County School Board Defends Overturning Fillmore District’s Expulsion of Student

Releasing detailed documents on a Fillmore High School student’s expulsion, county school board members Tuesday defended their decision to overturn the expulsion by claiming that the Fillmore school district failed to provide all the necessary documents to affirm its case.

Ventura County Board of Education President Marty Bates called the special meeting to respond to criticism of the board’s Oct. 30 action reversing the expulsion of the student, who brought a realistic-looking toy gun to school.

The Fillmore Unified School District board had expelled the student last year, citing violation of its “zero-tolerance” weapons policy.

Based on an appeal by the student’s parents, the county board ruled that the Fillmore board did not provide a photo or description of the toy gun nor copies of zero-tolerance policy posters and notices to students and parents, invalidating the expulsion.

The student did not threaten anyone with the toy gun, which was hidden in his clothing, and Fillmore district officials did not prove that the toy weapon was a dangerous object that would be addressed by the state Education Code, said Donald Hurley, assistant county counsel.

“If a district has an expulsion hearing, take it seriously,” Hurley said. “You’ve got to do your homework, look at the Education Code, and it is far better to put too much in than too little [information].”

County board members emphasized that they support weapons policies.

“I would like to get the word out that this board and other boards are really going to enforce the zero-tolerance policy,” Bates said.

But Fillmore schools Supt. Mario Contini berated the county board Tuesday for releasing the Fillmore student’s appeals hearing document and for intruding in the local board’s affairs.

County board member Wendy Larner twice contacted the parents of the Fillmore student to express concern over some errors in the boy’s transcript. The errors, due to a computer glitch, were discovered during the expulsion appeals hearing.

“Our board wants you to avoid using persuasive acts to convince private parties to open documents that are closed,” Contini said. “The local board needs some element of trust from the county board. There was a severe breach of trust and intrusion in the local district. We ask you to please place a little more trust in the local board.”

Problems in the district’s procedures for expulsions and appeals have been corrected and a detailed checklist created, he said. “The purpose of expulsion is to make the schools safer for the kids who stay in school,” he said.

Larner defended her actions, saying, “My concern really was for the student’s well-being. I did not in any way act in a way that undermined the [Fillmore] board to that parent.”

The Fillmore district’s legal counsel, Mildred Collins, said Larner’s actions “created the impression of dissatisfaction with the district. . . . This tended to place a wedge between the district and the parent.”

Fillmore school board members did not attend Tuesday’s meeting because they objected to the release of the appeals documents. The boy’s parents consented to it as long as anonymity was maintained.

Although finding the county board’s expulsion appeals ruling “absurd,” Fillmore board President Joanne King said earlier Tuesday that the county board must address concerns deeper than the single appeals case.

“I don’t feel the issue is our particular case,” King said. “The broader issue is their role. What they did is said and done, but the problem is how they handle things in general. They aren’t seeing what the consequences of what their decisions are. Either they don’t see it or they don’t want to see it.”

King said she believes that the county board’s actions, including reversal of the expulsion case, drives a wedge between local school boards and parents.

“The kid was back in school, crowing about his victory,” King said. “They’re saying, ‘Just go for a technicality, and it doesn’t matter what you do, you can get off.’ We’re hearing this attitude more and more.”

This is the latest in a string of county board actions that have angered local school boards. Local trustees denounced a vote in March to exclude Planned Parenthood and AIDS Care speakers from teacher-training seminars and a November decision to turn down a $500,000 federal jobs-training grant intended for local school districts.

A resolution to tell the county board not to “usurp the ‘local control’ of the school district boards” is being studied by school boards in the county. The resolution urges the county board not to jeopardize or restrict local boards’ opportunities to decide what is best for their students.