At last week’s school board meeting, another local family and spillover crowd came to demand the reversal of the controversial termination of special education programs at LBHS. This abrupt phase-out means special needs learners must be bused to an out-of-town high school with a larger special education student population.
School Board President Jan Vickers reacted to emotionally and morally powerful testimony, first by misinforming and misleading the public that the board has no responsibility to decide specific education program issues determined and directed by the superintendent. On the contrary, under the state education code, the school board is vested with all authority and responsibility for public education and retains full powers over how any authority delegated to the superintendent and other public school officials is exercised.
Vickers’ assertion the superintendent has powers independent of the board’s direction and control is a political hoax to evade accountability. Only because the testimony was, in Vickers’ own words, “compelling” did she evasively and vaguely concede the board should suggest the superintendent and special education team he controls to review the impact of the action that shockingly caught families of special needs students by surprise.
Tragically, the traumatized families indicated lawyers are being consulted because due process dispute resolution was deleted over a decade ago by a revision to our local school board bylaws recommended and voted for by Vickers. That leaves parents, the public, and even board members denied due process with no remedial pathway other than the courts, forcing more litigation costly to families and public education.
Every citizen should watch the YouTube video of the public comment session at the beginning of the Aug. 15 meeting. Oddly, Vickers broke her own rule against direct board member response to public comments in her bizarre admonition to the audience that her fellow board members should not be “hung out to dry” for the unpopular action because “they” didn’t approve it.
Instead of referring to the board, including herself, as “we,” Vickers’ choice of the word “they” oddly referred only to her fellow board members, who did not even seem to know about the controversial action until parents and speakers appeared for public comments at the meeting. The question many asked after watching the video was whether Vickers used “they” instead of “we” because she knew of the superintendent’s action but did not inform the other board members.
Howard Hills, Laguna Beach
I COMPLETELY AGREE with Howard Hills.
INCLUSION OF ALL CHILDREN into ALL of our community schools is an imperative we cannot ignore, regardless of current School Board and District leadership decisions.
We as a community of caring individuals, want our community SCHOLARS, one and ALL, to be successful right here in their home town with the kids they call friends.
We BELIEVE that “Family not by blood but by LOVE” is a value worth ENACTING!
Let us STAND TOGETHER and elect a school board that REPRESENTS OUR LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY OF VALUES!
The Superintendent works at the behest of the School Board. They are his Boss. It is incorrect to imply that the School Board has no authority over educational decisions.
Most Superintendents in other districts take their lead from and must answer to the School Board. This does not seem to be the case in this district.
In our small community, it always has to be students first… LBUSD there is the financial ability to support students with needs at the district level.… Only in the rarest of cases where a student would benefit from another Districts educational/behavioral implementation Should the student be transferred out of our district?
The Social emotional needs impact for being transferred out of our district has to be considered with some of our most precious students.
This whole affair is heart wrenching, not only for the young lady and her family, but also for what we are being forced to admit we have become as a community. The Board Chair claims the Board should not be blamed because it was not the Board’s responsibility and the Board did not approve the action. Perhaps it’s time to revamp said Board to ensure that these types of decisions are within the realm of its responsibilities, with the stated goal that Board actions should coincide with the values of the community at large.