ROCKLAND – A city woman is appealing the state Department of Human Services’ refusal to renew her license to operate Something Extra Daycare.

Day care operator Colleen Hupper filed a petition for judicial review of DHS’ final action and a request for a stay Friday in Knox County Superior Court through her attorney, Adrianne Fernstrom of Rockland. Human Services Commissioner Kevin Concannon is also named a defendant in the petition.

According to the court document, Hupper applied for renewal of her home day care certification in April 2000 and was denied re-certification on Dec. 16, 2000.

After two administrative hearings – one on March 29, the other on April 25 – hearing officer Ronald Stoodley recommended that the commissioner reverse the department’s action and issue a conditional license with some conditions, according to the petition. However, the commissioner declined to adopt the recommendations of the hearing officer, the document states.

On Friday, David Winslow, a DHS spokesman, said that Hupper’s license had been expired for several months and that she was notified several times regarding the expiration.

It was also found that Hupper had provided inaccurate responses to questions on an application, Winslow said, specifically answers to questions regarding previous involvement with the child protective system. He would not be more specific about the nature of the questions.

During an inspection of Hupper’s day care center, the state discovered that she did not meet the staff-child ratio. Winslow said she cared for 14 children by herself. DHS would have required her to have two additional staff members, he said.

The state also cited Hupper’s day care center for improper supervision of children, children leaving the property without supervision and various smaller discrepancies, such as record keeping, proper storage of cleaning products and covering of electrical outlets, Winslow said.

“Those were the allegations made,” Fernstrom said when contacted Wednesday.

However, Fernstrom disputed the allegations, saying that the findings of the hearing officer were that most of the violations cited were so insignificant they should not warrant consideration in determining Hupper’s suitability for certification as a home day care provider.

The petition claims that the commissioner ignored the hearing officer’s findings that six of 16 allegations made by the state were false and three others were not violations of DHS day care regulations.

According to Fernstrom, at the time of the March and April hearings this year, Hupper’s day care center was in compliance.

Noting that information regarding the child protective system is confidential, Fernstrom could not comment on the questions Hupper responded to on an application. She said that the hearing officer found there was no violation of rules or regulations pertaining to day care.

Hupper’s day care center remains in operation pending a judge’s decision on a stay, Fernstrom said.

Generally, day care operations are inspected once a year, Winslow said, unless there are complaints. Although the state provides an important function in policing day care settings, parents are there every day, he said, and therefore are the “best eyes for quality in a facility.”