Aisha Hiza (and daughter)
After ten weeks of generating bitter debate the controversial stay away order issued by ARPS School Superintendent Maria Geryk to single mom Aisha Hiza, who was advocating for her bullied child, has been lifted in its entirety effective June 1st.
Click to enlarge/read
Stay away order lifted
3/15 Stay Away Order
Temporary Town Manager Pete Hechenbleikner leaked the information published on the front page of today's Daily Hampshire Gazette although the draft letter he penned for the Amherst Select Board on this sad affair stated it was not a town issue but a Pelham police and school issue.
Draft of response to Vira Douangmany Cage's email last week
Select Board Chair Alisa Brewer had asked the Temporary Town Manager last week to respond to an incendiary email from Amherst School Committee member and State Legislature candidate Vira Douangmany Cage suggesting their silence constituted endorsement of social injustice.
Interestingly one of the only criticisms of deceased Town Manager John Musante at his last performance review was the Select Board did not like to be surprised by what they see in the local paper and wanted to be kept publicly informed about potentially controversial matters before it hit the news.
The brokered deal also involves Paul Wiley, former Crocker Farm Elementary School Principal and now ARPS ombudsperson.
Paul Wiley
On his Facebook page former School Committee member and nationally known diversity spokesman Amilcar Shabazz stated:
Click to enlarge/read
Oddly, only days after Maria Geryk issued a statement to the press defending her actions in this affair, she rescinds the stay away order without informing the media, and sent a copy of the order to the Pelham School Committee but requested they keep it confidential.
90 comments:
You mean Ed was not notified as well?
1: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! -- If DCF can not take custodial rights away from a parent without a court order, how the hell did Geryk get away with doing it?!?!? That is what she did....
I don't know who Brian Roffer is, nor particularly care, Geyrk's line about making him (and not the custodial parent) the emergency contact for her child is in violation of State & Federal law -- even the police are under very strict restrictions on what they can do with a minor without parental notification, particularly when it's a 7-year-old.
And the second part of that sentence is a FERPA violation, both ways. Absent a court order mandating it, you (a) can't deny a custodial parent access to their child's "record", nor (b) provide the same to anyone else (without permission). "Any personally identifiable information" is part of the "record" -- hence "any and all communications from the school" would be bound by FERPA if the were about the child.
Larry, even DCF can't violate FERPA, not without getting an emergency court order.
Geryk sure as hell can't, and it is grounds for DESE to yank her certificate. (It's also grounds for ED to terminate all Federal funds, or whatever lesser sanction they wish to impose.)
2: Notice how Geryk can't avoid "twisting the knife." She couldn't simply write that "the order is hereby lifted" and leave it at that -- something that Hiza's attorney will note should Hiza sue.
3: As to the Amherst Select Board, in which town is "170 Chestnut Street" located? Whose police department has primary law enforcement jurisdiction over that office, and hence what is done in it?
But I still can't believe GERYK did what she did...
No need. Somehow, Mr. ed will already know more about it than anybody else!!!
Wait... Pelham Police uses a Yahoo mail account? Yikes.
Ed can you explain again how you feel about Geryk? Have you presented the case to the International war crimes tribunal yet? Are you properly medicated?
And now Free Tom Brady !!!
And stop calling her Caligula, Ed. She's just a superintendent doing her job. People may not agree with all her decisions, but considering this an issue about bullying, abusive name calling seems all the more out of bounds.
This conversation is so sick. Dr. Ed~If I were you I would not take up my precious time and respond to anything these people are saying to attack you. At any rate--maria geryk is guilty of no less than committing horrendous acts against a woman and child of color! It is disgusting that that two police departments--in whatever form they participated in this--are complicit in these criminal acts. Welcome to Apartheid Amherst--where we now have to walk around with papers in our pockets saying we are free women--and no longer belong to the master!! Okay--administrators--you can take off your white pointed hoods--and long white robes--You can stop gathering at the local barn in the dark of the night--we know who the f*** you are!!!!
Why is "woman and child of color" mentioned here? Is the offense lesser for whites? Textbook racism.
Of color! (Why mention that? With an exclamation point to boot .)
Again with the anti cop sentiment.
3:34 doesn't know Ed very well.
