California Legislation Seeks to Limit Public Agency Activities Surrounding Immigration Enforcement and Religious Freedom

California Legislation Seeks to Limit Public Agency Activities Surrounding Immigration Enforcement and Religious Freedom

In December 2016, shortly after the November 8 presidential election, members of the California Legislature introduced for consideration a series of bills addressing immigration enforcement. 

May 18, 2017 Business & Facilities

Responding to Requests for Public Records on Behalf of an Auxiliary Foundation.

As public agencies, California community college districts are subject to the California Public Records Act (CPRA), the Act that grants members of the public access to a district’s “public records.”  Under the CPRA, public records include any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, or retained by a public agency, regardless of physical form or characteristic.  When a member of the public requests these documents, a district must disclose these writings unless a statutory exception applies.  

May 18, 2017 Education Matters

The IDEA’s Statute of Limitations Looks Forward From the Date of Discovery, Not Backward

In 2006, the Avilas, parents of G.A., a student in the Spokane School District 81, asked the District to evaluate their son for special education services.  A school psychologist evaluated G.A. and concluded that G.A.’s behavior was not severe enough to qualify for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).  In 2007, the Avilas requested that the District re-evaluate G.A. for IDEA eligibility.  A school psychologist concluded in a reevaluation dated April 14, 2008, that G.A. was eligible for special education services for autism.  About a year later, the Avilas and the District both filed a request for a due process hearing regarding a subsequent reevaluation of G.A.’s behavior.

May 18, 2017 Education Matters

Draft Report of Psychologist’s Evaluation and Emails of a Fleeting Nature with Casual Discussions Are Not “Education Records” to which Parents Are Guaranteed Access under the IDEA

E.D. attended Colonial School District in Pennsylvania during her kindergarten and first grade school years.  E.D.’s parents filed a lawsuit claiming, among other things, that the District denied E.D. a free appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.  The lawsuit sought review of the parents’ unsuccessful claims at the administrative level.  Both parties filed motions asking the court to rule in their favor.

May 18, 2017 Education Matters

Reclamation Districts May Levy Assessments on School Districts

Reclamation District No. 17 (“Reclamation District”) is a special district that maintains levees and provides flood protection benefits to San Joaquin County.  Each year, the Reclamation District imposes assessments on the properties within its boundaries for these special benefits.  The Manteca Unified School District (“School District”) owns real property within the Reclamation District’s boundaries.  

May 18, 2017 Education Matters

Under CEQA's Subsequent Review Provisions, Substantial Evidence Must Support An Agency’s Determination That Project Changes Will Require Only Minor Changes

In 2006, the San Mateo County Community College District (“District”) adopted a Facilities Master Plan (“Plan”) proposing nearly $1 billion in new construction and facilities renovations at the District’s three college campuses. At the College of San Mateo (“College”), the Plan included a proposal to demolish certain buildings and renovate others. The buildings slated for renovation included the College’s “Building 20 Complex,” which includes a greenhouse, lath house, surrounding garden space, and an interior courtyard.

May 18, 2017 Education Matters

Application of the U.S. Civil Rights Act to Sexual Orientation Discrimination

Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) has long prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex in the terms, conditions or privileges of employment.  One question of ongoing statutory interpretation has not been definitively answered: what constitutes “sex” for the purposes of employment discrimination?  Are the terms “sex” and “gender” interchangeable under the law?  And does the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex extend to a prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation?