[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6225070,"mediaKeyId","3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d","parentId",3540966,"title","Public speakers urge board to end legal fight over resolution banning critical race theory after appeals court finds it vague","audioSeconds",456,"startMs",2830000,"endMs",3286000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d&start=2830&end=3286","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d/thumbnail_2830000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6225070/California/Public-speakers-urge-board-to-end-legal-fight-over-resolution-banning-critical-race-theory-after-appeals-court-finds-it-vague","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225070-109c7b43cf58e81e5a847dc7942c0391/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118667&Signature=E3hE0pT-BA53TTAfNraDCNC~5TRryrLmH7wHNKvZT6y8X0m93zeG3UMoUV0Wf-rVVtcBhETsNgdKZOx5Ijrl-MWVrW~8hnDifpdRiPD~254H4zdKA1fef2vIfr~Z2MS04iYC9QKOUDMmyx-FC1FI8MobMT7rHkaKkzucxsiDCbAqaE5EzHQ6NGHymDJdszMuEf4kWGZFfpeA~0~R2ZXUm6HF8SwZD3hoWk9elzuZRtE2jq4o3dhjmAg-PdvjPhimkHpVWpNCsPk0kC5-kqAY7rD-jibfAYYnRlfkrWqGLcG7lYic6kYMDNvHL5--joM9O0TzHowN8U7ob4xhJRQuAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Desert Sands Unified School District","date","2025-05-28T12:56:11.41Z","article","Multiple members of the public urged the Temecula Valley Unified board during public comment May 27 to stop defending a board resolution that banned critical race theory (CRT) and to end the district’s contract with Advocates for Faith and Freedom (AFF), the outside law firm the board retained to defend the resolution.

Why it matters: the dispute touches district legal spending, board governance and curriculum oversight. Several speakers described the resolution as unnecessary, legally vulnerable and costly; the court of appeal recently found the resolution unconstitutionally vague on its face, a ruling speakers cited in urging the board to take new steps.

What public speakers said
- Multiple commenters said CRT had never been taught or planned in district classrooms and argued the December 2022 resolution (commonly labeled Resolution 21 in public comments) was unnecessary and hastily adopted by a previous board majority. One commenter said the policy was “not battle tested” and that similar policies in other districts were not enforced and therefore not litigated.
- Speakers criticized the district’s choice of outside counsel. Several public speakers alleged a conflict of interest in the district’s 2023 contract with Advocates for Faith and Freedom, arguing the firm has political ties and that the contract contained clauses that lock the district into paying fees even if the district later chose to end the relationship. Apneet Dhaliwal told the board, “The contract locked the district into pursuing defense to the Supreme Court and paying AFF all fees if the district ever settled, refused to appeal, or fired AFF.”
- Call to action: speakers urged the board to rescind Resolution 21, terminate the AFF contract, hire independent counsel and refocus district funds on classrooms and facilities. One comment said the board should “start spending our money on students’ education” instead of litigation.

Board context and history (as stated by public commenters)
- Several speakers said the resolution was hurried through by newly seated trustees in December 2022 without adequate staff input or legal review. Commenters asserted that earlier trustees urged a more deliberative process but were overridden at the initial vote.
- Public commenters pointed to the August 2023 contract with AFF and to subsequent legal fees the district incurred to defend the resolution. Commenters said the district had spent a substantial amount on legal defense and that the litigation produced limited educational benefit.

Formal actions and status
- The court of appeal issued an opinion finding the resolution insufficiently specific to be enforced; speakers said this undermines the basis for continued defense of the policy. At the May 27 meeting the board did not take a new vote on Resolution 21 during open session; public speakers urged that the board rescind the resolution and terminate the AFF contract.

