Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: I begin conversations with attorneys, district refuses to document accusations of my unprofessionalism for 10 weeks now, teachers’ union agrees to ‘most restrictive orders’ | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: I begin conversations with attorneys, district refuses to document accusations of my unprofessionalism for 10 weeks now, teachers’ union agrees to ‘most restrictive orders’

Perhaps the most helpful communication is a summary of events to the most recent article, the specific updates when they occurred, and preview of coming events (articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

Summary (links = full documentation): The California “lockdown orders” we were all told were necessary to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” have lasted since March 3, 2020. The California Emergency Services Act (ESA) is derived from California Government Code 8558 (b) that requires “beyond control” hospitals to authorize emergency dictatorial orders. Because Californians never received comprehensive hospital data, our government and corporate media “leaders” are lying in omission. Because problematic “positive cases” were substituted for “beyond control” hospitals, our leaders lie in commission. All testimony I’ve received from ~20 medical professionals here in NorCal report all hospitals they know of have been fully within their control throughout the “pandemic.”

As a NorCal public school teacher, at the start of our school year in September 2020 I inquired to our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limits to dictatorial authority. I cited our mutual Oath to “support and defend” the US and CA Constitutions. I reminded the district I merely ask them as educated professional adults to perform what we expect from all our Californian Middle School students in our State teaching standards: “Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.” (page 81).

After two requests, the district contact person responded by ignoring my questions, and that employees are required to obey “California mandates” “to protect you” under threat of being terminated. I emailed our district superintendent, school board members, my school principal and two interested teachers that we teach all high school students in our US History classes that the district’s position of “just following orders” is an illegal defense, and asked again how ESA limits are being honored.

After continued district silence, I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety to support apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of employment termination, $1,000 fines per violation, and one year imprisonment.

Our union responded with support to ask the district, and to communicate privately that they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because the working conditions were negotiated in good faith. The grievance process finished with district and union agreement the complaint didn’t qualify as a grievance.

I appealed the district’s answer to our community school board for what the district redefined as a “written complaint.” From October 2 to December 18 2020 the district was silent, despite policy promising a response within 30 days of the board’s receipt. After this December 13 reminder they were out of compliance for a response, the superintendent answered that the school board upheld the district response without comment.

I also received a “non-response” after nearly 5 months from my complaint to the US Department of Justice regarding unlimited government. My complaint to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint was fielded with a phone call response in December, with their promise to follow-up, and silence since then.

In March 2021, our NorCal public school superintendent sent all staff an email citing county deaths from COVID nearing 1,300 with 80,000 “cases.” He also asked for our professional responses to an upcoming survey. I responded with three basic questions: how many of our staff and students have died of (not with) Covid, what is the data for overall county deaths given controversy over causes of deaths, and how many staff and students have been injured by vaccines. He ignored my questions twice, which I then shared with our school’s ~100 teachers as Chair of a school Professional Learning Community (PLC) on broad educational topics directly affecting our school’s teaching and learning. A few teachers have communicated support, but our Social Science Department found no interest in this topic when I emailed them in inquiry.

Our district superintendent then answered my questions, and concluded with: “If you do not agree with the state and county guidelines or if you believe we are not following them, please pursue your questions and concerns with the appropriate agency.” I responded I would do so, and report my findings.

I followed up with 14 CA government agencies over 6 weeks, with all ignoring the question of how the limit of “beyond control” hospitals was being honored for “emergency” dictatorial authority, and CA Senator Glazer’s office stating the 60-day limit applied only to “non-safety” related orders. I hadn’t considered an American legislature would surrender forever dictatorial powers to a governor or elected officials without a time limit, as public recourse would be limited to recall (as is happening with Governor Newsom) or electing other legislators.

School district and CA government “answers” are therefore intentional lies of omission to claim they answered a question about ESA to “justify” dictatorial government while leaving out any consideration of crystal-clear letter and intent requiring that our hospitals are “beyond control.” The 14 CA government agencies claim dictatorial power to close businesses, stop social gatherings, force masking, force humans to forever remain no closer than six feet from each other, and with forever power until legislators or governor say otherwise, and while lying in commission that “emergency powers” are authorized by unreliable “positive” “cases.”

