برچسب: opponents

  • School board opponents in Orange Unified turn in signatures for recall election

    School board opponents in Orange Unified turn in signatures for recall election


    Packed crowd anticipates discussion on Orange Unified Parental Notification Policy on Sept. 8, 2023.

    Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource

    Organizers seeking the ouster of two conservative members of the Orange Unified school board announced last week they had collected more than enough signatures to put the recall to a vote in the next several months.

    The effort seeks the recall of board President Rick Ledesma and board member Madison Klovstad Miner, who was elected last November after defeating 22-year incumbent Kathryn A. Moffat by 0.2% — 221 votes out of 61,845 votes cast. Her election was pivotal in establishing a four-member conservative majority that had run on a uniform platform of parental rights. Ledesma and Miner had the financial backing of pro-conservative political action committees, including the Lincoln Club of Orange County, and the support of Jack Hibbs, an influential politically active pastor of Calvary Chapel Chino Hills, an evangelical megachurch.

    The new majority’s first action was to fire Gunn Marie Hansen, the district’s popular superintendent, with one day’s notice during the Christmas break, when Hansen was abroad. During the heated four-hour school board meeting, several angry parents vowed a recall election, but it took several months to organize a campaign. Although Hansen was fired without cause, Ledesma later said that under Hansen, the district was “focusing too much on the social politics of education,” and the board planned to revisit policies related to sex education, student equity and ethnic studies.

    The recall campaign is also running on a theme of fiscal responsibility, pointing to the cost of terminating Hansen’s contract, which, with vacation and benefits, was $505,000.

    Last month, the conservative majority made Orange Unified the sixth California school district to require school officials to adopt a gender notification policy, requiring school officials to tell parents and guardians if their child engages in activities designed for the opposite sex or changes gender pronouns.

    Darshan Smaaladen, recall committee co-chair and chief organizer, said the campaign had submitted more than 18,300 signatures — about 5,000 more than the 13,046 required. Organizers had to collect at least 10% of registered voters in the school district.

    Smaaladen, a parent of two graduates and one current Orange Unified student, said she was “elated” by the number of signatures collected and “looks forward to more knowledgeable public voting on the issues in future elections.” She said the signature-gathering was done mainly by volunteers attending festivals, stationing outside schools and going door to door. Three hundred volunteer signature collectors signed a code of ethics, committing to acting in good faith and staying true to the campaign message, she said. Some teachers, many of whom live in the district, were among the canvassers.

    “The Orange Unified Education Association is happy to see the petitions to be submitted weeks earlier than the deadline, and we see this as a statement of strength and support by the public for this recall,” said union President Greg Goodlander.

    Paid solicitors were hired to ensure meeting a Nov. 8 deadline and collected 2,000 signatures, Smaaladen said.

    In a lengthy email responding to EdSource’s request for a comment on the recall, district board member Miner wrote, “It’s essential to note that protecting students is my sole purpose, and the radical recall movement has made it clear that their quest for power over the children is nothing more than a strong political maneuver to influence and shape the children of OUSD. This has nothing to do with protecting or educating children.” (Go here for the full response.)

    The Orange County Registrar of Voters must now validate the signatures, initially examining a large random sample, then doing a full certification, if needed. The Orange Unified school board must choose a date for the recall vote. Smaaladen said she hopes the board chooses the March state primary election; tying the recall vote to that election will save the district about $1 million from the cost of holding an election on a separate date, she said.

    Located near Disneyland, Orange Unified draws from diverse neighborhoods in five cities plus unincorporated areas of Orange County; half of its 26,000 students are from low-income familes; 57% are Latino and a quarter are white.

    According to Ballotpedia, only about 1 in 5 recall campaigns nationally have qualified for the ballot since 2009. Of those, fewer than half have unseated board members.

    This effort could gain national attention and draw six-figure contributions on both sides. California Republicans and conservative PACs have targeted school board elections to outflank Democratic majorities in the Legislature, promote school choice, weaken teacher unions and oppose LGBTQ+ education. Democratic donors and the California Teachers Association in turn will weigh whether to encourage this and similar recalls, assuming it qualifies for the ballot, by donating heavily.

