001Good morning. Welcome. The time is now 9:02 a.m. on June 5th, 2026. Welcome to this regular meeting of the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education including closed session items. I will take roll. Ms. Newbill. >> Present. >> Dr. Rivas. >> Present. >> Mr. Melvoin. >> Here. >> Ms. Grajeda. Ms. Gonez. Ms. Ortiz Franklin. >> Present. >> Board President Schmerelson. >> Present. >> All right, we have a quorum. On the agenda for today, we have one open session item and then four [snorts] closed session items. So, we will now proceed to the open session item. May I have a motion and a second to bring it? >> I'll move it. >> Second. >> Moved by Mr. Melvoin, seconded by Dr. Rivas. Are there any questions or discussion on the item? None? >> None. >>
002Okay. Let's take a vote. Oh, that's right. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Tokofsky. I will give you credit on that one. We have Mr. David Tokofsky signed up on item one. Come on down, sir. You'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. And your mic is on. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you very much, Mr. President, board members, superintendent. I'm here to support the appointment of Matthew to this apparently unfilled position for a long time, and it would be good to know what is going on with the consortium exactly. You've got Culver City, which is in fiscal trouble. You've got Montebello, which is in receivership, and we're in this partnership. What what is this benefit of the consortium and decide whether or not uh it's something that we ought to be working on a
003legislative agenda across the state to undo our ties to these other organizations. And particularly to pursue the federal workforce investment money. This federal workforce investment money, which is CTE money, which a lot of you expressed interest in, has disproportionately moved to cities away from school boards in the state of California. This is where kids have the opportunity to do summer work to to find careers, and it's going over to cities and the cities are building buildings with it rather than helping our kids. Similarly, in government relations issues, um next uh board meeting you'll be working on uh over $500 million of these slab buildings that are unsafe for children across the state. Uh this is a hundred plus school districts, and we're apparently the only one pursuing uh what should be pursued by all districts.
004This is something that legislation should put money aside rather than taking out of the bond. Um nobody pressured the governor over the last 10 years or 8 years to do anything about it. Instead of spending your bond money, you should be working on on getting legislation to help either match or or legislation. Also, the ER measure looks like it's failing. We failed uh in the school districts to be part of that sales tax. The only way that sales tax will pass if it includes the psychologist, nurses, social workers of school districts. So, if it comes back on, you should be there. Finally, the fiscal stabilization and the state money are coming in. This year's tax revenue is now running 10% higher than the great money we got last year. It should be part of your
005fiscal stabilization plan. You were told that you wouldn't get a super cola at this board meeting, and now you have a super cola. So, advocate and pursue. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time, sir. All right. Shall we take the vote on tab one, Ms. Newbill? >> Yes. >> Dr. Rivas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Melvoin. >> Yes. >> Ms. Crieger. Ms. Gonez. Ms. Ortiz Franklin. >> Yes. >> Uh board president Schmerelson. >> Yes. >> Okay, it passes. I have a script to read in the event that it does pass. Um the board took action to waive local graduation requirements pursuant to education code sections 35160 and 51225.3. For Oh, I'm sorry. I made two errors today already. One was for the Um I'm sorry. I'll read that one later. And Ms. Crieger is here.
006Welcome. Okay, now we will read I will read the purpose and authority for the closed session items. I don't have to read the script. Thank you, everyone. Uh under tab two, student matters pursuant to education code section 35146. Tab three, personnel pursuant to government code section 54957. Public employee discipline, dismissal, and release, and the superintendent's evaluation. Uh tab four, conference with legal counsel, anticipated litigation under uh government code section 54956. 9D4. There's four cases. Under pending litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9 D1. Uh Isaac Keller v. LAUSD, Andrew Bennett v. LAUSD, John B. T. Doe v. LAUSD. And the 1776 Project Foundation v. Alberto M. Carvalho et al. All these case numbers are listed on our website. If you'd like to go look them up either at the Superior Court or the Federal Court
007online access systems. And under tab five, conference with labor negotiators pursuant to government code section 54957. 6. The negotiator is Dr. Murphy, and the employee organizations are Associated Administrators of Los Angeles, Teamsters 2010, California School Employees Association, Los Angeles County Building and Construction Trades Council, Los Angeles School Police Association, Los Angeles School Police Management Association, Service Employees International Union SEIU Local 99, Teamsters, United Teachers Los Angeles, and District Represented Employees and Contract Management Personnel. And now the Board will take public comment on the items that I've just read that will be heard in closed session. I do not have any public comment for tab two, three, or four. There is public comment on tab five, conference with labor negotiators. Uh they're both listed as call-ins. Uh let's see if they're with us. Uh Michelle H,
008I see you are on the line. Michelle H, please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Michelle Hyde. Michelle H, please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. >> Hello, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Please go ahead. >> Oh, okay, thank you. Uh my name is Michelle Hyde. I'm a Board Certified Behavior Analyst speaking today on behalf of the California Association for Behavior Analysis, which represents over 37,000 practitioners across the straight across the state. We wish to express concerns about the tentative agreement between LAUSD and SEIU Local 99 dated April 23rd, 2026, specifically about the subcontracting provisions. These provisions have the impact of undermining the special education infrastructure in the LA and surrounding areas.
