I read with interest your Feb. 17 article concerning Maine’s Child Development Services. As the site director of CDS in Franklin County these past 14 years, I have seen the tension between “maximum” and “adequate” special education services played out on a daily basis. While it is clear that young students with autism and Down’s Syndrome should qualify for CDS services, it is not so clear whether a child with a lisp or mild developmental delay, for example, is truly a student with a disability entitled to special education services.

I am in full support of the proposed changes to our regulations and thank the Department of Education for their attempt to promulgate them. I believe these changes will bring CDS closer to the intent of the federal and state law that governs our programs. The Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA.) was drafted and revised by the U.S. Congress with the intent to serve students with disabilities and significant developmental delays that adversely affect their educational performance and appropriate developmental activities. When one reviews the congressional floor debates pertaining to IDEA, it is clear that Congress never intended special education law to apply to students who were “at-risk” or whose disability did not adversely affect performance. In fact, much of the floor debate argued against establishing special education as a “dumping ground” for students who were needy but not disabled.

IDEA continues to serve as a beacon of hope and entitlement for millions of students who are indeed disabled and in need of highly individualized instruction to meet their unique needs. For these students, the IDEA has provided a mandate to serve, a requirement to structure their learning in a manner that fits their unique learning styles. As sad as it may seem to many, special education mandates were not designed to include and encompass the scores of students who are performing “below average,” but who do not meet the more stringent eligibility requirements established by federal and state law. These students need a voice too, and the many agencies that purport to care about them need to step up and be counted. These public and private agencies need to put their money where their rhetoric is and devote their resources to providing individualized services to them.

I was also surprised to hear Rep. Baker calling for Maine to adopt a “maximum benefit” approach to special education. The U.S. Supreme Court, in its Rowley decision, has declared that students with disabilities are not entitled to maximum benefits at public expense, and scores of federal courts have relied on that landmark decision for guidance in interpreting this federal education law. According to the courts, students with disabilities are to be provided a floor of opportunity and an individualized education plan that is, “… reasonably calculated to confer educational benefit.”

If Rep. Baker and the other members of the Education Committee want CDS to offer maximum services and generous eligibility rules, they will need to fight for the funding that goes with such a broad mandate. The Appropriations Committee and the full Legislature would need to make a conscious decision to exceed federal requirements and substantially increase the dollars allocated to CDS. I know all of us in CDS will strive to implement, with the highest commitment to quality, whatever level of services and eligibility the Legislature establishes. We cannot, however, translate a mixed message from the Education Committee that advocates for “maximum” services within a finite budget.

CDS is much more than a “conduit of funds” and a “broker” of services as stated in your article. We serve more than 5,000 young children with disabilities each year and must assure that each eligible student, ages 3 to 5, receives a free and appropriate public education. In addition, we are there every day for the moms and dads, siblings, grandparents, and other relatives of these special students. We only ask for clear instructions and a unified message from our Legislature concerning which students should be eligible and what level of services they would like us to offer.

Lew Collins lives in Readfield.