Letters/Comment 2-8-13

My name is Laura Shuler. I have been a resident of Rye for the past 14 years. My husband and I have raised our family here … our four children have attended Midland Elementary, Rye Middle School and Rye High School. We’ve been supportive of the schools, our kids have done well and we’ve never lodged a complaint.

So you can imagine my surprise on January 10 when, with no forewarning, I received a registered letter from a Kathleen Ryan, who identified herself as the Assistant Superintendent for Business of the Rye City School District. In it, I was informed that my daughter, who is currently a senior at Rye High School, would be expelled from the school in eight days hence. This was based on quote “facts” that were substantiated by surveillance of my daughter that documented that she predominantly lives at (another address) in CT and is therefore not legally entitled to attend the public schools.”

The letter went on to say that I had a right to an “informal meeting” with Ms. Ryan to understand the factual basis for her decision to expel my daughter, where I could provide documentary evidence to try and disprove her “facts”. In other words, my daughter was guilty, I was guilty and it was now up to us to prove our innocence.

Needless to say, I was shocked and upset.

For the record:

•  I am a resident and taxpayer of Rye.
•  My daughter lives with me and my husband.
•  She spends three nights a week at the home of her biological father, with whom I share joint custody.

Given those facts, I couldn’t imagine how or why my daughter’s right to attend Rye High School would be called into question. Or why the district would resort to covert spying on her, rather than contacting me directly to discuss a concern.

I contacted Ms. Ryan and Dr. Alvarez, the Superintendent of Schools, for an explanation. I wanted to know why my daughter had been targeted, what type of surveillance had been used, and what they were prepared to do to correct the situation, given the true facts.

In a phone call and follow up letter, Ms. Ryan told me that the eligibility requirement for a student to attend Rye City Schools is not whether he or she predominantly lives in Rye with a tax-paying parent, but is instead where he or she spends the majority of school nights. When I said that I had never heard of such a rule, Ms. Ryan said it was a regulation set forth by the Commissioner of Education.

I contacted the Commissioner’s office. They told me that there is no such requirement at the state level and that determination of student residency is left to the Board of Education of each district. I have scoured the Rye City School District’s Resident Student Admissions policy and its Application for Resident Students and have been unable to find a single mention of school-night-sleeping arrangements as a requirement for establishing residency.

And yet, this supposed regulation was the basis for setting up covert surveillance of my daughter and lead to a unilateral decision to remove her from the school I help pay for.

I guess I made a persuasive-enough argument in my phone call with Ms. Ryan to dissuade her from moving forward with the expulsion. I received a letter from her on January 15th in which she said that my daughter would be allowed to continue to attend Rye High School if she spends the majority of school nights sleeping at my home for the remainder of the school year. (While I found this to be over-reaching and invasive, at least I didn’t have to submit to a home inspection, something Ms. Ryan said I might be asked to do to prove my daughter lives with me.)

In her letter of reprieve, there was no mention of the details of the surveillance that was used on my daughter, and there was certainly no apology for the way the District had conducted itself in this matter.

And so, I am here today, to ask the School Board for some clarity. As a tax-paying member of this community, a homeowner and a parent, I think it is fair and reasonable to know the answer to the following questions:

Are you aware of and do you condone the District’s use of covert surveillance of its students? If so,

•  What are the conditions under which surveillance of a student is considered warranted?
•  Who is allowed to authorize it?
•  How is it being conducted?
•  How does a parent or student who has had this happen to them gain access to the records? (I do know that under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), I have the right to inspect these records within 45 days of having made the request to see them. As I requested this in writing on January 10th, the District has 45 days, or until February 24th, to provide them to me.)

Is a child’s right to attend Rye City Schools predicated on the number of school nights a student sleeps at the home of a parent in the district, rather than the fact that their parent is a tax-paying custodial resident? If so,

a. Where is this written down?

b. What is the purpose of this requirement, other than the targeting and removal of children of divorced parents from the school system? In our phone call, Ms. Ryan did say in that my daughter was one of a group of students under investigation. I’d like to know if they are all children of divorce.

Do you believe that the concept of due process and the bill of rights should govern the district’s interactions with students and their parents? If so, how can covert surveillance, false accusations and unilateral judgment be justified in a blue-ribbon school district where our children are being taught the value of our democratic rights to privacy and due process?

I’d like to know the answers to these questions. And I know a lot of other parents would too.

But perhaps the person who most deserves answers is my daughter. She’s done nothing wrong. And yet, the school district that she has called her home since she entered it in first grade targeted her, spied on her and was very ready and willing to throw her out.

Ironically, on January 9th, the day before I received the letter from Ms. Ryan telling me of “the surveillance”, of her “facts” and her decision-to-expel, my daughter attended an anti-bullying program put on by the Rye High School administration. In it, they talked about their intolerance of the behaviors that defines bullying: the intimidation of others through an imbalance of power that is characterized by harassment and threats.

Ironically, that’s exactly what arrived in a letter from the Rye City School District the very next day.

Sincerely,

Laura Shuler