009NPA's and NPS's are an essential component of the continuum of care for students requiring special education services. The professionals providing these services are specialized trained professionals that cannot simply be replaced by paraeducators hired by the district. Further, NPAs provide essential supervision of their paraeducators, including development of behavior plans, data collection, and support the database decision-making that is critical for students accessing special education services. This is provided by board-certified behavior analysts and other master's-level clinicians. The tentative agreement does not speak to how this component of a student's special education service will be provided should subcontracting with NPAs sunset. What is proposed by the agreement is not equivalent to what is provided through the current model, which includes NPAs and NPSs, and the research is clear. Behavior intervention for students with autism requires consistency, clinical oversight, and
010individualized implementation. A paraeducator who may be reassigned at any moment by a by school personnel and with only an optional 3-day training cannot replicate that. Before you vote, we ask, what is your plan to maintain access to quality behavior and other specialized services for students? Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Doug Mose, I see you're on the line to speak remotely. Doug Mose, please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. Doug Mose. >> Hello, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Please go ahead. >> Hello, this is Dr. Mose. Can you hear me? >> Yes, please go ahead. >> Yes, my name is Doug Mose. I'm a clinical psychologist and board-certified behavior analyst giving comments today on behalf of the Autism Business Association
011and the Stepping Stones Group. I want to draw your attention to a fiscal contradiction created by the subcontracting provisions outlined in the tentative agreement between LAUSD and SEIU Local 99. Your board has approved a fiscal stabilization plan calling for 660 million in savings in the 27-28 fiscal year, the same year the proposed SEIU subcontracting provision takes effect, designed to phase out non-public agencies' role in delivering behavioral support services to your most vulnerable students. Our coalition has conducted detailed financial analysis transmitted yesterday to the district's independent analysis unit documenting that absorbing non-public agency behavioral intervention services in-house would cost the district an estimated 170 million more annually than the current model. That's 26 cents of every dollar you have committed to saving added back by a single provision. In the same year your own CFO has
012called the budget outlook a doomsday scenario. We are not here to oppose this agreement. We are here because this board and the students it serves deserves a formal fiscal impact analysis before this vote is cast. Before you vote, we're asking for three things, none of which require voting no today. One, a formal fiscal impact analysis of this provision. Two, a legal opinion from district council on LAUSD's IDEA obligations. And three, a structured stakeholder process with providers and families before implementation begins. These are reasonable requests. We are prepared to work directly with the IAU and the district staff to validate our findings. The students in this district deserve no less. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Okay, that concludes item specific comment. And now we have general public comment. We've got 18 speakers signed
013up. As is our usual process, I'll call on the folks who listed themselves as speaking in person and then we'll transition to those who signed up to speak remotely. Uh the first speaker is Maria Luisa Palma. Come on down, Ms. Palma. I see you're out there. And after Ms. Palma is Carol Landeverde. Uh then Monica Arrazola and then Diana Guillen. All right, the mic is on and the two minutes is yours, Ms. Palmer. Thank you. >> Good morning. Well, LA Unified continues to be in quite a fiscal pickle and also also in a reputation crisis. And yet your pick to be the figurehead, the superintendent for the district who apparently isn't not with us here today, um leaves a bit to be desired. And I'm here to provide you some assistance in today's uh evaluation
014of the superintendent as you go behind closed doors. Uh at a recent meeting that we had with Mr. Chate because he likes to tell us that he's meeting with parents. Well, he's met with us. That's true. But he proceeded to lecture us at that meeting and take up all our time going completely off the agenda that we've been following on long-standing issues with, according to him, his remedy to um the fact that this district has made financial promises that it's unable to keep due to the financial situation. Uh he proceeded to tell us that you are all, including him, are advocating in Sacramento for more finance assistance from the state, but that that will not include taxes and additional taxes on consumers, but they will be on corporations. And at that point in the discussion,