    “Republicans have been talking about ratcheting up the fight on education policy for a few years. There have been some scattered skirmishes up until now, but this could be the all-out brawl that both sides have been anticipating,” said Dan Schnur, a longtime political observer who teaches political communications at the University of Southern California, UC Berkeley and Pepperdine University.

    A similar recall campaign is under way to unseat three politically conservative members in Temecula Valley Unified, including board President Joseph Komrosky, whom Gov. Gavin Newsom condemned for denigrating the assassinated gay activist Harvey Milk as a pedophile. On Wednesday, leaders of the League of United Latin American Citizens de Inland Empire and the local branch of the NAACP civil rights group announced they were joining the effort.  They have until Dec. 8 to turn in enough signatures to qualify.





    Source link

  • Newsom signs bill to end parental notification policies at schools; opponents say fight is not over

    Newsom signs bill to end parental notification policies at schools; opponents say fight is not over


    A big crowd was on hand when the Murrieta Valley Unified School District board voted last August to mandate that parents be told if their child shows any indication at school of being transgender.

    Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource

    A trailblazing state law prohibiting California school boards from passing resolutions that require teachers and school staff to notify parents if they believe a child is transgender isn’t likely to put an end to this polarizing issue. 

    The Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth, or SAFETY Act, was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday. It will prohibit school districts from requiring staff to disclose to parents information related to a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity, and will protect school staff from retaliation if they refuse to notify parents of a child’s gender preference. The legislation, which will go into effect Jan. 1, also provides additional resources and support for LGBTQ+ students at junior high and high schools.

    “California is the first state to pass a law explicitly prohibiting school districts from enacting forced outing policies in the nation,” said Mike Blount, spokesperson for the author of the bill, Assemblymember Chris Ward, D-San Diego.

    The legislation was passed in response to the more than a dozen California school boards that proposed or passed parental notification policies in just over a year. The policies require school staff to inform parents if a child asks to use a name or pronoun different from the one assigned at birth, or if they engage in activities and use facilities designed for the opposite sex. At least seven California school districts passed the controversial policies, often after heated public debate.

    First lawsuit filed

    By Tuesday evening, the conservative nonprofit Liberty Justice Center said it had filed a lawsuit challenging the new law on behalf of Chino Valley Unified, which passed a parental notification policy last year.

    “School officials do not have the right to keep secrets from parents, but parents do have a constitutional right to know what their minor children are doing at school,” said Emily Rae, senior counsel at the Liberty Justice Center in a press release. “Parents are the legal guardians of their children, not Governor Newsom, Attorney General (Rob) Bonta, or Superintendent (Tony) Thurmond. We will continue to defend parents’ rights and children’s well-being by challenging invasive laws like AB 1955 in court, at no cost to taxpayers.”

    Other opponents, including Assemblyman Bill Essayli, R-Riverside, indicated that the issue will be settled in court. He is “committed to challenging the bill in court, and he’s confident he’s on the right side constitutionally,” said Shawn Lewis, Essayli’s chief of staff. Essayli plans to work with a coalition of advocates to challenge the bill, Lewis said.

    Election issue

    Parental rights is the overarching issue for the Republican Party, but right now it is focused on the parental notification issue, Essayli said in an August interview with EdSource. “This is an issue we want to run on in 2024,” he said.

    The newly passed legislation also resulted in a flurry of press releases and social media comments from opponents and supporters. Even Tesla CEO Elon Musk weighed in, calling the new law the “final straw” in his decision to move the headquarters for X, formerly known as Twitter, to Texas.

    “I did make it clear to Governor Newsom about a year ago that laws of this nature would force families and companies to leave California to protect their children,” Musk wrote on X.

    Proponents of the parental notification policies have said that parents have the right to know what is going on with their children at school and that minors do not have a right to privacy. Opponents say these policies could endanger already vulnerable students who should be able to decide when they want to come out to their parents.

