 1.0 Implemen!ation ofrhe Revised Ravenswood Corrective Action Plall ("RCAP'J 1. 1 Presumption Regarding the Availability of F APE for Class Members The Parties have created a Revised RCAP , which is incorporated by reference mto this First .-'\mended Consent Decree. The purpose of lbe Revised RCAP is to ensure that all Class Members receive F.A.PE in the LRE. The Parti es agree that compliance with the Requirements set forth in the Revised RCAP shall raise a rebuttable presumption that there exists in Ravenswood a system capable of providing FAPE to Class Members. As set forth in more detail in Paragraphs 7.0, 8. 0 and 13.0 below, Class Members shall have the right to challenge whether Ravenswood has met the Requirements of the Revised ReAP, and/or whether Ravenswood is prov iding F APE to Class Members. Nothing in this First Amended Consent Decree limits or forecloses the rights of any individual Class Member to assert claims or otherwise seek redress against R avenswood or the CD~ for their failure to provide services or to otherwise fulfill their o bligations to the individual Class Member lUlder the IDEA or other applicable state or federal law. Thi s includes, but is not limited to, individual Class Members ' clmns for compensatory edUCation, claims regarding the provision of FAPE and Section 504, and claims made against the CDE for the provision of services directly to any Class Member if and when Ravenswood is ur.willing or unab le to fulfill its legal obli gations. Nothing in this First Amended Consent Decree limits or changes the ob ligation of CDE to ensure that chi ldren in Ravenswood have av ailable a F APE in LRE. 2.0 The Revised RCAP 2.1 Percentages of Compliance. Ravenswood is required to demonstrate that it has achieved institutiona l compliance wi th the Requiremems of the Revised ReAP. To the extent C :'.NrPortbN'ALI8 I\KDPIJ 16J06-t_ 11.DOC Ji12i200J 11:36 ..o.M 4 the Expected R esu lts or Corrective Acti vities in the Revised RC.ltP difier from the Requirements, the Requirements detlne Ravens\vood's obligations. To demonstrate mstitutional compliance, Ravenswood must demonstrate (i) 100% compliance with each Requirement in the Revised ReAP, unless a diITerent percentage of comp liance is expressly stated with respect to a particular Requirement, or (ii) with respect to any and all of the Requirements in the Revised RCAP, Ravenswood will be deemed to have attained the Applicable Percentage Compliance if (a) the difference between Ravenswood's actual percentage compliance and the required percentage compliance is no more than 5% and (b) Ravenswood demonstrates that the required percentage compliance was Dot attainable despite Ravenswood's consistent and substantial efforts. By satisfying either subsection (i) or (ii) herein, Ravenswood \\-i11 be deemed to have attained the Applicable Percemage Compliance. Attainment of Applicable Percentage Compliance is a defense to a finding of contempt but is not a cefense to the failure to provide FAPE to any indi\.idual class member or to comply with state and fed eral standards. 2.2 Maintenance Periods. The Revised RCAP requires Ravenswood to comp ly w ith certain Requirements for designated "Maintenance Periods." A Maintenance Period shall run from the first day of the reporting period for which the Monitor detennines that the District has satisfied the Applicable Percentage Compliance, unless the Court finds to the contrary. In order to satisfy a Maintenance Period, Ravens\\'ood must maintain the App licab le Percentage Compliance for the entire, uninterrupted duration of the Mainten ance Period. PUIS"J.ant to Paragraph 14.0 below, R avenswood and CDE shall begin to comply with the provisions of [his First Amended Consent Decree on March 1, 2003. Ravenswood may demonstrate that the Maintenance Period for a Requirement should begin to run prior to fina l C:\N rP ortbIIPALlB I\KDP12163064 _ I! .OCC 3/ \2,'200) I I :36 AM 5 . entrY . of this Decree bv the Court, if: (i) the Monitor determines .tlat he has sufficient evidence to evaluate Ravenswood 's compliance with the Requirement, and (ii) the :vlonitor determines that Ravenswood has satisfied the Applicab le Percentage Cornphance for the Requirement and the Plaintiffs do not object to that determination; or the Court finds that Ravenswood has satisfied the Applicable Percentage Compliance for the Requirement. 2.3 Quarterly Reviews. Pursuant to the R evised ReM, evidence ofRav,e nswood's compliance with certain Requirements will be reviewed quarterly by the Monitor. The Monitor shall complete his review o f Ravenswood's compliance with the certain Requirements no later than the fIrst M onday in the months of November, February, April and July each year. The "Ylonitor shall conduct his ftrst quarterly review under this Consent Decree for the fourth quarter of the 2002-03 schoo l year. To the extent the Revised RCA.P requires the Monitor to observ'e classrooms, interview teachers, or Qthenvise interact with Ravenswood's operations, Ravenswood and the Monitor shall work to coordinate schedules and otherwise minimize any disruption of classroom ac~ivities. 2.4 Parents/Guardians. In any instance in which the Revised ReAP refers to a child's parent or parents, it means either the parents of the child or the child's legal guardian(s). 