Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent tells Regional School District 09 board that past special-education practices violated students’ rights, urges training
Summary
Parent Kristen Anstead told the board that previous leadership prioritized saving money over students’ legal rights, saying delays and missed evaluations left her children without timely IEPs. She urged the board to preserve recent corrective work and invest in professional development.
Kristen Anstead, a parent who said she has two children with individualized education programs, told the Regional School District 09 Board of Education that the district’s special-education program suffered rights violations under prior leadership and that recent work by current staff has been “cleaning up a massive mess.”
“I have spent not $5,000, $10,000, up into the 20s thousands of dollars… to advocate for my children,” Anstead said, describing long delays before her daughter was found eligible for special-education services. She said the district repeatedly failed to assess in all areas of suspected disability and that it took “almost two years” to get her daughter identified for services.
Anstead accused the previous administration of treating cost savings as a priority. She said current staff member Katherine has “been cleaning up a mess” and warned the board against hiring a replacement who would return the system to earlier practices. “Please don’t go backwards,” she said, urging the board to hire carefully and to provide districtwide professional development so teachers and administrators better recognize disabilities such as ADHD and dyslexia.
The parent called for mandatory training across general-education classrooms to reduce escalating behavior problems that can follow unrecognized or unsupported learning needs. “Behaviors are a manifestation of a lagging skill,” she said, paraphrasing the educator Ross Greene, and argued that earlier identification and support would reduce out-of-district placements and other costly interventions.
The board did not respond substantively during public comment; the meeting continued into routine reports and later budget and capital discussions.
Why it matters: Anstead’s remarks highlight ongoing community concerns about special-education identification and compliance, the cost and time burdens parents say they face when pursuing outside evaluations, and the board’s role in staffing and professional-development decisions that affect students with disabilities.
What’s next: The comment was part of the public-comment period; the district’s special-education director and administration were later referenced during budget and staffing discussions. The board did not take immediate action on Anstead’s requests during the meeting.