    Chino Valley Unified in San Bernardino County, Murrieta Valley Unified and Temecula Valley Unified in Riverside County, Orange Unified in Orange County, Anderson Union High School District in Shasta County, and Rocklin Unified and Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District in Placer County are among the districts that have passed parental notification policies.

    California’s parental notification board policies have their origin in Assembly Bill 1314, proposed by Essayli, which was denied a committee hearing at the state Capitol last year. After that, Essayli, parents’ rights groups and attorneys wrote a model board policy for school boards.

    On Monday, Essayli released a statement about the new law: “Today, Governor Gavin Newsom defied parents’ constitutional and God-given right to raise their children by signing AB 1955 which codifies the government’s authority to keep secrets from parents,” he said. “AB 1955 endangers children by excluding parents from important matters impacting their child’s health and welfare at school. Governor Newsom signing AB 1955 is both immoral and unconstitutional, and we will challenge it in court to stop the government from keeping secrets from parents.”

    Eight states have passed laws requiring school districts to inform parents if their children ask to use names or pronouns associated with another gender, according to the Movement Advancement Project.

    LGBTQ+ rights threatened

    School parental notification policies have impacted the mental health of LGBTQ+ students and can lead to bullying, harassment and discrimination, according to a press release from Ward’s office.

    “Politically motivated attacks on the rights, safety, and dignity of transgender, nonbinary, and other LGBTQ+ youth are on the rise nationwide, including in California,” said Ward, who introduced the legislation along with the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus.

    “While some school districts have adopted policies to forcibly out students, the SAFETY Act ensures that discussions about gender identity remain a private matter within the family,” he said. “As a parent, I urge all parents to talk to their children, listen to them, and love them unconditionally for who they are.”

    The California Teachers Association and its members have been major opponents of parental notification policies, saying that they drive a wedge between educators and students, and endanger already vulnerable students. Teachers working in districts with parental notification policies have worried they could lose their jobs if they do not comply with the district requirement or end up in court if they disobey federal and state laws and policies.

    “This historic legislation will strengthen existing protections against forced outing and allow educators to continue to create a safe learning environment where all students feel accepted, nurtured, and encouraged to pursue their dreams,” said California Teachers Association President David Goldberg.

    “As educators, we are charged with providing a high-quality education to every student. No educator should experience retaliation or have their livelihood jeopardized for following the law and providing safe and supportive learning environments for our students.”

    Policies spawn lawsuits

    Attorney General Rob Bonta has said parental notification policies break California state law and violate students’ civil rights and their right to privacy. He issued warnings to districts and filed a lawsuit against Chino Valley Unified in San Bernardino County last year.

    A lawsuit was also filed against Temecula Valley Unified by a coalition of students, teachers and parents who oppose the district’s parental notification policy, along with a policy that bans “critical race theory.”

    California courts have had differing opinions. In San Diego, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez last year ruled that Escondido Union School District violated parents’ rights when it followed California state policy and allowed students to decide whether to tell their parents they identify as transgender.

    In Sacramento earlier that year, U.S. District Judge John Mendez dismissed a lawsuit against Chico Unified. The suit claimed that district policies allowed school staff “to socially transition” students and prohibited staff from informing parents of the change. Mendez said students have a right to tell their parents about their gender and sexuality on their own terms.

    The new law will also require districts to provide support or affinity groups and safe spaces for LGBTQ+ students; anti-bullying and harassment policies and complaint procedures; counseling services; anti-bias or other training to support LGBTQ+ students and their families; suicide prevention policies and procedures; and access to community-based organizations to support LGBTQ+ students as well as local physical and mental health providers with experience in treating and supporting families of LGBTQ+ youth.

    California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus Chair Susan Eggman said the legislation reaffirms California’s position as a leader and safe haven for LGBTQ+ youth.

    “I am also deeply grateful for all the parents, teachers, youth, LGBTQ+ leaders, and so many other groups who came together to support this bill,” Eggman said. “Their support reaffirmed what this caucus already knew: Safe and supportive schools for all our children should be our top priority. And at the end of the day, that’s what this bill does, ensures our K-12 campuses remain safe and affirming places for our youth no matter how they identify.”





    Source link