Parents and staff raise special‑education and incident‑reporting concerns; board hears multiple safety complaints
Loading...
Summary
Several public commenters described problems with special‑education placements, delayed homebound services, inconsistent incident reporting and staff safety incidents. A parent and several staff urged clearer communication and quicker follow‑up for students with IEPs and for injured staff and students.
Multiple speakers at the June 17 Mount Vernon board meeting described troubling experiences related to special‑education placements and incident reporting.
A parent said her 6‑year‑old — who has an individualized education program (IEP) and behavioral needs — was moved into an advanced first‑grade class without the parent’s knowledge and later proposed for homebound instruction. She said district staff promised follow‑up calls that did not occur and that the child had been out of school for weeks with no summer or next‑year placement clarified.
Miss Ward, a parent, described two separate incidents that injured her child’s face and expressed frustration at conflicting descriptions from the school nurse and teacher. She said she requested an incident report but initially received inconsistent information; when she later found a note in her child’s bag, it identified the object as a tennis ball and she said the nurse did not contact her directly. "I just want a note," she told the board, adding that a written report is necessary to avoid hearsay if medical care is needed.
Several staff members also addressed workplace safety and student supervision. Elaine Singletary, a long‑time district employee, described an incident in which a student reportedly ran from a building and she said she was treated poorly afterwards; she said her check had been held and asked for investigation. Another commenter identified herself as a whistleblower and raised allegations of improper employee time reporting.
Trustees did not take immediate remedial action during the public session but acknowledged the seriousness of the complaints. The superintendent’s office and district staff were asked to follow up with individual complainants and to review incident‑reporting procedures and special‑education placement communications.

