
From NPR:
Kelley Williams-Bolar, alarmed after her home was broken into, yanked her two daughters out of their urban Akron, Ohio, schools and enrolled them in her father's suburban school district nearby, using his address.
That way, said the single mom and teacher's aide, they could come to a safer home after school.
Her peace of mind proved costly. Officials in the Copley-Fairlawn district challenged the residency of her girls in 2007, when they were 9 and 13 years old. Williams-Bolar was charged and convicted of felony records tampering.
Not only was she jailed last month for nine days, but the conviction threatens her efforts to earn a teacher's license and could jeopardize her job as a teacher's aide. She plans to appeal.
Her case has become a rallying point for advocates of school choice and it has outraged residents in her northeast Ohio community - some because of her dishonesty, others for the severity of her prosecution.
"My kids are not latchkey kids," said Williams-Bolar, who had no choice but to re-enroll her daughters in Akron schools two years ago. "I am a mother, and I want to make sure my kids are safe, and I want to make sure that they're educated."
Her prosecution and incarceration are a high-profile example of how schools are getting tougher on parents who sneak their children into other districts, usually better-funded and higher-performing schools. Districts are fighting back, having students followed by private investigators, fining or pressing criminal charges against their parents - even sending them to jail.
The cases raise questions about school funding disparities and pit parents' pursuit of better academics or safer hallways against schools' interests in protecting their funding and quality.
There's little data that tracks how many parents register students using false addresses or those of relatives in violation of state, city or school regulations, but districts from New Hampshire to Texas to California report that it's a problem. Jailing parents isn't common.
"I must say this is the first case I've ever heard of where somebody has been arrested," said Susan Gates, a senior economist who studies education issues at the RAND Corporation.
Copley-Fairlawn Superintendent Brian Poe said his district "has taken a certain amount of heat," with critics saying it should educate all children. "That's not the law in the state of Ohio, and that's not our board policy."
Recent letters to the Akron Beacon Journal capture high emotions on both sides of the issue. Hundreds of Williams-Bolar supporters recently rallied with the Rev. Al Sharpton, calling for her exoneration.
"To take a viable human being and cast her aside like a dangerous criminal again proves that the American justice system is only just for some people - certainly not poor, black and struggling members of society," wrote Mary L. Tabatcher of Mogadore.
But Donna Blair of Akron was sharply critical.
"Shame on Kelley Williams-Bolar," Blair wrote. "We all want what's best for our kids, but should we commit crimes to get them the best? The message she sent to her kids was that it's OK to lie, cheat and steal."
The newspaper reported this week that one lawmaker is preparing legislation that would allow children to enroll in school districts where their grandparents live.
Around the country, transfers between districts are allowed in most places if both districts agree, with some requiring the home district to pay tuition to the receiving district, said Michael Griffith, a senior policy analyst with the nonprofit, nonpartisan Education Commission of the States in Denver. Problems occur when parents seeking better academics, elite sports teams or safer environments falsify records or say students live with relatives or in rental homes when they don't.
Cases typically are resolved when a parent moves a student out, changes homes or pays tuition, but a few end up in court. Since 2005, Copley-Fairlawn has resolved conflicts with 47 other families over illegal student attendance.
Education officials say cases tend to surface more when budgets are tight and in areas where there are significant disparities between districts such as in academic success or local income level - particularly in wealthier districts near urban areas. That often means the districts in question also have racial disparities.
Williams-Bolar's attorney, Kerry O'Brien, raised the issue of race at one point in court papers, saying that because her client is black, the case raises the specter of "improper racial segregation and prosecution."
Read the Rest on NPR.org

Comments: (7)
Add a comment
By: Black Barbie on 3/01/2011 1:42AM
I think this is a case of zealous prosecution. Do the parents share custody or does the father have visitation? If the mother used the children's father's address and they go to his house after school, why would that be abuse of the enrollment processes?
I would expect the district to prosecute people who had no remote claim to residency, but in the case of children of unmarried/separated/divorced parents, the circumstances are not always so clear cut. I could see the district pursuing people with obviously fraudulent address/enrollment information, but this case is a bit extreme, in my opinion.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: HOLLY on 3/01/2011 7:06AM
Why aren't people mad tha she had to go to this extreme to get her children a beter education? We can not as a nation say that everyone have oppertunity when some get better education then others. I am against school choice, but only because I don't think any child should be left in a failing school.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Greg on 3/01/2011 10:45AM
It's obvious that you don't know, or aren't willing to better understand the real relevant facts of this case! Please, get the facts before you post such foolish comments!
Report This
By: Inez on 3/01/2011 9:05AM
There is a saying, "you get what you pay for".
Those children who go to the better schools, their
parents pay higher taxes, and maybe better salaries and personnel for those schools. I know for a fact that
the parents are very involved in whats going in the
system, and that is very important. Its not fair that some parents pay and work to have better school, and then to find out that someone elses children whose parents are not contributing are
reaping the benefits. We have to do what we have to
do until we can do better, but lying and cheating are is not the answer. Remember, your sins WILL catch up with you, sooner or later.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: kieraht on 3/01/2011 9:53AM
There are extenuating circumstances in this case and the judge should have acted compassionately. They have a lot of discretion.
Meanwhile some pervert can squirt semen on at least 5 different Maryland women and the judge gives him probation.
I really can not understand.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Greg on 3/01/2011 10:48AM
Sorry, but lying, fraud, and stealing are not considered to be as you say "extenuating" circumstances!
Report This
By: CHRIS on 4/18/2011 7:50PM
Here's the thing many of you haven't considered. She is guilty no matter how you look at it, as she clearly stated in her own words, to keep her independence she lived in AMHA housing while the girls stayed with her father. So, consider the fact that if she won an appeal, that would open up the lawsuit her for committing fraud against AMHA, considering the fact that if her father had custody then instead of her having 2 dependants, she was just a single person, and certainly not eligible for sub housing or the other benefits she received.
Reply to this Comment | Report This