3.0 Ravenswood's Obligations /0 Class lv/embers 3.1 Responsibilities to C lass Members Ravenswood is required under state and federal law to make ~vailab l e a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment to all children v·ah disabilities who reside in the District. Ravenswood recognizes that, among other things, thi s means that it is legally obligated to identify children suspected of having disabilities; appropriately assess their needs; develop, review and revise appropriate and tim ely individualized education programs ("IEPs"); C:INrPQrtbl\ PAl. I ~ I IKDf"2. i030&4 _ li ,DOC )lIlf2003 I (:36 AM 6 and provlde all servi ces call ed for in the IEPs. Ravenswood recognizes that this also means that it is required to provide compensatory educaiion and related services to eligib le students. Ravenswood agrees to comp ly \vith the Revised ReAP and any amendments andlor modifications to the Revised ReAP that are made in accordance with this Decree. Ra\'enswood ackno\vledges that it must assure that corrective actions are implemented and services are provided in a manner designed to improve educational results for Clas.; Members. Ravenswood 's obligation to implement the Revised ReAP shall exist and continue to exi st until the Court detennines, as set forth in Paragraph 18.10 below, that Ravenswood has complied with the Requirements of the Rev;sed RCAP , there exists in Ravenswood a system capable of providing F APE to the Class Members, and Ravenswood and CDE have satisfied each of their respective obligations under this First AIr.ended Consent Decree. 3.2 ReAP Requirements The Revised ReAP contains various Requirements that are designed to estab lish a system capable of providing F.A..PE in the LRE to all children with_disabilities. Ravenswood shall demonstrate its compliance with each of the Requirements by gathering the Evidence of Perfonnance for each Requirement and preparing a Report of Compliance with each oflli e Requirements approximately every three months of the school year. Ravenswood shall fi le its repon with the Court and serve it on the Monitor and the Parties by no later than the fourth Monday in the months of November, February, April and July each year begilIDing with July 2003. Along with its report, Ravenswood shall also serve the Evidence of Perfonnance on the Monitor for his review. The Monitor shall make the Evidence ofPerfonnance available to the Plaintiffs and CDE wiihin 4 days of any request by Plaintiffs or CDE to review it. If any other Farty has good cause to believe that Ravenswood's Report of Compliance does not accurately C",NrPonb IIPA.UB \ \KOP\! 163064_ \ I.DOC 3fl ::!/ZOO~ II :36 AM 7 reflect Ravenswood ' s comp li ance \vith the Requ irements, thai Party shail, withi n 30 days of receiving Ra . . 'enswood' s Report of Compliance, provide to the Manner, fil e with the Court and serve on all other Parties, a written statement setting forth in detail its objections to Ravenswood's Report of Compliance. The fai lure of a party to submit a wriiten statement setting forth its objections shall not be considered to indicate agreeme:1t with the Ravenswood Report o f Comp liance. Ravenswood's obli gation to comply with the Requirements shall continue until the Court detemlmes, as set forth below, that Ravenswood has complied with each Requirement for its applicabJe Maintenance Period. 3.3 Ravenswood to Provide Accounting Ravenswood shall provide to the Court, the Monitor and the Parties by no later than July 15 each year, an accounting of the funds spent in connection with the imp lem entation of the Revised ReAP during the inunediately preceding school year, including identifying the ,recipi ents of such payments, nature ofrhe goods and services provided, and the amounts paid. 3.4 Compensatory Education Claims Parents of children with disabilities may submit claims for compensatory education. Claims for compensatory education shall be handled in accordance with the Procedural Safeguards established under Cahfontia law (including, at the parents' request, mediation prior to or after a request for a due process hearing), with the fo llowing exceptions: a) The District shall consent to m ediation of any claim for compensatory education servic es whenever a parent requests mediation in accordance \\lith California law. b) The District shall submit a copy of all claims fo r compensatory educaiion to the Monitor who \vi1l 1og the cl aim and record the results of the claim. C:11' rPO have discharged its responsibi lities for the Requirement, and the Monitor shall cease monitoring the District's compliance I,.\r!th the Requirement, unless the Plaintiffs or the CDE Object to the finding and file a request for a hearing, pursuant to Paragraphs 7.0, 8.1(a) or 8.I(c) below, within 45 days ofthe Monitor' s report. lIthe Plaintiffs or the CDE obj ect to the finding and file a request for hearing, the Court shall detennine whether the District has complied-with the Requirement for the . applicable maintenance period. 6.1.3 Concluding Report. If, anytime after Raveus\,'ood has been implementing this Decree for at least 2 Y2 years, Ravenswood or any other Party believes in good faith that Ravenswood has complied \vith all of the Requirements of the Revised ReAP, Ravenswood or the other Party may request in writing tl:at the Moni tor issue a Concluding Report or the Monitor may do so on his O\v'll initiaiive_ The request sha ll set forth in detail the reasons the Party believes that Ravenswood has complied with all of its remai ning Requirements under the Revised ReAP (as modified by those items for \vhich Ravenswood is deemed to have discharged its responsi'Jilities under this Consent Decree pursuant to Paragraph 6.1.2 above), and shall be C:\NrPortbl\1' AU B IIKDP\Z16J064_11.DOC ).112/200] I ' :36 AM filed with the Court and served on all the other Parties. \Vithin 45 days, the Monitor shaH file with the Court and senre on all the Parties his Concluding Report. 6. 1.4 The Monitor shall review the progress reports submitted by the CDE pursuant to Paragraph 4.3 above, in order to evaluate CDE's continued monitoring of Ravenswood's compliance with state and fede ral law and to consider CDE 's evaluation of Ravenswood's comp liance. If there exist any inconsistencies betvieen the Monitor's monitoring of Ravenswood's compliance with the Revised ReAP and CDE's monitoring of Ravenswood' s compliance with state and federal law, the Moni tor or the CDE may request a meeting prior to the dead:ine for submission of the Monitor's monitoring report pursuant to Paragraph 4.4 above to attempt to fecQnciie all such inconsistencies. If the Monitor and the CDE representative are unable to reconcile the inconsistencies, the Monitor shall describe, in as much detail as possib le, any and all such inco nsi ster,c \ ·,~s 6.1. 5 in his monitoring report. From :::. ;: to time as the Monitor sees fit, he shall select qualifi ed monitoring consultants to :,:::,. , < to Ravenswood the name(s) :lim.solely in monitoring compliance. The Monitor shalLpro-vide c:: 4:1)' monitoring consultants that he chooses. In the event that Ravenswood objects to the Ivlonitor's selection of monitoring consultant(s), Ravenswood shall have ten days from the date of receipt of the identities of the chosen monitoring consultant(s) to file with the Court and serve on the Monitor and the Parties v.'1itten objections to the reques t. The Court shall thereafter delennine whether to permit the Monitor to retain the seLected consultmts. 6.1.6 If directed by the Court, the Monitor shall meet with the Coun or the Court 's designee to discuss progress with Ravenswood 's compliance with the Revised RC.!iJl, -- CDE 's state-level monitoring system, andlor any other matters the MonitOT or the Court may C:\ NrPonbI'.PAL1BI\KQPI2 163064_ t I.OOC )! I2DOOJ 1!: J6A.~t 13 deem appropriate. If requested by a Party, the Monitor shall meet with the P arty to discuss the Party' 5 concerns and the progress of the imp lementation of the Revised RCAP . 6.1. 7 The Monitor or the Plaintiffs m ay request that tr.e Court issue an order to implement or effecruate this First Amended Consent Decree (including the Revised ReAP). Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Monitor and the Plaintiffs shall do so only after efforts to resolve their concerns by conferring with the Defendant(s) , ...·hieh is the s ubject of the requested order. 6.1. 8 The Monitor may participate in and provide recommendations regarding Ravenswood' s personn el hiring and reassignment decisions affecting the provision of special education services. The Monitor shall submit any such reconunendations in writing. If the District decides not to adopt the Monitorls recommendation, no later tnan seven days after making that decision, the District shall submit a briefwrin en explanati on to the Monitor as to "_ .- why it did not accept the Monitor's recommendation. The Monitor's recommendations and the District's hiring explanations, if any, shall be submitted to the Court and counsel fo r the Parties under seal 6.1. 9 Ravenswood shall notify the Monitor at least 20 days prior io engaging any consultant regarding special education, and shall simultaneously provide to him the credentials and quali fications of the consultant. If the Monitor objects to [he hiring of the proposed consultant, the Monitor shall no tify the District in writing with an explanation. If the District wishes to hire the proposed consultant after receiving the wri tten ob jections of the Morutor l the District shall submit a brieh...-ritten explanation to the ~ o nitor as to why it did not accept the Monitor's recommendalion. The Monitor's recommendations and the District' s hiring explanations, if anYI shall be submitted to the Court and counsel for 6e Parties under seal. C:IN rPoctb!\PAlIB I IKDP\21 6J06-i _I !.DOC 3/1 2'2 00) 11 :36 AM \4 - - - ---- _. -, 6. 1.1 0 The Monitor sha H ~t tend IEP team meetings as he deems appropriate. The Monitor may offer his opinion and reconunendations during the IEP team meeting, but may not mandate a speclfic kind or level of service. 6.2 Lmir3tion on the \1onitor's Authority The Monitor shall have plenary authority to monitor Ravenswood's comp liance with this First Amended Consent Decree (including the Revised ReAP). The Monitor is encouraged to offer Ravenswood suggestions and insigHs to assist Ravenswood's compliance. Except as set forth herein, the Monitor shall not directly provide services to the District. 6.3 Access to Programs and Infonnation The Monitor shall have wrrestricted access to Class Members' scbool records, IEP team meetings (subj ect to the objections ofParentlGuardian(s» , training sessions, classes, programs, and sen!ices; all Ravenswood's general and special education staff and programs, at the District and schoo l site levels; all Ravenswood records, policies , manuals, budgets, materials, resources and any other docuinents that may be relevant to, or necessary for, the _performance. of the . Morutor 's ·d:Jties. The Monitor shall also have umestricled access to records, materials, programs, staff and service providers relating to Class Members who attend school outside of Ravenswood. No advance noti ce by the Monitor of any visit or inspection shall be required. The Monitor shall sign out any student fil es slhe reviews which contain personally identifiable information. 6.4 Term of Engagement Unless otherwise ordered by the Courc, the Monitor ' s term of engagement shall continue until the Court enters the order pursuant to Paragraph IS. 1O. Any party may move at any time for entry ofan order replacing [he Monitor or limiting or terminating the Monitor's term . C .\NrPor.bIIP ALl 6 1\KDP '<2 I6306-1 _1I .DOC 3!"1 2!2003 11 'J6 AM 15 6.5 Vacancy in the Position of the Y10nitar Within -7 0 days of receipt of notice a f the need far a replacement Monitor, Pl aintiffs and Ravenswood shall each provide tbe other with the name(s) of their proposed rep lacement monitors. Wi thin 20 days thereafter, the panies shall meet and confer to try to select a neutral , qualified Monitor for appointment by the Court. In the event an agreement carmot be reached within that timeframe, Plaintiffs and Ravenswood shall each select no more than tv.·o quali fied individuals, neither of whom shall have (a) been a fonner employee o:Plaintiffs or Ravenswood, or (b) shall have previously acted as a monitor in this ,action. Within : 5 days of receipt of notice of the need for a replacement Monitor, Plaintiffs and Ravenswood shall submit to the Court the names of their selected candidates, along with 'h is or her current curriculum vitae and any other evidence or argument supporting the selectio n of the candidate. The Court shall thereafter choose the replacement Morutor from the candidates recommended by the Plaintiffs and Ravenswood. i.O Orders 7. 1 The Court shall have continuing jurisdiction of this action to ensure compliance with this Decree. 7.21f, at any time after the Monitor has issued at least two monitoring reports pursuant to Paragraph 6.1. 2 above, the Monitor or a Party believes that the District or CDE has failed to comply with its obligations under this First Amended Decree (including any obligations under the Revised RCAP), the Monitor or the Party, after conferring with Ravenswood or CDE in an effort to resolve the dispute, may request that the Court issue an Order to Show Cause re Contempt. 7.3 The Monitor or a Pany may req uest that the Court issue any other o rder at any time. C:'.NrPortbIIPAUa I\KDP\2 I6J064 I I.DOC 3iI 212003 I I :36 AM - 16 8.0 EVidentiary Hearings 8.1 Requests for Evidentiary Hearing The Parties may request an Evidentiary Hearing, as fo llows: (a) Any time after the ),lonitor files with the Co un a rep ort under Paragraphs 6.1.2 above, any Pany may file 'With the Court a Request fo r Evidemiary Hearing to determine if R avenswood :mdlor the CDE should be held in contempt or to seek other relief regarding Ravenswood and the CDE's compli ance with this First Amended Consent Decree (including the Revised R CAP). The Request shall set forth in detail the reasons for the need for an Evidentiary Hearing and shall be served on the M onitor and all o ther Parties. (b) .After the Monitor issues a Concluding R eport, as described in Paragraph 6. 1.3 above, Ravenswood may fi le with the Court a motion and Request for Evidentiary Hearing to establish complete compliance with aU rem aining Requirements o f the Revised ReAP. The Request must be supported \vith detailed evidence demonstrating comp liance with all of me remaining Requirements of the·Revised Re AP. The R equest must also specifically address any R equirements v..ith which the Monitor's Concluding R eport found Ravenswo od to be noncompliant, including detailed evidence rebutting the Monitor's findin g(s) of noncompliance. The Request shall be served on the M onitor and all other Parties. (c) luIy Party may request a hearing: regarding any other matter re lated to this First Amended Consent Decree, The Court may, on its own motion cr at the request of a P arty, schedule an Evidentiary Hearing upon its detennination that an Evidenti ary Hearing is necessary or appropri ate. C:INrf'OMbIIl'AL IB I IKDP\l.16J064 _11.DOC }/12I200311:36AM 17 8.2 Pre-Evidentiary Hearing Starns Conference Cpon receipt ofa Request for Evidentiary Hearing, the Court shall set a Status Conference to evaluate the need for an Evidentiary Hearing and to set ?rocedures for any such hearing_ Ten (10) days prior to the Starus Conference, each Party shat file \!".'ith the Court and serve on the Monitor and all other Parties a Status Conference Statement, which shall include a statement of the reasons for the requested Evidenti ary Hearing, a detailed request for any discovery needed in advance of the Evidentiary Hearing, an identification and description of the Party's anticipated witnesses for the Hearing, and a statement of the anticipated length of the hearing. Nohvithstanding the foregoing, in the event that the COM issues an Order to Show Cause re Contempt directed to Ravenswood, whether on its own motion or at the request of the Monitor or a Party, the Plaintiffs may 'Without further order of the Cowt take two depositions of relevant school personnel, including the Superintendent and/or the Assistant Superintendent of Special Education andioT one other person e~ployed by the District. 8.3 Monitor 's Role at Evidentiary Hearing The Monitor and/or the monitoring consultants sh all be availab le to be called as witnesses by any Party or the Court at any Evidentiary Hearing. 9.0 Periodic Siatus Conferences At any time after entry of this First Amended Consent Decree, the Monitor or any Party may request a Status Conference for the purpose of reviewing the District's compliance with the Requirements of the Revised ReAP. 10.0 Revised RCAP Cornrniuee Ravenswood shall arrange for the formation of an advisory Revised ReAP Committee. This Revised ReAP Corrunittee may be integrated with the District's Strategic Pl anning C:\NrPortbf\PALIB IIKD P\2163064_11.OC>C 3/ \212003 I I :36 ... M 18 Committee. The Revised RCAP Committee shall include a minimum of w ee Pare1 tfGuardians appointed by Plaintiffs, Rayenswood 's Superintendent, one member of Ravenswood 's Board of ! Trustees, Ravenswood 's Assistant Superintendent of Special Education, the CDE liaison, a representative from the San Mateo Co unty Office of Education, a SELPA representative, one general education teacher, one principal , one special education provider, and counsel for the Plaintiffs and Ravenswood. The Revised Re AP CommiTtee shall