Parent says district cut special-education transport after school year began; files complaint with state

Adam Poloz, a Moreland parent, told the Board of Trustees that the district unilaterally cut his 5‑year‑old son Elliot’s special‑education transportation this school year and that the change produced “serious safety incidents” in the first weeks of classes. Poloz said he has filed a formal compliance complaint with the California Department of Education.

Poloz said the student’s individualized education program (IEP) requires transportation both to and from school. He said the district used a contracted provider, EverDriven, for both morning and afternoon service in the prior year but moved his son to general‑education bus service this fall after an ordinary bus became available. “In just the first 3 weeks of school, there have already been 2 serious safety incidents,” Poloz said. He described one incident in which his son was dropped off at the wrong house and another in which the child was “left alone in the middle of a street with no adults” as he made his way to their building.

Poloz said the family convened an IEP meeting after the incidents, and that, in that meeting, “the director of special education flatly told us we are not changing the transportation plan.” He said staff did not adopt the family’s requested changes even after the parent cited legal obligations and the safety incidents. Poloz added that Fran English, described in his remarks as the district’s site identification director, made the decision to reduce services.

Poloz told the board he had filed a compliance complaint on Monday with the California Department of Education and that the district’s director of special education had been cc’d on the complaint. He asked the board to ensure that the district follows its prior funding and the board’s earlier budgetary action: “Less than a month ago, this room, you approved $200,000 budget for special‑education transportation,” Poloz said. “You made the right decision then. But it’s only the right decision if the district staff actually follow your guidance so Elliot can come home safe every day.”

Board members did not take action on the public comment during the meeting; board rules and the Brown Act were cited at the outset of the public‑comment period stating that unagendized items generally cannot be acted upon immediately. Poloz’s remarks were recorded during the public‑comment portion of the meeting and, by his account, have prompted a state compliance complaint.

Ending: The family’s complaint with the California Department of Education was the only formal step Poloz reported at the meeting. Board members did not announce any immediate changes to district transportation policy during the session; the board may request staff follow‑up under district practice for matters raised at public comment.