Closing note: speakers framed their requests as both fiscal and educational priorities — urging the board to limit legal expenses and to refocus on curriculum review and school needs. The board did not announce any immediate change to legal strategy on the record during the May 27 open session.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","MAY-27-2025 11:00 AM ◇ Special Meeting ◇ Open Session ◇ TVUSD Governing Board","oneSentenceSummary","Multiple members of the public urged Temecula Valley Unified trustees May 27 to rescind the board resolution banning critical race theory, terminate a contract with Advocates for Faith and Freedom and stop spending district funds on litigation after an appeals court ruled the resolution too vague to enforce.","taxTitle","Temecula Valley Unified, School Districts, California","taxId",14501,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6225075,"Board to refine parental‑notification policy, reinstate committee and send draft policies to attorney for review",569,2072000,2641000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d&start=2072&end=2641","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d/thumbnail_2072000.jpg","/articles/6225075/California/Board-to-refine-parentalnotification-policy-reinstate-committee-and-send-draft-policies-to-attorney-for-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225075-94477754756f4d9d24c5e738db0ba6f9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118667&Signature=AuHbxsPszLKM1U9uwkEVnaMuTn25Is~xPhJm4sOAQvL5l9rXBcgUWAg0u4btBT1SV7aFbis1dZv2hgiYFg4f2-RrVv2GkJQtqb9DLbd4xtaRE-Ubzel0Hd2kRv1a30-fDgdwk3ZLngL747icGwk8JkjFacM0hdhtkp4iAM5nd8XkIe0bMAEkDXDc8RQXjGfEdisZN1gUQdWhr3gT0kcsg12MAyzdifpTgXYCGl-kTTTA8o4~5zy5R1~UUQVXX-kaVSlxJSURzkwXeYTjIa-ypsWNt87qWrLe4cxIVpQazVxcUfPYI~NXD0H8FlB9kEg80rZN8aoDBQqgeSm0se7p6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Temecula Valley Unified School District governing board discussed updates to parental‑notification policy and a plan to reinstate a parental‑notification committee during its May 27 special meeting. Board president Dr. Melinda Anderson asked board members to review draft language and indicated she would present polished board‑policy edits for attorney review before seeking action.

Why it matters: the board is addressing how and when parents are notified about student mental‑health services and other school matters; proposed changes touch on superintendent authority, Brown Act constraints, confidentiality for minors and which items warrant immediate parental notification.

What the board discussed
- Drafts and process: Dr. Anderson said she consolidated ideas from board members and will circulate updated policy language for review. She asked directors to identify missing elements and said she would present the draft with changes highlighted for board review and attorney review before any action.
- Reinstating the parental‑notification committee: the board agreed to reinstate the previously suspended parental‑notification committee to continue work on specific policy items. Dr. Anderson said the committee had been suspended while members worked on distinct topics and would be reconstituted.
- Emergency authority language: Trustee Joseph Komrovsky and others proposed adding language giving the superintendent authority to act “in any situation in which immediate action is needed to avoid any risk to the safety and security of district students, staff, or property or disruption to student learning.” The draft also included a clause requiring notification to parents within 24 hours for nonacademic communications deemed necessary to avoid risk. Dr. Anderson said she would add the suggested language and present it to the board for refinement.
- Brown Act and counsel review: board members repeatedly stressed attorney review. Dr. Anderson said the intent is to supply attorneys with a draft that reflects the board’s preferred language so counsel can “polish” rather than draft from scratch, which she said reduced outside legal cost in a prior policy update.

Clarifications and limits discussed
- Where to post and which policies to update: trustees identified specific board policy numbers for amendments, including 5145.6 and others relating to library access and student wellness; Dr. Anderson indicated she would incorporate trustees’ edits and return the policies for committee and attorney review.
- Scope of superintendent authority: some trustees questioned whether the superintendent already possesses statutory authority to act in emergencies; proponents said adding policy language would remove ambiguity and set a formal 24‑hour notification expectation.
- Process and timing: the board agreed on a multi‑step process: staff consolidation of edits, subcommittee and committee review, attorney review of the consolidated draft, and then a board meeting where trustees could approve, amend or reject final language.

Board direction and next steps
- The board did not vote to adopt the policy at the May 27 meeting. Trustees asked that the consolidated draft be returned to the committee, that the committee solicit legal review, and that Dr. Anderson present the edited draft to the full board prior to any action.

Public comments during the meeting included requests that the board ensure legal protections for minors and maintain transparency with parents; trustees said staff would gather and present relevant statutes and legal guidance to the board before final action.","The Temecula Valley Unified School District governing board discussed updates to parental‑notification policy and agreed to reinstate a parental‑notification committee May 27, directing staff to consolidate edits and submit the draft for attorney review before the board considers adoption.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6225080,"Temecula Valley Unified outlines plan to bill services under state CYBHI after $983,835 capacity grant",1600,465000,2065000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d&start=465&end=2065","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d/thumbnail_465000.jpg","/articles/6225080/California/Temecula-Valley-Unified-outlines-plan-to-bill-services-under-state-CYBHI-after-983835-capacity-grant","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225080-a546c891c9f22c1c3f54361e80df9473/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118667&Signature=QYLM463WVVA0Ecpp2W9vlZKJnverrw-rRprdCKUtwgBj0aCPW564q8KJU5erJ8hj-QJMWxw8O42yKC3cm5keFiBEaQLvYDiVZXc1U4jUGkBE65RE29LLq2KsbFLqVFx4YKFxEa4zXN0fMKhMVhiqSjaM6kNwPB6Zp~hv1ql~HKyd0C4eRG~FHBL80QMFbd4iNMTzuT3nfN6HPuM9gQwQtnnjEZxUQWWhz2n8Ymk6OZYZoVDXFPwneYpFgRRFXn3xpL12qbSxcFH1CJhTjDZduhifMfwBQIjKG6s3FhZ7zJSoNEcUEIQB5xB1bDuYQf8BroK31guNx6KRS6ta7nQQXA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Temecula Valley Unified School District trustees heard a May 27 presentation on a plan to seek reimbursement for school-based behavioral health services through the California Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI) and to use a newly awarded $983,835 capacity grant to build billing capacity and hire two positions.