Oh good, apartheid AND white goods in one post.
We have actually managed to reach a new height of stupidity and ridiculousness here....
STILL waiting for Ms. Hiza to allow the school department to speak on the matter. When she signs a release, then we'll know the rest of the story....
Wow! Talk about over the top! Someone even loonier than Mr. Ed. Where do you find these people Larry.
Maybe anon 3:34 was ed?
forget a court order mandating it, you can't deny a custodial parent access to their child's warrant. he only talks down or goes school. it's a nowwin situation
" And stop calling her Caligula, Ed."
I consider it appropriate, he also was charming for the first few months of his reign, and then became mad with power.
She's just a superintendent doing her job.
Much like he was just an Emperor doing his.
People may not agree with all her decisions,
That's like calling the Holocaust "a slight misunderstanding."
but considering this an issue about bullying, abusive name calling seems all the more out of bounds.
I didn't start until I got fed up with the abuse directed at me.
STILL waiting for Ms. Hiza to allow the school department to speak on the matter. When she signs a release, then we'll know the rest of the story....
STILL waitibg for Ms Geyrk to allow her doctor to tell us how much she weighs. When she signs a release then we'll know that as well.
Look, neither Aisha Hiza's personal life nor Maria Geyrk's weight is relevant to a review of what I consider serious professional misconduct perpetrated by Geryk.
anon 334 It has been confirmed that the police departments were not as involved as it was implied in the superintendents press releases.
I am thankful that the pelham school committee will tally their superintendent votes separately for our community to read easily. They will then submit their votes in to the three committee results for the overall evaluation. This will make it much easier for us to evaluate our school committee for re-election and whether we feel they are holding the administration to task on school goals.
Ed can you explain again how you feel about Geryk? Have you presented the case to the International war crimes tribunal yet? Are you properly medicated?
And people get upset with me calling her Caligula?
Ed I am still waiting to get an answer to the parent that threatened the kid during recess and wasn't held accountable. I am curious about what that means if Pelham gives a bad evaluation ... seperately.. from everyone else.. what that may mean for the future.
Let's just say that Pelham pays for 4% of the annual salary of the supt. BFD
Oh poor baby, Ed.
Part 1 This is why Aisha wins... and Maria loses.. This was the mistake... Fed law.. Like the NW DA office the court also recommends policy and protocol around stay away orders. Second, the ARSU failed to provide Mr. Cyr with adequate alternative channels of communication. Furthermore, physical participation in open school board meetings is a form of local governance, and to the extent that Mr. Cyr cannot be present at these meetings to communicate directly with elected officials, his First Amendment right of free expression is violated. Hodgkins v. Peterson, 355 F.3d 1048, 1063 (7th Cir. 2004); see also Riley v. Nat'l Fed'n of Blind, 487U.S. 781, 791 (1988) (“[T]he government, even with the purest of motives, may not substitute its judgment as to how best to speak for that of speakers and listeners; free and robust debate cannot thrive if directed by the government.”).
In sum, the First Amendment does not permit the ARSU to confine Mr. Cyr’s speech to
telephone or “assistive technologies” by issuing a blanket notice against trespass when less 19 Case 1:12-cv-00105-jgm Document 57 Filed 09/30/14 Page 19 of 30
burdensome alternatives exist. See Madsen, 512 U.S. at 765. Accordingly, Mr. Cyr’s motion for summary judgement is granted as to his First Amendment freedom of expression claim, and the ARSU’s motion for summary judgment on that claim is denied. 3. Fourteenth Amendment Right to Due Process First, the fact that there is no protocol in place governing when an ARSU official may issue a
notice against trespass increases the risk of erroneous deprivation because it grants officials broad discretion to ban members of the public from school premises and, consequently, school board because it grants officials broad
discretion to ban members of the public from school premises and, consequently, school board 21Case 1:12-cv-00105-jgm Document 57 Filed 09/30/14 Page 21 of 30
meetings. See Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 394 U.S. 147, 153 (1969) (“[W]e have consistently condemned licensing systems which vest in an administrative official discretion to grant or withhold a permit upon broad criteria unrelated to proper regulation of public places.”) (quoting Kunz v. NewYork, 340 U.S. 290, 293-94 (1951)).Second, neither notice against trespass sets out any process for contesting the notice. Cf. Catron v. City of St. Petersburg, 658 F.3d 1260, 1268-69 (11th Cir. 2011) (trespass ordinance that lacked an appeal process is procedurally inadequate). In response to Mr. Cyr’s inquiries following the March 2012 notice against trespass, the ARSU merely informed him that they might lift the notice
against trespass if he underwent an independent mental health risk assessment. (Doc. 53-6 ¶ 39.)Third, Mr. Cyr did not receive a meaningful opportunity to contest the notices against trespass. See Wright v. Yacovone, No. 5:12-cv-27, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157544, at *49 (D. Vt.Nov. 2, 2012) (“The opportunity to be heard must thus occur ‘at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.’”) (quoting Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333). Neither notice contained any explanation of the basis upon which it was issued.12 See Taylor v. Rodriguez, 238 F.3d 188, 193 (2d Cir. 2001)
(notice and denies the ARSU’s motion for summary judgment as to the due process claim.