meet at least once each semester and once durin g the summer break. At least ten days prior to any meeting of the most recent Revised ReAP Committee, Ravenswood shall provide a copy of the Monitor's , monitoring reports pursuant to Paragraph 6.1.2 above. At each meetir.g of the Revised ReAP Committee, Ravenswood shall discuss its compliance with the Revised ReAP, including the manner in which it intends to comply with any Requirements for which the Monitor' s report indicates noncompliance or the basis for the District's disagreement v.i th the Monitor's detennination, if any. The Revised RCAP Comminee shall advise the Superintendent on any other marter~ related to performance of the Requirements of the Revised Re AP. 11.0 Parem Advocates Parents Helping Parents have been engaged to work as Parent Advocates in the District. They assist, and shall continue to assist, ParenUGuardian(s) in (a) reviewing the records and IEPs of their students, (b) preparing fo r and participatin g in Class Members ' IEP meetings; (c) submitting claims fo r comp ensatory education; (d) submitting fonn al compl aints to Ravenswood andlor the COE requesting due process hearings; and (e) condu cting other related activities as necessary. In the event that the current contract with Parents Helping Parents has to be replaced, Plaintiffs ' counsel shall select replacement Parent Advocates. The CDE wi ll contract with the C;\NrPotlb IIPAl IB 1\K.DP'.2 163064_ I I .DOC 311 2!200) 1 : :]6 AM 19 replacement Parent Advocates within 45 days from receipr of notice from Plaintiffs' counsel of the identity of the replacement Parent Advocates. In the event that iT becomes necessary' to train th e Parent Advocates, the Monitor shall develop or identify a training pro gram, which shall be paid for by the CDE. 12.0 Modifications to and Approval ofSuppIem ems to Ihe Revised RCAP Any Party (the " Initiating Party") or the Moni tor may submit to all other Parties and the Monitor recommendations to supplement or r:p.odify the Requirements set forth in the Revised RCAP. The Parties shall have 20 days to review and submit their conunents to the Initiating Party regarding the proposed modifications or supplements. The N!oritor, in his discretion, may also submit his comments to all the Parties within the 20 day dead l in~. Within 15 days thereafter, all Parties shall meet and confer in an effort to reach agreement regarding the proposed modifications or supplements. Within 15 days thereafter, any Party may file and serve a motion to supplement or modify the Revised ReAP or this decree in a manner consistent with any of the proposed modifications or supplements. 13.0 Determination that FAPE is Provided and that CDE has an Effective Afonitoring System in Place If, after considering the motion(s) of Defendants and any opposition thereto, and after conducting an Evidentiary Hearing, if necessary, the Court detennines that ( 1) Ravenswood has complied with all Requirements of the Revised ReAP, and (2) the state-level system in place is capable of ensuring continued compliance with the law and the provision of FAPE to children with disabilities in Ravenswood , there shall be a rebuttable presumption th at there exists in Ravenswood a system capable of providing FAPE to Class Members and in CDE a system to adequately monitor, supervise and ensure FAPE to Class Members. To overcome thi s C'\NrPonbl\P A1I8 1\KDP\21 63064 _ II .DOC 3/ 1212003 11 :)6 AM 20 . demonstrate, with specific evidence, , that Pres umption, the Class Members must afiirmativelv Ravenswood does not have a system capable of providing F.A..PE to Class ivlembers. At any time after an appropriate hearing, the Court may order any appropriate relief, including ordering the Distric. io continue iiS efforts to comply with the Revis ed RC,A.P , modifying the scope and terms of the Revised R CA.P , ordering the CDE to continue certain moni toring obligations, or dismissal with prejudice of Ravenswood and CDE in the event that they have complied with the terms of this Decree and R avenswood has a system cap able of providing F APE to Class Members. 14.0 Implementation of this Decree and Revised ReAP As set forth above, Ravenswood and the CDE shall begin implementing this First A..mended Consent Decree on March 1, 2003. The Monitor shall operate Wlder this First Amended Consent Decree, including the Requirements o f the Revised RCAP, upon its entry by the Court as requested by the Parties pursuant to their Stipulation aixl. [Proposed] Order or, if the Court derennines that Notice to the Class Members and a Fairness Hearing are required, upon the Court's preliminary approval oftru s First Amended Consent De::ree, as if it has be.en finally adopted as an order of the Court. 15.0 This Decree and the Revised RCAP Shall Become a Court Order Upon final adoption of this First Amended Consent Decree by the Court, this Decree, including the Requirements of the Revised RC.t\..P, and each and every one of its supplements or modifications, if any, shall beco me a Decree of the Coun, and shall entered b y this Court. The Court will retain jurisdiction C:\NrPortb(lf AU BI\KDPIl 16J064_ II, DOC }J1 2l2001 II :36 AM 21 Ie oe enforced as an order ensure implementation of the Decree. 16.0 Arrorneys 'fees Plaintiffs may se ek to recover reasonable attorneys ' fe es, costs and expenses for any work perfonned in this matter prior to entry of this First .