015I did under my breath a little sound like this. I interrupted and I said, Yeah, I did. I disagree with that statement. And then he came at me and said, well, he draws the line and he will not tolerate disrespect. So he's basically intolerant of disagreement. So at that point, of course, I had to leave the meeting. So I'll fill you in on a fun fact. Do you know how government pension plans are funded? Yes, there are contributions from this district and in some cases from the employee. But that requires growth in the value of the securities owned by CalSTRS and CalPERS based on what? What do you think they're based on? Profits, corporate profits, mostly on large corporations and other types of investments from Wall Street. We need to make sure Mr. Chade is
016aware of this. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Carol Landaberry, are you here? Come on down, Ms. Landaberry, you'll have Usted va a uh va a hablar en español? Okay. Ms. Landaberry is going to speak in Spanish, so if you'd like to hear what she's saying in English, please put your hands up and we'll get you these translation headsets. Okay, listos, gracias. >> Muchas gracias to you. Thank you very much. Buenos días. Good morning. I came really fast in the car. >> [snorts] >> I'm here for something very important. And my child already has 4 weeks he hasn't been to school due to the simple fact that a teacher's assistant tried to touch my child inappropriately. My child made a report to the Russian principal. The We had a meeting with the principal,
017but they haven't taken done anything. I've sent two emails to the school district and to this moment I haven't received anything. They've left things as they are and in reality I'm at the point where I want to go to a higher point. If the board isn't going to help me, then I am going to go to higher legal things because it is not right what is happening. My child has a disability with special education. He has light autism and thank God he reported that. He does not want to go to school. He had two incidents in which I took him to the emergency room because he has light autism and he has diabetes type 1. He has asthma. The child, when he feels that something is going on, he feels suffocated. He can even die.
018And in reality, I am a leader parent and I have always liked for things to be how they are. And I will say something and it's not because I am here. The only person I'm scared of is God. And I respect every single one of you. I respect you. But it is not right for people that are working inside the school district are doing things that they should not be doing. Please, do something about the issue. I've sent two emails and my child has been missing school and that person has not been removed. The principal tried to help, but there is not a job that the district can do. You have me this way and you have done nothing. Please, take this into consideration. I would appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you for your
019time. Uh Monica Arrazola, are you here? I don't see Ms. Arrazola. Diana Guillen, I see you right there. Come on up. You'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. Ms. Guillen is going to speak in Spanish, so if you'd like to hear what she's saying in English, please put your hands up and we will get you translation headsets. Okay, listos. Gracias. >> Uh Buenos días. >> Good morning. First, I want to uh congratulate Ms. Gornes and Mr. Melvoin that will be here for 4 more years, part of the board. And of course, Ms. Rocio Rivas, who with eight hundred and ninety-nine thousand dollars that the syndicate gave to her, she will will be here compared to the teacher that was going against her with two thousand dollars. A teacher who's had 20 years of
020experience. But, the politics of this district earn and what matters is the money. It doesn't people don't matter. Money matters. And I will read a little bit about what is your responsibility because you are not doing what you're supposed to be doing here. You vote to lie to people. You lie You vote to lie to teachers and employees. Your responsibility as elected members is to supervise the annual budget and the responsibility plan, which you read once a year. Then making decisions about students curriculum and security. Here, Ms. Carla Grego will be another making another resolution on the 16th for what? To for the community of LGBTQ. But, that is not one of the responsibilities that you should be doing. That is your responsibility to see the programs, the academic programs for our children and we
021have not seen that. And I'm also curious to see how you are lying to the public, Ms. Grego. You sent the parents an email saying that there are three hun- three point 3.9 billion dollars that the government has in regards to a proposition, which I don't know exactly which one it was, but it's not true. What is not true is that those 3.9 billion dollars is for the whole state, not for the school district. And you only get like 180 million dollars. The 3.9 billion is for the whole state. Stop lying to the parents because that money isn't only for you. >> Okay, the next speaker is Stephen Brenda Ortega. Oh, wait, that's a call-in. Uh, uh, Chavez, Jacqueline Chavez, come on up. You have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. >> Good morning.
