Parents tell board about special‑education failures and allege coach misconduct; district response not recorded at meeting

During the citizen comment period, several parents and community members raised detailed concerns about special‑education services and student safety, and two speakers alleged misconduct by an Osborne Park High School coach.

Brittany Robinson said her son experienced severe school anxiety and school refusal and was placed in a private day school placement that she described as restrictive. "He was unable to attend school and he told me that he did not know how to live anymore," Robinson said, and she asserted the district had defended the placement during earlier internal discussions. Robinson also said that the family is pursuing federal litigation and read internal PWCS emails into the record.

Jessica Young, a mother and PTO leader, urged stronger, more consistent supports for students with special needs, including access to American Sign Language for a nonverbal child who uses ASL, clearer ESY (extended-school‑year) calculations and timely transition planning. "If they need it, the law says they receive it," Young said, describing an instance in which her family felt supports were reduced without data to justify the change.

Troy Harris and Calisha Harris raised ethics and accountability concerns about the Osborne Park varsity boys basketball coach, alleging the coach used school‑affiliated pages to promote private business content and displayed what commenters described as inappropriate imagery accessible to students. "Students' names, images and likeness should never be used in a manner that promotes personal interest or creates the appearance that students are being leveraged for private gain," Calisha Harris said. The speakers said they filed multiple complaints and that corrective action required intervention from communications and executive staff.

The meeting record includes these allegations and the speakers' statements; the board did not provide an on‑the‑record substantive response or a public update on investigative outcomes during the June 3 meeting beyond acknowledging the comments. Some speakers said they had already taken matters to higher levels (federal court or executive cabinet). The absence of an immediate district reply in the meeting minutes means these claims were recorded as allegations and not resolved at the dais.

Next steps: The public commenters called for follow‑up and accountability. The meeting transcript records the allegations and the board's receipt of them; it does not document any board action or staff report addressing the specific cases during this meeting.