<\mended Consent Decree and in the process of implernenting and enforcing the terms of thi s Decree (including the Revised ReAP), and for any work peIforrned between tina: approval of this Decree and the dismissal with prejudice o f t~1is action against both Defendants. Reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses shall be awarded in amounts agreed to by the Parties or, ab sent agreement, as determined by the Court or an agreed upon neutral upon Plamtiffs' noticed motions. Defendants reserve the right to oppose any motions by Plaintiffs for reimbursement of attorneys' fees, costs and expenses. l'othing in this First Amended Consent Decree limits or affects Plaintiffs ' rights to recover fe es, costs or exp enses incurred prior to entry of tbis First A.rr.ended Consent Decree, including fees, costs or expenses incurred. leading up to, implementing or enforcing the original Consent Decree, adopted as an order of the Court on January 18, 2000. Similarly, notlring in this First Amended Consent Decree limits or affects Ravenswood' s or CDE's rights to oppose any request for fees, costs or expenses sought by Plaintiffs or constitutes any admission by Ravenswood or CDE that it is ob ligated to pay for attorneys' fees. By entering into this First Amended Consent Decree. CDE and Ravenswood do not admit that the entry of this Decree constitutes a basis for an award of attorneys' fees. 17.0 Costs of Implementation Efforts The Defendants shall pay all the costs of implementing this First .Amended Consent Decree unti l the Court determines that they have complied with all of the requirements under this Decree. pursuant to Paragraph 18. 10 below. Allocation of responsibilit y for such payments between the Defendants shall be determined by agreement of Defendants, or if they are unable to C:\NrPortbl\PALlBl \KDPI2 161Q6.U I. OOC 3/ 12.'2003 I i :J6 .~M 22 - - -- - - -_ .- agree, by further order of ihe Court. These payments shall include, but are not limited to, the following : 17.1 Monitor Costs. These costs shaH include payment of the Monitor ' s salary, payment of the salary for any monitori ng consu ltants hired by the Monitor pursuant to Paragraph 6.1.5 above, and paymen t of the salary for an assistant [0 the Monitor. The Nfonitor's salary shall be S700!day, not to exceed $ 150,000 annually without further order of the Court. Ravenswood shall also provide adequate office space, supp lies and equipment fo r the Monitor to perfonn his duties effectively pursuant to this D ecree. 17.2 Parent Advocates. The Defendants shall pay for all costs and fees of Parents Helping Parents. Such amount shall be limited to S50,000 per year, \\·i thout further order of the Court. 17.3 Expenses of Parent Members of the Revised ReAP Committee. The Defendants shall pay reasonab le expenses fo r participation by parents in the Revised ReAP Committee meetings. The Defendants shall pay for such reasonable expenses within 45. days frOID a request fo r payment. These funds are intended to assist those parents who are obliged to miss work or who must pay for child care in order to participate in such meetings. 17.4 Neutral to Resolve Class Members' Cornpensatorv Education and Other CompensatoD' Claims. The De fendants shall pay the costs and fees of a med iator, an early neutral evaluator or hearing officer ("Neutral") from the Special Education H earing Office, in order to assist the resolut ion of Compensatory Education Claims of Class Members. 17 .5 Notice to Class. If the Court determines that l\'"otice to the Class and a Fairness Hearing are required prior to final adoption of this First Amended Consent Decree, the Defendants shall pay the costs of pro\oiding notice to the Class Members regarding the Fairness C:\."I rPortbIIPAlIB I IKDP\! t63()(.4_1 i. DOC 3/12.'2003 11.36 AM 23 '- Heanng, the final issuance of this First Arr.ended Decree, and any he aring to detetmine Ravens\i,!ood ' s comp li ance \..,ith the Revised ReAP. 17 ,6 Attorneys' Fees. In the event attorne ys' fees andro! costs are agreed upon or are awarded by the Court io Plaintiffs, the Defendants shall pay for such fees and costs. 18.0 Release and Dismissal of Action 18.1 This First Amended Consent Decree incorporates by re ference the Release and Dismissal of Action found in Section F of the original Consent Decree, adopted as an Order of the Court on January 18 , 2000. Except expressly provided herein, this First ~t\.Jllended Consent Decree replaces and supercedes the original Consent Decree and the original ReAP. 18.2 It is further agreed and understood by and between the Parties that this First Amended Consent Decree settles and concludes the contempt proceedngs pending against Ravenswood arising from the October 4,2001 Order finding Ravenswood in contempt, including any and all proceedings relating to whether Ravenswood has purged itsel f of contempt, and if not, the appropriate remedy. 18.3 The Parties hereto mutually agree to waive, release, and hold each other, and their respective officers, agents, employees, and attorneys, harmless from any and all claims, including claims filed with any administrative body, demands, or sui:s, or any other action based on, arising out of, or connected to the transactions, facts or events which gave rise to the October 4, 2001 Order findi ng Ravenswood in contempt and all proceedings relating to whether Ravens\vood has purged itself of contempt. 18.4 Nothing in this First Amended Consent Decree shall limit or fo reclose the rights of individual Class Members to bring claims or complaints against Ravenswood or the CDE for C :lNrPortbIIPA U B IIKDPI.2 16306J _ I I.DOC 3/1 2/2003 I I :J6 ..>./;1 24 , __ fail ure to provide individual services or otherwise comp ly with their obligations under state or federal law. 18.5 The Parties warrant and represeni that they have read and hereb y expressly waive all ri ghts under section 1542 of the Civil Code o f C ali forn ia, which provides as follows: "A general release does not extend to claims which the credilOr does not know or suspect to exist in her favo r at the time of executing the release, which ifkno\\"n by her must have materially affected her settlement with the debtor." 