Where was that confirmed? I missed it too.
Part 2 why Aisha wins in court
must contain “specific facts underlying the allegation[s]” that led to the government’s actions “because a hearing is not ‘meaningful’ if a [party] is given inadequate information about the basis of the charges against him.”). Cyr was informed of the basis for the March 2012 notice on April 27,2012, when he was told by letter only that it was issued “on the basis of a written notice of risk to faculty and staff provided to the ARSU under a professional’s ‘duty to warn.’” (Doc. 49-13.) Mrs.Cyr appeared at the April 2012 Benson school board meeting and attempted to contest the notice against trespass, but received no reply from the board. (Doc. 48 ¶¶ 139-40; Doc. 54-1 ¶¶ 139-40.) Upon weighing the Mathews factors, the Court finds the notices against trespass violated Mr.Cyr’s due process rights by depriving him of his First Amendment right to express his views at school board meetings without adequate process. The Court grants Mr. Cyr’s motion for summary judgment as to his due process claim
This is also why she wins because a school file when requested by parent should include these items
the principal will have your child’s cumulative file, which you will want to see and copy. Often the cumulative file contains little more than a profile card with personal identification data and perhaps academic achievement levels, some teacher reports, and report cards.
Confidential file. Also accessible to parents, the confidential file may be kept at your child’s school, or in a central administrative office where the special education program offices are located. The file is called confidential because access to the information is limited to certain individuals. Your child’s confidential record includes all of the reports written as a result of the school’s evaluation; reports of independent evaluators, if any; medical records that you have had released; summary reports of evaluation team and eligibility committee meetings; your child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP); and, often, correspondence between you and school personnel.
Compliance file (some schools). Some school systems keep the reports of eligibility meetings, correspondence between the parents and school officials, and other similar documents in a separate compliance file. The contents of the compliance file demonstrate that the school system has met the timelines, notification, and consent regulations required by IDEA.
Discipline file (some schools). Some schools may also maintain a separate file regarding discipline issues involving long-term suspension or expulsion.
Wow while rka45 is usually incoherent. ..literally...they sure can cut and paste....now can rka45 say it in their own words? And once again the good Dr is invoking the Holocaust!
We have been saying it our own words for three months.. but have been ignored.. or discredited. I thought cutting and pasting the exact findings of the court case and the exact contents of school records (which were incomplete when requested by Aisha) might be slightly more effective.
And stilllllllllllll waiting for Ms. Hiza to allow the school department to tell it's side of the story..............................................................................
Where are the "exact contents of school records" to which you refer? We need an rka45 translating app......
Anon 10:03 You know Kurt if you ask you wife she might show them to you.
was that you who took the picture of the draft letter from jim wald's...did he let you take the picture...please post and respond...and why did you photo a draft that was not to be released
Rebecca - aka RKA45 - After watching you a number of times, I feel badly that you are so emotional and divided.
The commenters on this blog get loonier by the day.
And stilllllllllllll waiting for Ms. Hiza to allow the school department to tell it's side of the story
And stilllllllllllllll waiting for Ms. Geyrk to allow the school department to announce her weight at the start of every school committee meeting...........................
