Faulty procedures, but ‘no bad guy’ in U-CF residency probe

Despite a report from the Chester County Intermediate Unit saying that the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District administration did everything right in handling a residency issue, questions remain.

While some questions —along with a weak investigative procedure — relate to the current school administration, one question relates to a former school superintendent.

But, according to the Intermediate Unit’s Executive Director Joe O’Brien, “There’s no bad guy here.”

At issue is whether or not there was some sort of deal made between the current superintendent and a family from Londonderry Township whose children have been attending district schools since 2004 when Jack Kenney was the superintendent of schools.

At the time, a Londonderry Township couple that owns a business property in the U-CF district sought to enroll their children in the district schools.

According to O’Brien, the family was told that all they needed to do was show a drivers’ license, a tax bill and a utility bill connected to the district and they would be considered residents. The family provided that information.

“In my opinion, that was a flaw in the policy,” O’Brien said. “That was the deal made at the time when I don’t think anybody cared.”

He added that the district’s solicitor was not consulted and would not have given that advice.

Current Superintendent John Sanville inherited the situation when he took over from Sharon Parker in 2011. On learning of the residency concerns, Sanville initiated an investigation, with the school board retaining a private investigation company, CFR, to do the job.

The investigation established the family was living in Londonderry Township, not in the Unionville-Chadds Ford district. Sanville told the family in May, June and again in July of 2012 that their children could not attend district schools.

According to O’Brien, the children were actually dis-enrolled for a brief period of time.

In August of 2012, Sanville told the family the kids could attend U-CF schools if they slept in the business property four nights per week.

In an interview, Sanville said he didn’t change his mind.

“I didn’t change my mind. I set more stringent requirements,” he said.

When questioned about “sleeping” at the in-district property versus actually living there, Sanville said he saw no difference.

It was suggested that it’s possible the kids could be going to the actual residence in Londonderry after school to play with friends, do home work and eat dinner there before being driven to the in-district property just before bedtime.

“They do live there,” Sanville said. “I’ll let the IU report stand on its merits.”

Yet, there has been no full verification that they actually live in district.

The report says that in March, April and May of 2013, Sanville and Business Manager Bob Cochran did drive-byes and saw a vehicle registered to the family parked at the in-district property, but there was no mention of any human activity going on there. There was no mention of people being observed, no mention of lights or televisions being on, just that a car was parked there. A surveillance of the Londonderry Township property by private investigators was inconclusive, the report said.

Nor was there any indication that neighbors of the in-district business property were questioned about people living at that property.

O’Brien said this second investigation was weak, that Sanville should not be doing the investigations.

“One of my recommendations was the board needs to clean up its processes and procedures,” he said.

State law says students must actually live in the district in which they go to school, but O’Brien said districts have some latitude based on a precedent set in a Cumberland Valley residency case from 2000.

It was Sanville who referred the family to the Cumberland Valley case.

O’Brien said Sanville did the right thing by telling the family the kids couldn’t attend district schools, but acknowledged that the crux of the issue is “When did the ‘no’ become a ‘yes.’”

He could not comment on a separate document he hadn’t seen, a memorandum from the school district solicitor that mentions a June 1, 2012 meeting between the parents and Sanville. That memorandum characterizes the meeting as “confrontational.”

It was in that meeting when one of the parents said they spend more time in the Londonderry home than in the district property.

In an Aug. 1, 2012 meeting, Sanville reminded the family that they were not district residents.

O’Brien said the family asked a direct question that day: What do we have to do to establish residency?

Sanville’s response, O’Brien said, was that the kids had to live at the district property four nights per week. He even gave the family a copy of the Cumberland Valley decision, according to O’Brien.

“The family said they would do that,” he said.

“I can’t find a villain,” O’Brien added. “The family asked a question [in 2004] and they got an answer, a lenient answer. Later somebody checks and it doesn’t seem right, but nobody knew the arraignment,” he said.

According to O’Brien’s report, the board has two ways to approach queries about establishing residency. It can be transparent and helpful by laying out the various ways, or it can be tough and take the attitude that the burden of proof is solely on the family based on the information the family provides with no help from the district. The board must periodically review the procedure whenever it reviews district policies, O’Brien added.

O’Brien said he is confident that board is now doing the right things with the right policies.

About Rich Schwartzman

Rich Schwartzman has been reporting on events in the greater Chadds Ford area since September 2001 when he became the founding editor of The Chadds Ford Post. In April 2009 he became managing editor of ChaddsFordLive. He is also an award-winning photographer.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 1.67 out of 5)
Loading...

Comments

comments

This Post Has One Comment

  1. mjwalter

    What type of business are these children allowed to sleep at? A restaurant? A gas station? A dry cleaner? Certainly these establishments are not amenable to sleeping unless there is an apartment attached!

Leave a Reply