Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents tell Kaneland board their child was denied school access; parents urge review of special-education practices
Summary
Two parents told the board their son was outplaced and denied access to school, alleging the district violated his rights under FAPE; speakers called for accountability, improved training and better inclusion supports. No formal district rebuttal was recorded at the meeting.
Parents and local advocates used the public-comment period to press Kaneland Community Unit School District 302 officials on special-education decisions they say removed a child from school without adequate notice or support.
Giovanna Owens of Montgomery told the board her son, diagnosed with Down syndrome, was denied access to school for 13 days and was turned away on Nov. 15 despite prior discussions with the special-education team. "This approach to exclude our son from his school undermines the discussions we've had with the team and the special education department and disregards his rights under FAPE," Owens said during public comment, adding, "quite frankly, it is illegal." She urged the board to investigate staffing, training and the district's approach to inclusion.
Chris Duffy, who described himself as director of disability services at a local house of worship and an Elburn resident, spoke in support of Owens and Ozzie. Duffy said inclusive settings improve outcomes for students with and without disabilities, cited national research and urged the district to prioritize inclusive placements and staff training rather than outplacement. "By outplacing Ozzie, the district is not only sidelining his rights, but also depriving other students of the chance to grow in empathy and leadership," he said.
Rob Owens, who spoke during the second public-comment period, told the board he had not seen proactive outreach or support during the weeks his son was without education and urged the district to adopt better communication and accountability for families of students receiving special education services.
The transcript records these allegations and emotional appeals but does not include a formal response from district leaders during the public-comment slot. Board members did not debate while speakers were presenting; the record notes that a second public-comment opportunity would be available later in the meeting and that administration offered to supply follow-up information after the meeting if requested. The transcript does not record a corrective action or a scheduled administrative follow-up reported out during the meeting.
Next steps: The parents urged the board to review staffing and training in special education and to respond to the family's concerns; the transcript shows no formal remedy or timeline announced during the meeting.
