Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parental Notification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board forms parental-notification subcommittee after heated debate; vote 3–2
Summary
After extended discussion and disagreement among board members, the Governing Board voted to refer two parental-notification information items to a new subcommittee with four appointed members.
The Temecula Valley Unified Governing Board voted 3–2 on Tuesday to refer parental-notification materials to a newly created board subcommittee, setting membership and preserving further legal and bargaining review.
Board members debated how to reconcile multiple parental-notification proposals on the agenda, including language from Chino and Placentia–Yorba Linda school districts and a proposed draft policy (proposed board policy 4119.24) that some members said needed additional work and legal review.
The motion approved by the board referred information report item 6 and the materials provided by Mrs. Wiersma to a new board subcommittee, to be called "Parental Notification". The subcommittee membership recorded in the motion is Mr. Barham, Dr. Woods (Superintendent), Mr. Arce and Mrs. Lash. Clerk Lene called the roll on the motion: Schwartz — yes; Wiersma — no; Kamrowski — no; Barham — yes; Anderson — yes. The motion carried 3–2.
Board member Mrs. Wiersma described her long involvement in drafting parental-notification language and said she wanted to be part of the subcommittee. "I have worked tirelessly for the last 15 months on parental rights," she said.
Other board members said they wanted a robust policy that draws on policies that have been "battle tested" and that any final policy will require bargaining with employee associations. One board member noted existing district and outside-district policy models — including Chino and Placentia–Yorba Linda — that avoid specific AB 1955 statutory language while seeking to empower parents; the transcript records the reference to AB 1955 as a factor for legal review and bargaining.
Board members amended proposed subcommittee membership on the floor before the final vote; several members argued for continuity by including board members who had previously worked on parental-notification drafts. The board did not adopt any policy language at Tuesday’s meeting; it referred the item to the subcommittee for further review and legal consultation.
The board also discussed bargaining obligations: members repeatedly noted that any district policy change involving working conditions or employee records will be subject to collective bargaining and legal review before formal adoption.
