This lawsuit is like blackmail. We shouldn't give in to such tactics. Take it to court.

Thanks for the more detailed information on the lawyer and law firm. I'm writing to join this lawsuit.

Higgins has good suggestions, however, how does she know that it is "highly improbable" that the change will result in a more racially (or otherwise) diverse? Keep in mind she said this in front of five caucasian board members, in addition to a caucasian superintendent and assistant superintendent. The only minority on the dais was the Gunn student representative.

Having voting districts might just spur some to run if they feel they have a better chance to win and can represent their district. It might also get more people out to vote if they believe that they are voting for a candidate that represents their interests.

One additional option, and not sure if it would be legal, but how about allowing all parents with children in the district to also vote, regardless of citizenship. That would also include VTP students and PAUSD staff with children in the district.

#Samuel,

Web Link

"Non-citizen parents and guardians of children in San Francisco Unified School District are now able to register to vote for Board of Education members, the city's Department of Elections announced. "

Also agree that's it's surprising there was no mention by the board of how to increase diversity on the board and only discussion on how to fight the lawsuit. At the Weekly hosted debate, guess which was the only candidate came out in favor of district voting?

Talk about attacking the symptoms....

@Samuel L.
School Board is a volunteer position. The issue of squashed representation is more like in City Council, where the problem clearly affects which side of town members come from: only the wealthiest (regardless of race) can afford to serve. There is a clear overrepresentation of those on the higher end of the income spectrum on these bodies, but most especially in City Council which has traditionally been filled with people in the richer north - where not surprisingly the city amenities are also better - rather than in the South side of town.

But this is where the litigants go off the rails here. In this town, it’s mostly not about race, it’s about socioeconomics, and most minorities who live here are neither sequestered nor in lower social strata. Making district elections roughly by north and south of town makes sense for City Council. It makes no sense for school board. The plaintiff’s analysis by race ignores the relevant facts. White members like Dauber had to run twice before elected, and many people asked Dalma to run again because they support her views, nothing to do with race. She chose not to run again for personal reasons. Subramanian withdrew very early, and not only did that not have anything to do with race, he still garnered so many votes relative to two incumbents (one a white woman who lost), it’s very likely that if he had remained a candidate he would have won.

Our town is too small and generates too few qulified candidates for these important volunteer positions. There is also no clear divide across town by race that makes sense in terms of district elections. All district elections for school board would do would be to deny the voting rights of the majority of residents of all races to pick the most qualified candidates and get rid of bad ones.

This is a form of blackmail and the district should fight back with SLAPP countersuits, and get other disteicts to join. It would be nice to see thrm use their legal costs to protect us for once rather than using them against families - in a way, I would add, that they have disproportionately affected protected classes of students. District ekections that further reduce our choices for school board would only make this worse.

Boo to people trying to come in from outside like bulls in a china shop and tell is what to do in ways that are guaranteed to hurt our schools, thwart democracy and actual voter rights, and cost money. They should be ashamed of themselves for shaking down school districts.

One thing that would be worth moving to is ranked choice voting, though. But that’s another discussion.

"Also agree that's it's surprising there was no mention by the board of how to increase diversity on the board"

Not accurate. Collins talked about city-wide proportional representation voting as something to explore. That would retain city-wide candidate pool, but increase (in theory) minority representation. Maybe impractical, but was discussed.

@SamuelL, my assertion that it would be unlikely to produce a more diverse pool of candidates is based on analysis of other districts across the state who have been forced by the same action to make the change to a district instead of “at large” system. Even in districts where there is concentration of minority groups in certain areas, the results have been in underwhelming in terms of adding diversity to school boards.
I recommend you take a look at this article: Web Link
The other major issue with this change is that board members will only feel the need to represent the interests of voters who reside within their “district”. This is very problematic for a unified school system. Do you want a candidate whose allegiance is only to 3 elementary, one middle and high school?
I think there are other ideas out there that are worth exploring, including ranked choice and the ones I mentioned at the board meeting. The lawsuit is cookie cutter rather than tailored to the specifics of our school district and the assertions made relating to our district do not hold up to scrutiny. There is no mention that in recent years we have had 2 Asian American board candidates successfully run and won.
The attorneys bringing these suits are motivated by an easy $30,000 if the district agrees to go along with the suit.

