Redford Union board hears plea to restore special‑needs supports; superintendent outlines student discipline and virtual‑program options

A Redford Township resident asked the Redford Union Schools District No. 1 school board on Tuesday to restore sensitivity training, a mentoring program and smaller classes for special‑needs students, saying her grandson has been targeted and ‘‘set up to fail.’’

The request came during public comment from Patricia Cleggett, who identified herself as a Redford Township resident and grandmother of Milton Miller, a ninth‑grade special‑needs student. Cleggett described incidents of bullying, limited co‑taught class options and the removal of smaller‑class placements she said previously helped students work toward a diploma rather than a certificate.

The appeal followed superintendent remarks about a separate disciplinary incident involving a different student who made a threat of violence, which led to a long‑term suspension and the district offering reenrollment in its virtual program. Superintendent Mr. Witt said the student was never expelled and that the district has offered the student another chance in the virtual program, but that the student has completed only 4 of the 22 credits the district records as required for graduation.

Cleggett told the board that her grandson was placed into general‑education classes despite being a special‑needs student and that smaller, like‑minded class groupings, sensitivity training for students, and a mentoring program had previously been in place. "What I'm requesting is the sensitivity training be restored, the mentoring program be restored, and smaller classes for special needs students so they are given every possible chance to receive a certified diploma and not a certificate," she said.

Cleggett described bullying incidents she says continued after initial discipline, including an episode she said resulted in another student being expelled for striking her grandson. She said her grandson was left isolated at lunch, mocked in small groups and physically hit with pieces of paper; she described him as a "gentle giant," 6'4" and about 173 pounds, who does not defend himself.

Superintendent Mr. Witt described a separate matter raised in an email some board members received that concerned a student who threatened gun violence against others in a particular program. "The bottom line is there was an incident where the student made a serious threat of violence towards others and did so in a, very serious manner," Witt said. Because the report arrived late on the evening before a school day, Witt said the district canceled school for that program the next day while administrators assessed safety and disciplinary options.

Witt said police or prosecutor action was considered but, to his knowledge, did not materialize; he also said he has not followed up with the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office to confirm whether charges were pursued. The student received a long‑term suspension and was later enrolled in the district's virtual learning program. Witt said the student has completed four credits toward the 22 credits the district records as required for graduation and is now 19 years old.

Board members asked whether other in‑person alternatives existed for the 19‑year‑old student. Witt said the student had requested placement in the virtual program and the district did not identify an in‑person placement they were comfortable offering given the circumstances. He added that the virtual program includes on‑site teacher support and that students may be given in‑person opportunities even while enrolled virtually. Reenrollment requires proof of district residency; district staff have contacted the student about steps to reenroll.

Board members also discussed best practices for board communication and the Michigan Open Meetings Act after the email was circulated to multiple trustees. One trustee urged colleagues to send questions through the superintendent to avoid reply‑all exchanges that could risk an Open Meetings Act violation.

The board took a roll‑call vote earlier in the agenda to approve routine checks; the vote was recorded as affirmative by board members present. The chair encouraged Cleggett to follow up with superintendent Witt, special education teacher Mrs. Dillard and the junior high principal to pursue her concerns, and district staff indicated someone would follow up with her after the meeting.

The board did not take formal action on the requests Cleggett raised during public comment. The superintendent said the district will reiterate expectations and supports available in the virtual program if the 19‑year‑old chooses to reenroll and that the student will need to complete a substantial amount of work to earn remaining credits.

The board also announced upcoming workshops and meetings, and the meeting adjourned.