Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Special Education topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves 30‑day IGA with Litchfield for level‑D special‑education placements; orders separate legal review

Liberty Elementary District Governing Board · July 15, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After hours of questions about conflicts of interest, liability and invoicing, the Liberty Elementary board approved a short‑term (30‑day) IGA with Litchfield's White Tanks Learning Center so students have placements at the start of school. The board required separate legal review by counsel not representing the other district.

The Liberty Elementary District governing board voted to approve a 30‑day intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Litchfield Elementary School District to send an estimated six Liberty students to the White Tanks Learning Center, a level‑D placement, while the board secures independent legal review.

The item drew extensive questioning from board members, who pressed administration on who negotiated the IGA, whether a single law firm had prepared documents for both districts and whether conflicts of interest were adequately disclosed and waived. Board member Todd raised those concerns repeatedly, saying the same attorney and law firm appeared to represent both parties and that the district "cannot have a lawyer that represents both districts" sign both sides of the agreement.

Dr. Doozy said the superintendent had signed a conflict‑of‑interest acknowledgment and that additional attorneys had also reviewed the agreement, but board members said they wanted the district to obtain legal advice from counsel that does not provide general counsel to the other district.

Todd also criticized several contract terms he said exposed Liberty to risk, including a 15‑day invoice payment term, limited contractual language describing Litchfield's service levels, lack of explicit indemnity language, and an apparent transfer of liability to Liberty for incidents that occur off its campus. He urged the board to seek a monthly cap and clearer dispute‑resolution and documentation processes, including access to footage or reports before charges would be invoiced.

Supporters of swift action noted the practical constraint that students need placements when school opens. Board member Zimmerman, among others, highlighted termination language in the IGA allowing either party to end the agreement on 30 days' notice; administrators said that clause provides an exit mechanism that earlier providers did not offer.

The board ultimately approved an amendment to accept the IGA for a 30‑day period while administration secures a separate attorney or law firm to represent Liberty and conduct a line‑by‑line review; the motion carried 4–0. Administration noted Litchfield had already passed the IGA at its meeting.

Next steps: administration will obtain independent legal review as directed and return with any recommended contractual edits for board consideration. The short approval is intended to ensure students have placements on the first day of school while the board completes its review.