Parent’s legal representative tells Desert Sands board of alleged four‑year special‑education compliance failures

A teacher and mandated reporter who said she spoke with the authorization of a student’s legal parent told the Desert Sands Unified School District Board of Education on June 10 that the district has repeatedly failed to follow special‑education procedures and federal privacy rules in a case dating to 2021.

Marjina Orantes said she submitted a packet to the board on behalf of John Ochoa, the legal parent of student Ariel Ochoa, and asked trustees to review a documented timeline of errors and to require an independent investigation. “Since 2021, mister Ochoa has maintained a detailed documented timeline now submitted for your review covering failures by both site and district personnel to follow federal educational law, FERPA, and California education code, as well as a valid court order mandating joint legal custody over educational decisions,” Orantes said.

Orantes alleged specific procedural failures: a special‑education referral that did not receive a response within the 15‑day legal deadline, an assessment plan issued only after more than 60 days and lacking required scope, and a cumulative file produced in 2025 that omitted the parent’s original referral letter despite that document appearing in a 2022 version of the same file. She said the missing referral letter was located only after formal complaints were filed with the U.S. Department of Education.

Orantes also said a Section 504 plan was finalized and implemented without the participation or consent of both legal custodians, despite a court order requiring joint educational decision‑making. “This is not about 1 mistake or 1 meeting. It's about a systemic breakdown in compliance over 4 years,” she told the board and asked trustees to ensure the student’s procedural rights were honored going forward.

The speaker requested that the board review the submitted timeline, intake records and any independent investigation materials and to take steps to ensure that similar oversights do not reoccur. The board did not announce any immediate remedial action on the record during the June 10 session.

Separately, other public commenters praised the district’s special‑education staff and recounted positive outcomes for individual students, underscoring a mixed public record that the board heard during the public‑comment period.

Orantes concluded by asking the board to consider the harm done when custodial rights and statutory timelines are not followed and to prioritize students’ legal protections in district processes.