Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comments Legal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and residents urge review of legal spending and raise special-education complaints during public comment
Summary
Two public speakers at the March 11 meeting urged the board to review legal fees and attorneys' roles in special-education matters; one parent accused the district of denying a free appropriate public education and of spending heavily on legal bills rather than services.
Two Powhatan residents used the meeting's public-comment period to press the school board on legal spending and special-education practices.
Tammy C., identified in the record as a Powhatan resident, told the board she had filed notice alleging a civil rights violation and a denial of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). "By law, when a child has an IEP, a doctor's note should be accepted without question," Tammy C. said in the public comment; she accused district officials of "conspiring to obstruct my son's education" and asserted the district had spent more than $50,000 on legal fees rather than paying about $1,300 she described as necessary for her son's education. Tammy C. said she had withdrawn a due-process filing after attorneys breached her son's records in February 2024.
Kathy Halverson, who also addressed the board, said the law firm Sands Anderson had been engaged to perform tasks beyond what she expected of outside counsel. "They have been approving and not approving FOIA requests, writing letters, attending IEP meetings, and even writing IEPs," Halverson said. She traced a timeline she said showed Sands Anderson was not involved until February 3, 2022, and contrasted that with the earlier 2021 firm contracting. Halverson urged the board to review procurement and financial oversight related to legal invoices, and questioned whether the district had appropriate signatures and checks in place for legal expenditures.
Board members and staff did not provide a detailed response during the public-comment period. Later in the meeting a school official clarified that Penn Foster is not an accredited program by the Virginia Department of Education and cannot be used by the division to award credit toward graduation; the speaker noted families may use it as an independent homeschooling resource but that the division cannot apply it for graduation credit.
The comments put legal spending and special-education practices on the public record; board members asked staff and legal counsel to review procedures and financial oversight as part of ongoing governance work.
