STATEMENT MADE BY MARCOS AGUILAR CALLING ON LACOE TO "CURE AND CORRECT"

THE FOLLOWING IS THE STATEMENT MADE BY TLAYECANTZI MARCOS AGUILAR ON 9/16/13 CALLING ON THE LACOE BOARD OF EDUCATION TO "CURE AND CORRECT" THEIR VIOLATION OF THE BROWN ACT AGAINST THE APPEAL BY ANAHUACALMECAC:

Good afternoon Boardmembers,

My name is Marcos Aguilar. I am the Executive Director of Semillas and principal of Anahuacalmecac founded to address the needs of historically educationally disadvantaged students in our communities. The fact is that the almost 80% of students in our communities who do manage to graduate from high school are not eligible to enroll in the UC/CSU university systems. After five years our success rate reverses this trend in particular for students with learning disabilities, English learners and Indigenous students. Yet, on September 10, 2013, the Board of Education of the Los Angeles County Office of Education effectively denied our appeal to renew our charter.

Upon witnessing the fallacies, contradictions and unprecedented maneuvers resorted to by the LACOE Charter Schools Office staff on behalf of the LACOE Superintendent, LACOE Board members Mr. Tom Saenz, and Dr. Jose Calderon responded with a methodical line of inquiry clearly unraveling the Superintendent’s position.  As a result, the LACOE Superintendent’s recommendation to deny the appeal of Anahuacalmecac failed due to its weak and illicit foundations. Our students are today speaking to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to advise them of these facts.

The Board of Education of the Los Angeles County Office of Education has an important opportunity to once again reconsider the renewal of the charter of our school. Due to discriminatory treatment and outright abrogation of the law governing our appeal, AIUP students now find themselves at risk of losing their best chance at college.

We are here to request the LACOE Board of Education reconsider our appeal by September 30, 2013, otherwise we would have to appeal to the State Board of Education and even if successful, AIUP could not operate for an entire academic year. All legal matters aside, the most urgent issue raised by these egregious violations of our students' rights to a college preparatory education in our school is the unconscionable and disparate impact against our graduating twelfth grade class and significantly large percentage of special education students.

In summary, we urgently request your reconsideration of the renewal of the AIUP K-12 charter petition. We also ask that you initiate an investigation of the LACOE Charter Schools Office with regards to the matter of our appeal process and the multiple examples of a violation of process, disparate treatment and even legal violations of our rights as petitioners, parents and students at the hands of LACOE Charter Office staff and LACOE Board members.

I am also here to call your attention to what I believe were substantial violations of the central provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which may jeopardize the finality of the action taken by the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE), regarding the appeal for the renewal of the charter petition of Anahuacalmecac International University Preparatory (AIUP).

The LACOE Board violated the Brown Act by discussing the AIUP charter renewal at its September 3, 2013 meeting for more than 14 minutes, even though it was not on the agenda.  That also violated the Charter Schools Act.  Further, the LACOE Board violated the Brown Act at its September 10, 2013 meeting when LACOE Board member Doug Boyd referred to a “letter” from an undisclosed source that was not made available to public or other board members.

Even though Cal. Gov. Code Section 54954.2(a)(2) states that “a member of a legislative body or its staff may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her activities”, Mr. Boyd’s statements went beyond the scope allowed under section 54954.2(a)(2) because Mr. Boyd’s statements were not formulated in the forms of questions but were rather unsubstantiated accusations against AIUP and its staff.  Those statements were not brief because they led to a discussion which lasted for over eleven minutes and they did not report on his activities, but instead focused on his reading and presentation of a slanderous letter alleged to be from a former parent.   This alleged letter was never provided to the public as required by the Brown Act but entered into the Board’s consideration of our school’s petition as a decidedly biased and influential source of in the mind of at least Mr. Boyd.

Tomorrow will be the sixtieth day in the calendar of our appeal to renew the charter  of Anahuacalmecac and pursuant to Government Code Section 54960.1, I will be forced to demand that LACOE cure and correct the illegally taken action as follows: to declare LACOE’s vote of September 10, 2013, on whether to deny the appeal for the renewal of AIUP’s charter petition, null and void. I will also demand that the Board of Education reconsider the matter within the thirty-day period established by the Brown Act.

As provided by Section 54960.1, you have 30 days from the receipt of our demand to either cure or correct the challenged action or inform us of your decision not to do so.  If you fail to cure and correct as demanded, such inaction may leave me no recourse but to seek a judicial invalidation of the challenged action pursuant to Section 54960.1, in which case I would also ask the court to order you to pay my court costs and reasonable attorney fees in this matter, pursuant to Section 54960.5.  In closing, please keep in mind that your Board was misled, lied to and purposely confused by the staff of the Charter Schools Office and even your general counsel’s office. For example, our board members never admitted to violating the Brown Act, our petition’s budgetary administrative cost percentage is 4% not 25%, and our Board meets regularly, participates actively and monitors our school’s achievements and challenges diligently. We are prepared to offer you all of our evidence to merit your reconsideration of our appeal. Thank you.