022Uh, members of the board, my name is Jacqueline Chavez and I'm a clinical supervisor at Center for Behavioral, Educational, and Social Therapies. And I'm also a parent of a high school student who has relied on both district-assigned and MPA behavioral services throughout their education in this district. I'm speaking today on both in both roles as a clinician and as a parent because this agreement affects me on both sides. As a clinician, when a district assigns a paraeducator, that person goes wherever administration directs them, to any student, to any task. When an MPA assigns a behavior technician, that person serves one student, implementing a specific behavior plan under clinical supervision. They are not the same. As a parent, I have watched what consistent specialized MPA support has meant for my child's development and independence. The notion
023that a reassignable district employee delivers the same outcome is simply not true. And no parent of a child with significant needs would believe it. I'm asking this board before you vote, please explain both. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. All right, Katie Pace, are you here? Katie Pace, come on down. You have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. >> My name is Katie Pace and I'm here representing a group of parents with students in grades 6 through 12. A group that felt so hopeful when you passed using technology with intention resolution. We have since, however, read the draft of the policy and feel that you are completely overlooking our children. As parents, we cannot continue to sit by and watch this age group of students continue to be the guinea pigs for
024tech use within LAUSD. They were in elementary school when given Chromebooks for online learning during a pandemic that no one ever took away from them. They went to middle school and were sent home with YouTube, a new iReady experiment, and a screen addiction in their backpacks. And now these high schoolers are being told that 3 hours a day, 3/4 of their state-mandated instructional minutes, is somehow a limit. I keep hearing, "Well, high school is tricky. It's more nuanced." Yet, there is nothing in this policy demonstrating any sort of nuanced guidelines. There's no mention of how teachers are to coordinate time limits among a student's course load, and no reference to how this may apply to homework. So, it seems like it's not that it's actually nuanced, it's that you think it's okay for teens to
025spend hours on a device. You took away their cell phones, but yet the Chromebooks are even worse because they're now they're now the same all-day distraction just disguised as education. There needs to be maximum time limits for middle and high schoolers, not simply recommendations in this policy. The minimum should be removed as no student, regardless of age, should be required to use a screen daily. The limit should be set by subject per week, not daily, with middle schoolers set at 45 minutes per subject per week, and high school at 1 hour. The passing period device ban needs to be extended into high school as there is still no reason for high schoolers to be in screen in a screen instead of a conversation during lunch. The policy also needs to discourage screen-based homework and have
026homework factored into the screen time limits. Every night we police screen addictions masquerading as homework. Lastly, we need you to enact a complete moratorium on all student use of AI. Every day we learn of its new harms to children. And yes, these teens are still children. We cannot continue to let tech companies sink their teeth into this group of students. This period of adolescence is the second largest period of human development next to the first year of life. This is the time when they are forming all of their executive functions. And so far, they're only learning how to function with a screen. >> Thank you for your time. Next in-person speaker is Mike Bogiao, Mike B. Come on down, you'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. >> Buenos días. Uh dear board, my
027name is Mike Bogiao. I am a concerned parent with just a few reminders about how classroom technology hinders learning. Not talking about coding or video making, that's different. First, as you already know, over a decade of research confirms that literacy and reading comprehension declines on screens. Reading on paper triggers that spatial awareness and memory from the page needed for deeper learning and is lost with the shallow screen skimming. Second, have you noticed how writing by hand forces deeper and more deliberate thought? The subtlety of tactile variation, writing big, small, dark or curvy, straight, connects body and mind learning in ways that rote mechanical typing never can. And third, human-to-human empathetic synchronicity. I see you, you see me, we're looking at each other, essential for nuanced learning between students and teachers, is absent when staring at
028the screens. Lastly, regarding attention and distraction, surveys tracking the digital habits of third through 12th graders reveal about half of every hour on screens in class is spent off task. When the very same tool students use for playing games, watching shows, media scrolls, and private chats is put in front of them for what for school work, how can they be expected to remain on task in the classroom? They can't. Most adults can't and their learning is undermined. And yet, of the 300 minutes per day of instructional time required by the district for secondary students, minutes that include recess and lunch, the new screen time guidance draft recommends an average of half the day spent on screens. This is outrageous. If the school district is serious about giving the next generation of students a fighting chance
029at scholastically outperforming their predecessors, please amend these district guidelines to recommend, of course, no screens through second grade, but cap middle schoolers at 60 minutes and high schoolers at 90 minutes per day. That, dear board, would force using screen time with intention. Thank you for listening. >> Thank you for your time. Okay, now I will transition to those folks who listed themselves as speaking remotely. Steven Brenda Ortega, are you on the line? Steven Brenda Ortega. Not on the line, are you in the room, sir? Steven Brenda Ortega. Faqur Singh, I see you're on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you have two minutes to speak once you begin. Faqur Singh. Mr. Singh, I see you're on the line. There you are. >> Hi, can you hear? >> Yes. >> Perfect. Great.