The letter mentions an Asian who lost in 2016, obviously Subramanian, but doesn't mention that Subramanian (who withdrew very early) got like three times as many votes as the white guy who lost...

District elections value geographic diversity over intellectual diversity. I'm in MP district 2 looking at a city council election wherein I won't have an option of voting for a no growth candidate. At least with at large elections I made have a broader selection of candidates.

God made an idiot for practice, then he made school boards.
- Mark Twain

I wonder if this is a money shakedown like the one made about restaurants not meeting the ADA Requirements. He sent out many letters hoping to catch a sucker and prey on a victim. This incident does not pass a smell test.

One option is to put the issue to the voters. Let them decide if they prefer at-large or by district-based elections.
Let the people decide.

Perhaps that could put this crappy lawsuit to bed?

@Vote

Your solution to a majority hegemony is to ask the majority to vote on whether they want to give up their privilege?

What do you expect to happen after the vote?

Either the vote passes and we have district elections or the vote fails giving more ammunition to the law suit. Either way we end up with district elections just how much we determine we want to spend.


The choice is simple: limit the costs to $30K and go for district elections or expect to spend years and in the region of $5M fighting a losing battle along with every other CVRA challenge so far.

You may not like being forced to change - perhaps the district should have done something before now. You can vote those responsible out in November.


Some food for thought..

Web Link
"the [the Saugus Union School District and College of the Canyons] city settled for $600,000 – all of which went to attorneys; "


Web Link
"City of Santa Monica Enters Second Year of Fight Against Voting Rights Lawsuit"
"In 2017, total fees to the outside firm handling the case...estimates the suit so far has cost the City about $4 million."


Web Link
"estimating the city of Palmdale spent $7 million fighting the lawsuit in 2015 before capitulating and creating districts".


Web Link
"no city in California has yet won California Voting Rights Act-related case and said Encinitas was likely to lose $2 million or even $3 million in a failed attempt to fight a lawsuit. "

Read this fromLA Times
Web Link

But he says his group only sues or threatens to sue when it can show that a Latino-majority district can be created in those cities.

There is no way that you could draw districts by race in this town. Any attempt would violate federal laws, and would deny virtually everyone’s rights to vote for good candidates given how few people run for these offices.

If someone cares about defending those whose rights are being violated telative to our schools, they would make free legal services available for anyone in need of fighting the district for violating their special needs child’s rights, because right now only the wealthy can ensure their children get what they need.

This is ridiculous! Palo Alto is full of liberals, there is no racism on the board, nor was there ever. Barb Klausner and Dana Tom (both Chinese) were on the School Board for two terms each. If some Chinese person wants the board to kick-up the rigor in our school district because it's not as rigorous as China, then they should move their children to Cupertino (Monta Vista) or Fremont (Mission San Jose High) where they can compete as if they are in China. PAUSD is plenty rigorous. [Portion removed.]

[Post removed.]

Posted by Chinese Parent, a resident of Community Center

>> This is ridiculous!

Unfortunately, the law, intended to ameliorate some real and highly visible wrongs in some other districts, has the unintended consequence of creating and supporting a legal cottage industry for law firms such as the one involved here. PAUSD is in a difficult position. It is, in this case, "frivolous". But, there is no cost-effective way to fight it.

"If some Chinese person wants the board to kick-up the rigor in our school district because it's not as rigorous as China, then they should move their children to Cupertino (Monta Vista) or Fremont (Mission San Jose High) where they can compete as if they are in China." Houses and neighborhoods better in Palo Alto. If can afford, prefer to live in Palo Alto. Old Chinese prefer Palo Alto as well. Up to student to be rigorous. Only way to get into good college.