18.6 This Decree is entered into by and between the Parties to settle the current contempt prcceedings, and shaH not be construed as admission, express or implied, of fault, wrongdoing, liability andlor debt on the part of CDE, the Ravenswood Defendants, or any other entity or person released herein. 18.7 It is understood and agreed that this Decree is in full , final and complete settlement of any and all claims against CDE and the Ravens\vood Defendants based on, arising out o f or corinecred with the facts, transactions or events which gave rise to the October 4, .2001 Order and all proceedings relating to whether Ravenswood purged it5elf of contempt, except for the matters set fo rth in Paragraph 18. 18.8 It is Wlderstood and agreed that this Decree shan inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, a"ld assigns of the Parties. 18.9 It is understood and agreed that, except as expressly set forth herein, this Decree supercedes all prior negotiations, commitment, representations, promises, understandings, statements of siipulations, oral or \vri rten, between the Parties or th eir officers, employees, agents and attorneys, and this Decree reflects the entire agreemen t of the Parties. This Decree does not C.\t"rPortbl\P".UB I \K!lP''; 163064_1 1.OOC )/ 1212003 1 ! ,:;6 .A M invalidate previous agreements for the pro\lision of comp ensatory educatio n or other services to individual class members. 18.1 0 u pon detennination by the Court that Ravenswood and ~he CDE have complied with the requirements of this First Amended Consent Decree, including the Revised ReAP , and there exists at Ravenswood a system capable of providing F.A.P E to Cl c..ss M embers, the Action shall be dismissed with prejudic e by the Court. 19. 0 Responsibility for Obtaining Court Approval of the Tenns ol T71is Decree 19.1 lf the Court detennines that Notice to the Class Members and a Fairness Hearing are required prior to final approval of this First Amended Consent Decree, within four weeks of that determination, Counsel fo r Ravenswood shall prepare all pleadings and papers necessary to obtain the Court's preliminary approval of the tenus oftbis Decree. Counsel for Ravenswood shall also pre~are all pleadings and papers 'necessary to obtain the Court's final approval of the tenns of this Decree, Counsel for Ravenswood shall prepare the above·mentioned pleadings and papers in ·consultation with the counsel for all Parties, and shall submit such papers to cOWlsel for all Parties for their approval before filing the papers with the Court. 20.0 Notice to Class 20.1 If the Court determines that Notice to the Class Members and a Fairness Hearing are required ?rior to fi nal adoption of this First Amended Consent Decree. Counsel for Ravenswood shall prepare a proposed notice plan for providing class members with notice of the Fairness Hearing and notice of this First Amended Consent Decree after final approval by the Court. Notice of this action, ihe propose::! resolution agreed to by the Parties, the Fairness Hearing, and the Class Members' right to object at the Fairness Hearing shall be sent to all ascertainable class members and publ is h~d in local newspapers. Upon final approval of this C:I.NrPortbl\f' ALl8 I\KDPIl1 63064 _ II. OOC 3/121200) II 36 AM 26 Decree by the Court, notice will be sent to a\l ascertainable Clas s Members informing the Class , Members and their Parents/Guardian(s) of this Decree and their rights to : (1 ) request ne\\' I evaluations of Class Members; (2) participate in IEP team meetings; (3) submit claims for Compensatory Education claims pursuant to Paragraph 3.4; (4) submit compensatory claims pursuant to Paragrapb 1i .3; (5) submit noncompliance complaints to Ravenswood or the CDE or requests for due process bearings; (6) receive assistance from the Par~t Advocates; and (7) object to any Party's mOlion for a detennination that the Revised RC.AY has been implemented. FerCDE: Approqd, as to FO!lH: Name: Title: 'Kror..icl( Mosko"'itz T iedmann & Girard Date: Date: For Ravenswood: N~e: _ _____________________ Thomas F. Casey III, Esq. Miguel Marquez Couney Counsel Title: ____________ Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ For the Plaintiffs: (2!~--.. Robert P. Feldman, Esq. Colleen BaI, Esq. Arlene Mayerson, Esq. Disability Rights Education Defense Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Clas s ~se l . Date : ~ \''2-1 "2.ev") Fund, Inc. Class Counsel Date: ______ __ _ _ _ William Koski, Esq. Youth & Education Law Proj ect Class Counsel Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ C:\NrPortbi\P ALiS t\KD?Il16 JOfA_ ll.OOC 311212003 ! I : ~6 AM 27 Decree by the Court, nonce will be sent to all ascertainable Class Members informing the Class Members at.d their ParentslGuardian(s) oftbls Decree and their rights to: (1) request new evaluations of Class Members; (2) participate in IEP team meetings; (3) S'J.bmit claims for Compensatory Education claims pursuant to Paragraph 3.4; (4) submit compensatory claims pursuant to Paragraph 17.3; (5) submit noncompliance complaints to Ravenswood or the CDE or requests for due process hearings; (6) receive assistance from the Parent Advocates; and (7) object to ru:y Party's motion for a determination that the Revised ReAP has been implemented. For CDE: Approved as to Form: Name: Title: - - - - - - -- - - Ann M. D~e: Murray, Esq. Kronick Moskovitz Tiedmann & Girard _ ________________ Date: . __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ For Ravenswood: For the Plaintiffs: Robert P. Feldman, Esq. Coll= Ba!, Esq. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Class Counsel Date: _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ Arlene.Mayerson, Esq. Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, Inc. Class Counsel ________________ D~e: William Koski. Esq. Youth & Education Law Project Class Counsel D~e: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ C:INri'ortbN'At..m PX0Pl2163064_1l.00c 212tVlOO, 2:12 PM 27 CDl or requests for a u!! prQ Ce~5 hearings: (6) receive ('.ssista"1c~ fr om the Parent Advocates; ar.d (7) object to Ul:y p ,,:-ty 's motion for a determil~alion thal the Re:v1sed RCA.P has been :m p ! eme~lLcl. rcr CDE: Approved as to For,m: Name: AM M. Murray, Esq. Kronick Moskovitz Tiedmann & Tide: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ D.teo _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Gitard Date: _ _ _ _ __ _ __ For Ravenswood: Name: Tit!o: ----------- Date: Thomas F. Casey III, Esq. )"1iguel Marquez County Counsol Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ For the Piruntitfs: Robert P. Feld= . E'q. Colleen Bal, &q. Wi lson Sonsilli GoocL';eh & Rosati Class Counsel Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Ud@4,~rJ.~=fi2h___ (Z?L'1::===-Arlene Mayerson, Esq. Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, Inc. Class Counsel Date: 2-?j ~ $b. -':-'=-C~7"C:'----- Willirun Koski, Esq. Youth & Education Law Project Class Counsel D ~.te ; '- .C:\W{N{lOWSI1'ClnPCl'....y {1Il<:rT\<.... 1r..Si'200, J:J& I'M F l k~\(;untcIl.U Ef>Wl'G~O P::,; 91.i. -',l,1-9J Amend.:'!.l C U"Wlll.'ct~e.DOC Decree by ti".e Court, notice: will be sent to all ascertamable Class yrembers informing the Class Members and their ParentslGuardian(s) ofthis Decree and their rights to: (1 ) request new evaluations of Class Members; (2) participate in IEP team meetings; (3) submit claims for Compensatory Education claims pursuant to Paragraph 3.4; (4) submit compensatory clrums pursuant to Paragraph 17.3; (5) submit noncompliance complaints to Ravenswood or the CDE or requests for due process hearings ; (6) rec:ive assistance from the Parent Advocates; and (7) object to any Party' s motion fo r a detemtination that the Revised ReAP has been implemented. ForCDE: Approved as to Form: Name: Title: - - - - - - - - - Date: _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ AI11l M. Mumy, Esq. Kronick Moskovitz Tiedmann & Girard Date: "_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ For Ravenswood: Thomas F. Casey m, Esq. Miguel Marquez County Counsel Date: ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Name: Title: - - - - - - - -- - Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ For the Plaintiffs: Robert P. Feldman, Esq. Colleen Bal, Esq. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Class Counsel Date: Arlene Mayerson, Esq. Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, Inc . Class Counsel Date: ~ ·vL· tlliaffiKoski. Esq. Youth & Education Law Project Class Counsel Date: Z~ ~3 fLl. . C :\NrPOr'lbIl.PA UBI \ KOPU 16J064 II .DOC 2ntllZOO3 2:i2 PM - 27 ----------7' ;gTO~ /I. ~ 4 ' f l For California Department ofEducarion and SupmnJepdent of Public Education: NrunPt:ri:,e Title; Ch i ef Deputy Date; MARCH 10..,L 2003 ~ Ann M. Ylurray, Es~ / Kronick Moskovitz Tiedmann &--. G~~d Date: . n ~ 7lJ~)~ 20",-" , Approved as to{onn~ For State Board of Educarion: ~q" 7J ADll M. Murray, Esq. Kronick M oskovitz Tiedmann & Girard~ Dat e : / /, C:\NrPOftbIIl'ALIB 1 1KD!'\216~Q6o\ I1.1XX 3nnOO3 1:404 PM 28 .:2CO.3' Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the RavenSlvood City School District The Board 1S ~esohred. October 31,2002 to and does p.ereby adoI': trJ.e: fcl:o';"i:1g procedu:-e to be followed to 511 ar.v vacar;c· ..·m (he, OfEce . of Supen:ltenc.eT'.: of:ne R.aver.s'w·ood Citv , . . School DIstriCt: Tr.e Board ofTnlStees sr.ail SppCL'1t a Screening Committee composed 0: three II'.embe:-s, who iliaD be :-espec:ed 3...'1d knowledgeable people i ..: the fieLd of education and learning, s"1d at least one of whom shall have knowledge concening special ec.ucation. At least one rrember ofl1e Sc:ee:ling COITL"Dirtee shall be chosen fromthe attached list or from ar: additional list supplied by ~Qmsel for the plain::lffs ir.. the Emma C. v, Delaine Eastin litigation. The meJ.::lbe:-s oftf~e Screerjng Committee shall no~ have a prior business relationship vnth t.'1e District. 2. The Board ofTru.c;tees shall prov:de to the Screening Committee a description of the ~ ob.~duties and qualificatioI"-s for the position of Superintenderi'L ofllie Ravenswood Cit:" School District. 3. The Screening COITJlUit:ee shall be empowered by the Board of Trustees to inf;erv:ew and investigate the qualifications of ca"'ldidates for the position of Super,lltende:1t of the Ravens'~'ood City School District. 4. The Screenir_g Committee shall ;rrovide to t...'1e Board of T:n.:stees a lis"': of those candidates that the Screening Comn:ittee, IJ1 its independent judgment, finds to be qualified for 6e position of Superintendent. This determination by the Screening Committee shaD be by majon-:y vote. 5. The Board of Trustees shall either (1) selec~ a candidate for the position of Superintendent oftne·Rav=nswooc. City School District from among those ca."ldidates found to be qualified by the Screening Committee, or (2) reject each ofthe candidates and direct t.1.e Screening Committee to consider additional candidates. 6. The Board of Trustees shall not appoiD.t a person to -tJ1E: position of Superintendent of~:1e. Ravens\vcod City School Di~trict who has not been rOLL"'1d to be quali5ed 'oy the Screening COITJ1l1i:tee, ResolL!.~ion .Ao.o?ted this 31 II day of October, 2002. Rubotn Abrica, Board President Beard of Trustees Ravenswood City School District