Fresno Unified Not Responsible: Student's Family Lied About Residency to Enroll

A family living in Clovis Unified's boundaries rented an apartment in Fresno Unified and falsely claimed residency there in order to enroll their daughter with autism in FUSD. The ALJ found the family never actually lived at the apartment, meaning FUSD was never the responsible district. The case was dismissed before any FAPE claims could be heard.

What Happened

A 17-year-old student with autism and a speech-language impairment had been receiving special education services through Clovis Unified School District, where her family actually lived. Her parents were unhappy with Clovis's approach — particularly around inclusion services — and wanted her to attend Bullard High School in Fresno Unified School District (FUSD). In July 2008, they applied for an interdistrict transfer, citing that the student's mother was employed as a teacher within FUSD's boundaries. FUSD denied the request in August 2008, saying the Bullard High School program was already at capacity.

Rather than appeal through the proper county board process, the family rented an apartment inside FUSD's boundaries, enrolled the student using that address, and filed a special education due process complaint against FUSD — falsely listing the apartment as the family's residence in the hearing request itself. FUSD hired a private investigator, who confirmed the apartment was vacant and that the family continued to live in their home within Clovis's boundaries. The due process hearing was split so that the question of residency — and therefore which district was responsible — could be resolved first, before getting to any FAPE claims.

What the ALJ Found

The family never established legal residency in FUSD. Under California law, a person can only have one legal residence, and it cannot be changed without both a physical act and genuine intent to make the new location home. Renting an apartment but never sleeping there does not change legal residency.
The interdistrict transfer was properly denied. FUSD denied the transfer request because the school program was full. The ALJ had no authority to overturn that decision — appeals of interdistrict transfer denials must go to the county board of education, not a special education hearing officer.
The "parent employed in district" exception is permissive, not mandatory. Although the student's mother actually worked for FUSD, state law only says a district may accept such a student — it does not require the district to do so. FUSD was not obligated to enroll the student on this basis.
The due process complaint contained false statements. The family listed the rented apartment as their residence in the hearing request, which the evidence showed was untrue.
FUSD was never the responsible LEA. Because the student resided in Clovis Unified's boundaries and no legal exception applied, FUSD had no obligation to provide FAPE to this student.

What Was Ordered

The ALJ ruled that Fresno Unified School District is not the local educational agency (LEA) responsible for the student's education.
The student's entire due process complaint against FUSD was dismissed.
FUSD prevailed on all issues. No FAPE claims were heard on the merits.

Why This Matters for Parents

Your district is determined by where you actually live, not where you rent. California law looks at your true, established home — the place you return to, sleep at, and intend to remain. A rented apartment that no one lives in will not change your legal district of residence, and investigators can and do verify this.
Interdistrict transfers are not guaranteed, even if you work for the district. The law gives districts discretion to accept students whose parents work there — it does not require them to. If a program is full or the district simply declines, they are acting within their legal rights.
A special education hearing officer cannot override a transfer denial. If your interdistrict transfer is denied and you believe the denial was improper or discriminatory, the correct appeal path is the county board of education — not a special education due process hearing.
Misrepresenting facts in a due process complaint can destroy your case. Filing a hearing request with false information about your address is a serious problem that undermines your credibility across all of your claims, not just the residency issue.
If you are unhappy with your current district's services, the right path is to challenge those services directly. Filing against a district that is not your LEA wastes time and resources. Parents dissatisfied with their district's IEP or inclusion practices should file due process against the district actually responsible for their child — and seek an IEE or request an IEP meeting to address specific concerns.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

The family never established legal residency in FUSD. Under California law, a person can only have one legal residence, and it cannot be changed without both a physical act and genuine intent to make the new location home. Renting an apartment but never sleeping there does not change legal residency.
The interdistrict transfer was properly denied. FUSD denied the transfer request because the school program was full. The ALJ had no authority to overturn that decision — appeals of interdistrict transfer denials must go to the county board of education, not a special education hearing officer.
The "parent employed in district" exception is permissive, not mandatory. Although the student's mother actually worked for FUSD, state law only says a district may accept such a student — it does not require the district to do so. FUSD was not obligated to enroll the student on this basis.
The due process complaint contained false statements. The family listed the rented apartment as their residence in the hearing request, which the evidence showed was untrue.
FUSD was never the responsible LEA. Because the student resided in Clovis Unified's boundaries and no legal exception applied, FUSD had no obligation to provide FAPE to this student.

What Was Ordered

The ALJ ruled that Fresno Unified School District is not the local educational agency (LEA) responsible for the student's education.
The student's entire due process complaint against FUSD was dismissed.
FUSD prevailed on all issues. No FAPE claims were heard on the merits.

Why This Matters for Parents

Your district is determined by where you actually live, not where you rent. California law looks at your true, established home — the place you return to, sleep at, and intend to remain. A rented apartment that no one lives in will not change your legal district of residence, and investigators can and do verify this.
Interdistrict transfers are not guaranteed, even if you work for the district. The law gives districts discretion to accept students whose parents work there — it does not require them to. If a program is full or the district simply declines, they are acting within their legal rights.
A special education hearing officer cannot override a transfer denial. If your interdistrict transfer is denied and you believe the denial was improper or discriminatory, the correct appeal path is the county board of education — not a special education due process hearing.
Misrepresenting facts in a due process complaint can destroy your case. Filing a hearing request with false information about your address is a serious problem that undermines your credibility across all of your claims, not just the residency issue.
If you are unhappy with your current district's services, the right path is to challenge those services directly. Filing against a district that is not your LEA wastes time and resources. Parents dissatisfied with their district's IEP or inclusion practices should file due process against the district actually responsible for their child — and seek an IEE or request an IEP meeting to address specific concerns.