Larry this is a great opportunity for you. Teach the kids that are being bullied self defense. What a windfall.
"The commenters on this blog get loonier by the day."
Job security for all of us in the mental health field!
If the Town of Pelham were to hold a Special Town Meeting and vote "No Confidence" in Geyrk, it would get noticed. It's archaic but Town Meetings can also "instruct" the town's elected officials to do certain things -- Pelham can "instruct" its SC members to fire Geryk. That'd definitely get noticed, even if she wasn't trying to bully Amherst voters into paying for a new MegaSkool.
The thing to understand about Caligula is that the doctorate she never completed was in Mental Health, not Education. Without exception, those in the mental health profession are (a) arrogant and (b) incredibly "thin skinned." They are bullies and bullies are inherently cowards attempting to hide their cowardice.
Geryk simply can't deal with free speech, let alone any speech that she perceives as being critical of her. Look at the visceral reaction to my merely stating that a woman's weight -- any woman's weight -- is something personal that she should not be forced to publicly divulge. One can only imagine her response to a municipal "no confidence" vote.
0r losing a lawsuit...
Let's be honest here. A courageous young woman prevailed against a powerful and abusive superintendent who routinely bullies parents and teachers alike who stand up to her. Dr. Ed is a brilliant but long-winded civil rights activist and legal scholar. And, the mean and hateful commenters on this blog who attack anyone who speaks up against what appears to be the illegal conduct of the superintendent, are shamed and humiliated once again (happens every spring) by their own (and the superintendent's) angry, spiteful, immoral and illegal conduct.
I would like to see the last Regional School Committee video from 629 to 635 which hss magically disappeared From actv
This situation is very hard. There are many people that are emotionally tied to our town and our school. I feel torn right down the middle trying to figure out what is best for my family. My town, and balance that with what my friends on both sides of this situation are going through. For me in the end it is what is best my child and her educational environment that matters most.
Actually this SB statement differs from Maria's official statement that the police recommended the stay away order
"the police determined that the safety concerns were credible and a stay away order was recommended."
https://www.scribd.com/doc/314292751/Maria-Geryk-statement
From Masslive (6/2/16)
"Pelham Police Chief Gary Thomann said police met with school officials but did not generate a written report. He said it was a school issue."
and this Select Board document indicates that APD declared it a Pelham issue.
So- looks like neither the Amherst nor Pelham police departments recommended the stay away order.
A parental request for records were submitted. The records came back with very little information in them. One example no report cards or progress reports were included. There were other documents missing as well.
Ed is brilliant? That sentiment alone is enough to make me discount this entire comment. What a laughable thought. Eddie is brilliant. Yea right. And the sun revolves around the earth. And up is down. And right is left. Where do you find these people Larry?
"the police determined that the safety concerns were credible and a stay away order was recommended."
https://www.scribd.com/doc/314292751/Maria-Geryk-statement
From Masslive (6/2/16)
"Pelham Police Chief Gary Thomann said police met with school officials but did not generate a written report. He said it was a school issue."
The key word here is "written report". The Pelham police Chief may not have generated a written report, but he could have issued a verbal recommendation. The two are not mutually exclusive.
The fact that no report cards were included should be reported to DESE on the presumption that there aren't any. You can't loose a child's grades.
Or lose, either.
Responding to Dr. Ed's first comment on custodial rights being taken away.
This situation is off, but when she voluntarily kept sending her kid to the school, how can the school be accused of taking the kid away. Once the order was made and she knew about it and still sent the kid into the school, she gave the kid up for the day, the kid was not taken.
I was surprised to read that Hiza continued to act and speak like she was still banned after she met with officials and received a notarized letter June 1. Why did she mislead the public?
Her statement is http://onlyintherepublicofamherst.blogspot.com/2016/06/a-violation-of-journalistic-ethics.html?m=1 here.
That doesn't explain why she misled the public. She could have said she got a notarized letter totally lifting the ban at any time. It looks shady.
"...but when she voluntarily kept sending her kid to the school, how can the school be accused of taking the kid away. Once the order was made and she knew about it and still sent the kid into the school, she gave the kid up for the day, the kid was not taken.."
OK, I'm assuming this is a legitimate question and will answer it.
