The School Committee briefly discussed the special education spending controversy at its meeting last week, with members wondering when they would finally get some concrete information from the Massachusetts Ethics Commission or the Worcester County district attorney’s office on the matter. Both are conducting investigations into questionable payments from last year, when Harvard paid roughly $30,000 for tuition at a private school for the child of a former school board member, allegedly without going through the proper procedures for approving such an out-of-district placement. Superintendent Tom Jefferson, who approved the placement, has defended the payments as a necessary cost-sharing agreement that was in the best interest of the child.
School Committee Chairwoman Willie Wickman said she has been talking with the board’s legal counsel on special education, who advised her that “you’ll hear from the powers that be when you hear from them.” In an interview this week, she complained that her board “has never heard anything official from anyone” concerning the investigations. “It would be nice to have something defined, so we can move on,” she said.
On Wednesday, a spokesperson for the district attorney’s office told the Press that “it’s an active, ongoing investigation.”
The state’s Ethics Commission, which investigates possible violations of the state conflict-of-interest law, has been looking into the matter since last winter. In an earlier interview, Special Education Director Charles Horn said that the commission told him that its investigation would likely take about six months. However, the executive director of the commission has recently resigned, and Wickman fears that the personnel change may slow down the commission’s work.
According to the Ethics Commission’s website, the enforcement division of the commission screens every complaint it receives to see if it falls within its jurisdiction. After that, it conducts a preliminary investigation, after which “the Commissioners vote on whether ‘reasonable cause’ exists to believe that the law has been violated. If the Commissioners find ‘reasonable cause’ the subject of the complaint is entitled to a public hearing before the Commission to present evidence and testimony on his own behalf, ” the website states. However, if no reasonable cause is found that a violation occurred, the case is closed and the records of the case remain confidential. The commission has the power to assess financial penalties and require restitution of funds if it finds a serious violation of the law. In such cases, a person being investigated has the right to appeal the commission’s decision to a superior court.