At the end of April 2021, I wrote a lengthy and fully documented report of those 14 CA government agencies’ responses, and emailed it with a cover letter to district leadership, school board members, teachers’ union leadership, our PLC members, and school teachers. The district’s Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources immediately responded with threats of disciplinary action for unspecified violations of district policies, as did my school principal. The district has yet to respond to my questions regarding their undocumented complaints as the “foundation” to their threats.

I appealed to our teachers’ union for relief (and here, here). After 4 emails and 15 days of silence from our union President and VP, I sent this email to 14 of the Board of Directors of our teachers’ union. Our President and VP then responded for a next step “to gain clarification regarding matters within our scope and discuss next steps, if any.” We Zoom-met, and our union President met with district Assistant Superintendent of HR on May 25, 2021. The district emailed me claiming my PLC report somehow “harasses or disparages” my colleagues “based on their political beliefs,” yet fails again to provide any documentation or explanation despite the union and my requests.

I filed three employee grievances for apparent contract violations, with our contract requiring my silence of proceedings. On July 8, I spoke by phone with our teachers’ union president, who reported that the district is again considering my Grievances as employee complaints, with HR Assistant Superintendent admitting failure to address my requests for the district to document and explain their complaints.

On July 9, 2021 our teachers’ union held a Zoom conference with ~100 teachers to explain the tentative agreement for work conditions for 2021 - ‘22 school year for staff, students, and families to obey “the most restrictive health measures” “ordered” by state, county or federal government. I asked the first question for our union to explain how the state has ordering authority given the strict limits of “beyond control” hospitals, with union president, VP, and another union board member responding they are still representing my question, but all legal information they’ve received is that there is no requirement to oppose ordering authority until proven in court.

**

Update 1: My attorney(s)? I’ve begun conversations with attorneys at two firms who are active and motivated to uphold Constitutional Rights. If either of these move forward, I’ll consult with the attorney(s) what is appropriate to share publicly.

**

Update 2: Ongoing district silence (per se defamation?) Since April 26, the district has chosen silence rather than respond to my repeated requests to cite what I wrote and explain the problem they see to threaten “disciplinary action.” The district claims that my emailed report to ~100 staff at my high school in my capacity as a Professional Learning Committee Chair regarding the most authoritative 14 CA government agencies ALL REFUSING to address how “health orders” can be lawful was claimed by the district to be harassing and/or insulting to other staff members’ political opinions.

Our teachers’ union president will have her second meeting with the district’s Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources in attempt to get an answer.

**

Update 3: Union/district agree to “most restrictive health measures” Our teachers’ union held a Zoom conference with ~100 teachers to explain the tentative agreement for work conditions for 2021 - ‘22 school year. I asked the first question of the call regarding a premise of the agreement claiming the district is required to follow state and county health orders:

Q: Please explain how the agreement provision to obey “the most restrictive health measures” “ordered” by state, county or federal government is legal in light of our Constitutional Rights we’re all Oath-bound to protect and defend, and the strict limit of California Government Code 8558 (b) cited by Governor Newsom 16 months ago that requires imminent threat or actual “beyond control” hospitals to authorize emergency dictatorial orders. Californians have never received comprehensive hospital data, and all testimony I’ve received from ~20 medical professionals here in NorCal report ALL hospitals they know of have remained FULLY WITHIN CONTROL throughout the “pandemic.” Californians were “bait-and-switched” to accept problematic “positive cases” rather than operational hospitals. So, how is agreeing to ongoing “health” “order” obedience lawful, especially when California high school students are taught in World History, US History, and US Government that “just following orders” is illegal authority that MUST be rejected without demonstration those orders are within the law.

Our union leadership of the President and VP explained they are still representing my question, but all information they’ve received is that there is no legal requirement to oppose ordering authority until proven in court. I repeated my request to speak with the CTA attorney because the limits to dictatorial “health” “orders” are crystal-clear in letter and intent to require “beyond control” hospitals. My sense of the following 2 hours is that my concern was not shared by other union members.

**

Up next: Will the district retain their position of unsubstantiated allegations against my professionalism for asking how their policies honor limits within applicable laws? Will attorneys take my case? Will any colleagues join my cause?

Stay tuned to find out!

Comments

SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA