In San Francisco, Virus is Contained but Schools Are Still Closed

[David Lockmiller]

Regarding the possible renaming of Abraham Lincoln High School in San Francisco, I wanted to let everyone know that there are potentially dark clouds on the horizon, according to the Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, Erwin Chemerinsky. He is the renowned author of eleven books, including leading casebooks and treatises about constitutional law, criminal procedure, and federal jurisdiction.


Did S.F. school board's renaming of 44 schools violate California law?

San Francisco Chronicle -- Kellie Hwang
Feb. 10, 2021Updated: Feb. 10, 2021 4 a.m.

The controversy swirling around the decision to rename dozens of San Francisco schools continues to grow.

The San Francisco Unified Board of Education’s recent vote to rename 44 schools because they bear the names of historical figures linked to racism and oppression has opened the district to potential litigation under California’s meeting-transparency law, according to San Francisco attorney Paul D. Scott.

In a letter Saturday addressed to the board’s president, Gabriela López, Scott demanded that the board repeal the resolution it passed 6-1 at its Jan. 27 meeting. He alleged that the board did not properly notify the public that it was making a final decision to rename the school sites, which include ones honoring Abraham Lincoln and George Washington.

Scott said the board provided advance notice only that it would decide on a list of “potential” schools to be renamed. As a result, he said, the board violated the notice and agenda requirements under the Brown Act — California’s open-meeting law — and denied due process to families and the public.

His letter declared a 30-day window to “cure or correct” the action, and said that if the board does not reverse its decision, “legal action will follow.” He told The Chronicle, “The only way to implement the will of the communities is by giving them adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard on a school-by-school basis.”

Scott had outlined his legal conclusions in a letter Feb. 1 to Mayor London Breed, calling for a review and opinion by the City Attorney’s Office “so the School Board will have an opportunity, if appropriate, to reconsider its course of action.”

“While the language of the resolution indicated that the Board was going to consider approving a list of school names for potential renaming,” Scott noted, the district then sent out a news release that “goes further and states that the decision has now been made to rename the schools on the list and only alternate names will be considered going forward.”

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the Berkeley School of Law, said that the board could respond to the demand letter by changing its meeting notification — but then proceed to deliberate and follow the same course.

“I understand that the claim was that the notice given was not sufficiently specific to meet the requirements of the Brown Act,” he said. “If this is correct, there is a basis for overturning the decision. The board could then do it again, but would need to give proper notice of the meeting and then could deliberate and vote the same way again.”

“In other words,” Chermerinsky said, “if this succeeds, it would delay the decision, but likely not change the outcome.”

Scott said that if the board followed that course, “We would have to take a close look at the specific actions taken by the School Board.”

Scott said the matter should be handled on a school-by-school basis, after students are back in schools and the public can engage in person, particularly those who do not have access to technology. He expressed concern about a decision affecting the 44 campuses en masse, adding that the actions were based on the findings of an advisory panel created by a board resolution that was to offer recommendations by June 2020 but delivered its findings in September.

“Beyond the notice issue, it is also highly problematic for the Board to be rubber-stamping a list of 44 schools produced by an unelected panel whose tenure had previously evidently expired,” he said. “Given how important each individual renaming decision would be to so many people, it is hard to imagine how the affected communities could possibly be given a fair hearing if the decision is made as to all of the schools at once.”

Scott, whose children attended San Francisco public schools, told The Chronicle he has been “approached by numerous others about their concerns or about them joining in an action if it proves necessary.” He said “there would be no shortage of plaintiffs” for a lawsuit.

The school board, city attorney and mayor’s office did not respond to requests for comment.