1: Truancy: "Every child...shall...attend a public day school in the town the student resides...unless the child attends school in another town..." (https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter76/Section1)
All children are "taken away" by the school, in the sense stated above. Leaving School Choice out of this for a minute, Aisha was legally required to send the child to school. If she hadn't, Geyrk (or designee) would have filed what used to be called a "ChINS" -- "Child In Need of Services" -- petition with the court, essentially to put the girl into DSS (now DCFS) custody, i.e. "take the child away" from Aisha in the sense most people would think of that.
I don't know if a ChINS is mandatory, but I do know that a 51A is, at least as I understand/teach the law -- in the case of a truant 1st Grader, you'd have to tell DCF about that, and in theory, they'd actually care. So DCF does the ChINS instead.
Bottom line, no parent has a choice, it's only "voluntary" in the sense that filing Form 1040A is "voluntary."
2: School Choice: Lost in the noise about Charter Schools, which arrived with it, School Choice essentially allows regular schools to do the charter schools do -- take children from other districts with some of the state money intended to pay for the child's education coming with the child. Choice is not as lucrative as Charter because it was intended to be on a "space available basis, -- filling empty seats in a classroom much like filling empty seats in an airplane or empty hotel rooms.
While not the intent, Choice has been a Godsend to towns like Pelham, there is no way that school could be economically viable without a third (soon to be half) of the children attending being "Choice."
Like with Charters, you aren't allowed to "cherrypick" (or recruit your football team as one school attempted), you've got to take whoever applies, with a lottery if the number of applicants exceeds the number of seats you are offering. You are explicitly prohibited from any form of racial discrimination. You also have to keep any Choice child until graduation -- because Pelham accepted Aisha's girl as a Kindergartner, they are required to keep her until she graduates from ARHS.
Hence Pelham essentially chose to declare Aisha a Pelham resident, with money coming from Chicopee to Pelham because of this.
3: In loco parentis Latin for "in the place of the (custodial) parent, this is what Geryk violated, as the school acts as the agent of the custodial parent. Rights are retained by the custodial parent -- Geryk should know that.
One other thing -- the parent is required to provide transportation.
As it is inherently unsafe (I suspect illegal) to park in the travel lane of that road, by trespassing Hiza from school property, Geryk made it impossible for Hiza to provide transportation herself.
That's illegal.
Ah there's the rub? Why did she mislead the public you ask? Could it be she has been misleading the public all along and there was a very good reason to be banned from the school? Other parents have issues with the schools and their bullied children and stand up to the schools to fight for their children and do not get banned. This woman did some thing to get banned. I am sure of it.
Of course the parent did something to get banned. The school would never want to buy this kind of problem if there weren't a really good reason for it!
That's why she won't allow the schools to discuss the issue.
She got the letter and then had phone call from Faye Brady which was very suspicious because Ms Brady was acting as though the ban was still in place. Since she received the letter with no witness present and she didn't sign anything, she was waiting on legal counsel advice due to her general distrust on the whole situation. She continued to only talk to staff and enter school with witnesses present because she was still very nervous about the whole situation.
Of course the parent did something to get banned.
Yes, she admits that -- she stood up to the bully named Maria.
The school would never want to buy this kind of problem if there weren't a really good reason for it!
There actually is: No questioning voices may be tolerated in Maria's fiefdom.
There will be no lawsuit. Why hasn't this already been in court to get an injunction if the stay away order is so illegal? We all know why.
"There actually is: No questioning voices may be tolerated in Maria's fiefdom."
Well, I have gone into the schools with some BIG questions and complaints and have come away very satisfied at the results for my kids. So I know from first hand experience that that is a load. Mr.ed, have you ever approached a member of the Amherst Schools about an issue with your child?
Thought not.
Then all else is hearsay until Ms. Hiza lets the schools tell the rest of he story.
I'm beggin you all : enough. Please.
Dr Ed (Mr ed is a horse) will not stop until he gets what he is owed, not one second sooner! Right doctor?
I will repeat my message from yesterday, the relentless personal attacks again the superintendent or anyone are reckless and inappropriate. The person(s) making comments about weight are just ridiculous and should be ashamed of themselves. You are very sad people.