The presentation outlined how the district already bills Medi‑Cal for certain special‑education services, described the CYBHI fee schedule and explained that the district intends to align existing MTSS (multi‑tiered system of supports) interventions to CYBHI billing categories. Kelly Gradstein, director of student welfare and success, told the board, “Our grant award is $983,835.”

Why it matters: if implemented and operationally sustained, the reimbursement program would create a new local revenue stream to fund SEL (social‑emotional learning) staff and systems the district already uses. Board members and staff raised implementation questions about parent notification, confidentiality for minors, explanation‑of‑benefits (EOB) issues and long‑term financial sustainability.

Most important facts: district billing today and what would change
- The district currently bills Medi‑Cal for services provided to students with services listed on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), Gradstein said; that billing is processed through the district’s LEA billing program. Examples given included behavioral health, speech and language, physical therapy and adapted physical education.
- CYBHI creates a separate fee schedule that allows participating LEAs to submit claims for a broader range of school‑based services and supports, including screening, management and treatment categories. Staff are working to map existing interventions (for example, small group stress‑management or anxiety groups) into the appropriate CYBHI categories.
- Gradstein described the operational workflow: teachers identify concerns and collect data; if additional supports are needed staff contact parents, obtain consent for Tier 2/3 plans, document interventions in the student information system (Infinite Campus), implement supports and monitor outcomes. If the parent consents to billing, staff would collect insurance information and submit claims to CYBHI’s third‑party administrator once interventions are completed.

Parent notice, confidentiality and EOBs
- Gradstein said the district intends to seek insurance information and bill on a case‑by‑case basis, not by blanket notice to all families. “Our plan is to do it on a case by case basis,” she said, adding that the district prefers one‑on‑one conversations with parents as needs arise.
- Board members asked whether parents would receive an explanation of benefits (EOB). Gradstein said, according to CYBHI rules as she understands them, insurance companies will not send an EOB to parents and there will be no copay charged to families; instead, parents would receive district‑produced summaries on request. Dr. Joseph Komrovsky also noted AB 1184 and related state law affecting confidentiality of some sensitive services (for example, certain transgender‑related care) and told the board that the district must ensure any policy does not conflict with that statute.
- Gradstein said the district does not plan to bill insurance when parents do not consent. She said, “if a parent was on board with a plan, but they weren't on board with providing their insurance ... we just wouldn't submit for reimbursement. We would still continue to provide the support.” She also said that existing provisions in the Education Code permit limited circumstances (for minors 12 and older) in which parents are not notified; the district does not intend to bill for confidential services where parental notification is excluded under law.

Capacity grant and implementation steps
- The district applied for a CYBHI capacity grant and learned in January that the county approved its application. Gradstein identified the award amount as $983,835 and said contracts were expected in June or July; the capacity funding is intended to support operational readiness and build back‑office systems needed to bill reliably.
- Planned uses the presenter listed: two grant‑funded positions for two years (a lead SEL team member and a billing specialist), an electronic health record (EHR), training and professional development, materials and resources, and additional funding to support campus wellness centers and “friendship rooms.” Gradstein said the capacity funding is expected to be spent by June 2027.
- On sustainability, staff said the district will plan for the two grant‑funded positions and an EHR to be sustained by revenue generated from reimbursements if the program proves viable. Gradstein and other staff recommended reevaluation after one year; one board member said the district should assume a conservative one‑year horizon while testing the fee schedule.

Operational questions board members raised
- Data and transparency: trustees asked for disaggregated data on wellness‑center use (how many “pop‑ins,” how many frequent users) and how parents would be notified about nonbillable Tier 1 usage; Gradstein said the district has begun collecting such data and plans to disaggregate it next year.
- Liability and malpractice: trustees asked whether medical‑malpractice coverage would be required for staff; staff said cost estimates for sustaining two positions and an EHR were still being refined and would be part of future budgeting, and that an RFP will be required for the EHR.
- Implementation timeline: staff said contracts were expected in June or July; operational rollout would be phased as systems and training are completed.

