Parents and advocates urge Tempe Union to preserve Success University, demand special-education review

Pam Bartlett, a parent, told the Tempe Union High School District Governing Board that families rely on the district’s Success University transition program and that the district’s reported plan to decentralize the program risks denying students appropriate transition services. "VR does not do what Success University does," Bartlett said, arguing that VR (vocational rehabilitation) meets but does not operate the daily, skills-based programming Success University provides.

Several other speakers echoed Bartlett. Kristen Cutlet said district leaders had cited compliance as the reason for changes but asked "compliance with what?" and said parents needed clarity about what the district found out of compliance. Brenda Walsh cited the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Arizona Department of Education guidance and urged the board to exercise its statutory responsibilities on curriculum and special-education policy. "IEP teams must do a better job at making sure students have completed the requirements," Walsh said, later asking whether the board wants its name on diplomas that students did not earn.

Jody Hernandez said district legal counsel had suggested that students do not remain eligible through age 21–22, a claim she called shocking and that prompted questions about post‑secondary program access. Multiple parents asked for metrics and a concrete plan for transitions; Debesh Singh requested that the issue be placed on a future agenda for thorough review.

Speakers proposed specific remedies: keep current students in the existing Success University configuration, halt decentralization, form a formal committee that includes parents, faculty and business partners to plan the program’s future, and present a public, transparent rationale and data for any change. Jennifer Jarvis asked the board to add a policy review of special-education practices, courses and curriculum to a future agenda and to allow IEP teams flexibility to set course sequencing that serves individual student needs.

The board did not take formal action during public comment; the chair said public comment would be limited to directing staff to study matters or scheduling them for future consideration. Member Steele later made a formal request to place special-education courses, curriculum, policies and practices on a future agenda; the chair agreed to meet to specify the request.

The next procedural step announced at the meeting was a commitment (by individual board members during discussion) to bring disaggregated district data to a board briefing and to schedule a board agenda item to examine special-education policies and transition services.

Ending: The board did not adopt or reject any special-education policy at this meeting; speakers and trustees asked staff to provide further information and to bring the topic back for formal consideration.