ANON June 9, 2016 at 1:41 PM - This is a classic diversionary tactic and so manipulative.
Ms hiza...please just let the Schoold tell their side....you know what to do....except you know what you did!
Thanks Kurt we learned from the master.(you) Of course you could ask Ms Brady if she talked with Ms,Hiza at 320 pm on june 1 to confirm this happened
Thanks for answering my question Dr. Ed. It was serious.
I still contend she had alternatives to this particular school, whilst still being the socialist the laws you quote require. I would also contend that she should not want her kid to go to this school any longer. She can want whatever she wants obviously, but why the heck would she want this school at this point.
This is without moving.
"The person(s) making comments about weight are just ridiculous and should be ashamed of themselves."
I will try one more time -- Maria's weight is personal information that she has a right to know and the rest of us don't. Nor do we have a right to know the intimate details of Ashia's personal life.
How difficult is that to understand?
Ed, nobody is asking for the details of Hizas personal life. They are asking for the details of interactions that led up to the ban. What was it that she said or did to staff that was deemed aggressive or harassing? How difficult is that to understand?
Mr. ed,
We are asking that the school be allowed to discuss the EVENTS leading up to the decision to enact the trespass order. NOTHING about anybody's personal information.
TOTALLY different things......but apparently too hard for you to understand.
Also none of Ed's business, as he lives in Maine.
What are "white goods?"
Well, par for the course in Looneytown.
Does ed live in Maine ? He says this is all his business cause he pays statewide taxes that go for education. Ed?
"She can want whatever she wants obviously, but why the heck would she want this school at this point. "
She likely has her reasons.
I had an opportunity to transfer out of UMass & get my doctorate at another institution, working on something that the US Navy was funding, and in hindsight, I wish I had.
This is a free country, which means you get to make the choices you think best, even if they aren't.
What was it that she said or did to staff that was deemed aggressive or harassing?
Which has NOTHING to do with the question of if she is a threat to public safety.
I gather you disagree.
Try to better proof your anti-white comments next time, please.
The typo was in a post mocking the hyperbolic anti white language in another post.
Try to keep up.
If you read some of the emails Aisha has had provided you see.how straight forward she is. They are posted in one of these rooms. NTFBS that's for sure straight to the point.
We understand what aisha is saying...we just find it hard to believe she doesn't know WHY...that geryk got up one day and just decide to ban her out of the blue....
Well, maybe Geryk did.
I will not lower myself to speculating on Geryk's mental health. I will only note the Larry-documented "not seen in public for over s month" (bigtime warning sign), and how illogical this appears as a safety issue.
She lost all credibility when she lied by saying she hadn't gotten written notice yet that the ban was lifted. Front page of the bulletin, no less.
Front page of the Bulletin does not constitute legal notice from Geryk.
Anonymous Dr. Ed said...
Well, maybe Geryk did.
I will not lower myself to speculating on Geryk's mental health.
ed how about speculating on your own ..especially your EXTREME paranoid delusions
You aren't paranoid if they really ARE "out to get you."
I think the visceral directed at me speaks for itself.
Hey, I can use circular logic too...
Do not forget that Martha Mitchell really wasn't delusional, the Watergate Breakin really did happen. Also, an interesting piece on Earnest Hemingway, who wasn't paranoid, the FBI really was following him:
"J. Edgar Hoover had placed Ernest under surveillance because he was suspicious of Ernest’s activities in Cuba. Over the following years, agents filed reports on him and tapped his phones. The surveillance continued all through his confinement at St. Mary’s Hospital. It is likely that the phone outside his room was tapped after all.
In the years since, I have tried to reconcile Ernest’s fear of the F.B.I., which I regretfully misjudged, with the reality of the F.B.I. file. I now believe he truly sensed the surveillance, and that it substantially contributed to his anguish and his suicide."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/02/opinion/02hotchner.html?pagewanted=all
No, the front page of the bulletin is where she lied. When she gave that interview she already had the paper in hand. You know, the notarized one from June 1 that Larry posted here. Also, When she sat at the select board meeting with Vira, etc., she was well aware that her meeting with Maria and Paul Wiley was going to lift the ban.
Ed you are paranoid if you are schizophrenic. ...
Post a Comment