Board action and next steps
- This item was presented as an information item; the board did not take formal action during the May 27 meeting. Gradstein told the board she would return with contract details and a funding plan for future board action.

Closing note: Gradstein emphasized service continuity. “The resounding sentiment on our team is really that we want to preserve time with kids and continue to provide the support and care that we do,” she said. The district said families who decline to provide insurance information will continue to receive district‑provided supports regardless of billing status.","Temecula Valley Unified School District trustees heard a May 27 presentation on a plan to seek reimbursement for school‑based behavioral health services through the California Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI) and to use a newly awarded $983,835 capacity grant to build billing capacity and hire two positions.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6225066,"Board debates structure and authority of proposed advisory committee; superintendent directed to move forward",670,2780000,3450000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d&start=2780&end=3450","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3540966-cac028135c4e6de4f42797b13c37fa1d/thumbnail_2780000.jpg","/articles/6225066/California/Board-debates-structure-and-authority-of-proposed-advisory-committee-superintendent-directed-to-move-forward","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225066-84de71f739e62d28d2daa403cb52a586/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118667&Signature=mR-JXt7-Tcu-ZO6kDF0Hm6rVSd5grkQj97YyotQZsRF0xfkUZLhgysvXgN6SRGo9uQPGqK06O4YUBVkx59G79hdylwCVjJ32xke8EgjYhfWtCeQLjqAykdGLIFd4VfvRwBM-ey9YxSCCql9DujfAaAX3ZrpR3Pme0sc5aOSxKiNR6NrQ9znPX73BTGo9hI4GztaWLHcrO459NQXMrndzb6y7oyqZlIJwLYOOGyG2uVrLaCCDWbpJq9tOcRWZv0Lteu5w5v1LOR4gR9A7f19dc0IdvflB7qnrvpJ1lqiJLIjs62l2JpCc5~i0j6eEZRhtoN8EzRAi2YbnGQkDPKxqsA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Trustees spent a substantial portion of the May 27 meeting debating a proposed board advisory committee: how often it would meet, who appoints members, how many board members should serve, and whether the superintendent should select community representatives.

Why it matters: an advisory committee could provide sustained community input on complex district issues (bond measures, academic programs, lawsuits). Trustees expressed divergent views about oversight, composition and the risk of creating a standing body that could become entrenched.

Key points from trustees and superintendent
- Composition and appointment: some trustees argued the board should appoint community members to avoid concentrating appointment power with a superintendent; other trustees said allowing the superintendent to nominate a subset of members would help ensure broader parent representation and usability.
- Term length and gatekeeping: concerns were raised that a single board member on the committee could become a passive “bystander” if the superintendent’s appointees were the majority; trustees discussed two‑member representation to avoid a single trustee becoming a gatekeeper.
- Meeting cadence and reporting: Superintendent Gary Woods said the committee typically would meet monthly during the school year and present summary information to the board three or four times per year or as directed; Woods described the committee’s work at his prior district and said members did homework and produced substantive recommendations.

Board direction
- After discussion trustees directed Superintendent Woods to proceed with drafting a plan for the committee, including membership parameters; Woods and staff will return to the board with proposed language for committee formation and governance.
- Trustees did not adopt final committee membership rules or a formal policy at the May 27 meeting; the item will return to the board after staff work and likely attorney review.

Context: governance and caution
- Several trustees urged caution about creating permanent bureaucratic structures and suggested exploring temporary ad hoc subcommittees for discrete projects instead of a standing committee. Other trustees argued the advisory committee had produced valuable guidance in other districts and recommended piloting the committee.

No vote was taken to create or dissolve any committee at the May 27 meeting; the superintendent was given direction to draft the committee plan and return it for board consideration.","Trustees discussed whether the superintendent or the board should select members for a proposed board advisory committee and debated term lengths, representation and removal rules; after exchange, the board gave Superintendent Gary Woods direction to proceed with a draft plan for committee formation","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public speakers urge board to end legal fight over resolution banning critical race theory after appeals court finds it vague

Board to refine parental‑notification policy, reinstate committee and send draft policies to attorney for review

Temecula Valley Unified outlines plan to bill services under state CYBHI after $983,835 capacity grant

Board debates structure and authority of proposed advisory committee; superintendent directed to move forward