030Great morning, everyone. Happy Happy Friday, members of the board. I'm again today to to speak and again here today to speak on the matter that I brought up yesterday at the committee meeting and meetings prior, which is the matter of Assistant Gulo, Maria Hernandez and Latasha Buck. These individuals are still employed by LAUSD. They are still paid by taxpayer dollars. Again, these are people who locked a student in a room who reported a rape. They locked her in a room for hours. And then then they were promoted and now earn over $200,000 a year of all of our money, including yours. And then there's Latasha Buck who said that rape was okay since it was 20 years ago. These are spokespeople for the district. Why are they still working for LAUSD? And I understand there's
031been conversations had. We of course, you know, don't know the extent of these conversations. We don't know what action will be taken. And of course there are the regular district regulations around um um you know, fully disclosing actions taken. But we ask for at least some sort of update and we we know that these at the very least we know that these people are still employed by LAUSD. They should be fired or they should resign. Um this I mean you know just imagine what this does to LAUSD's reputation. And again as I mentioned yesterday, I learned that their names have been mentioned on in the national media. Is Justin Golden Maria Sotomayor they have been mentioned in the national media and that's of course on top of recent um allegations against LAUSD in in you
032know in terms of investigations and such. So please I ask the board to consider is this or are these the people who represent your values? Are these the people who you want working on your dime? Please consider consider that and I think you would agree that the answer is no and then please fire them immediately. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Next speaker is Briana Hernandez. Briana Hernandez. I don't have you on the line. Are you in the room? Briana Hernandez? No. All right. Abigail de la Torre. You're signed up to speak remotely. I don't have you signed in right now. Abigail D? No. Uh let's see. Krista Estella Torres. Krista Torres. Not on the line. Are you in the room Ms. Torres? No. All right. Jamila. Jamila, are you on the line?
033You're signed up to speak remotely but I do not have you online. Are you in the room Jamila? Amanda McCarthy, I see you are on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you have two minutes to speak once you begin. Amanda McCarthy. >> Good morning. Can you hear me? >> Yes, please go ahead. >> Good morning. My name's Amanda McCarthy Gucci. I'm a parent and educator who's part of the LAUSD community. I currently work for one of the district's option schools, City of Angels. We're an independent studies school where many students come because they're unable to attend traditional school. In the years following the pandemic, our school community has grown to include students whose mental health is severely impacted and the vulnerable students affected by ICE activity. Our school has maintained classrooms
034at Bellview Primary Center in Silver Lake for over 15 years, building relationships in the community and with local feeder schools. Our campus also serves and houses other programs for vulnerable student groups, including the low incident program, which provides services to children with disabilities such as hearing loss, visual impairment, and orthopedic impairment. We understand that there's a proposal being voted on at some point this month to convert our classrooms at Bellview Primary Center into a medical clinic of some kind. Groups of people from facilities and student medical services have pushed into our classrooms throughout the semester during instructional time, taking photographs and talking about their construction plans, which appear to be very costly. A colleague overheard a member of their team saying that our location had the best view and that's why they were choosing it.
035My understanding is that the school-based health centers are usually housed on traditional campuses where they can reach a maximum number of students. The decision to take over our small campus that serves such a specialized population is confusing, especially considering how many vacant properties and space LAUSD has. The programs that would be impacted by this displacement are asking you to please reconsider the building of a clinic or medical facility at Bellview Primary Center and help keep our programs intact and operating out of this campus. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for your time. The next speaker is Kate Brody. Kate Brody, I see you're on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you have two minutes to speak once you began, Kate Brody. >> Hello, my name is Kate Brody. I'm
036an elementary English teacher and parent of two LAUSD students. I am here representing scores of elementary school parents who are deeply concerned that although the new technology resolution creates much needed restrictions on one-to-one devices for TK to one, it falls short in addressing the proliferation of short-form video content on platforms such as YouTube. So-called brain break videos have become widespread in the youngest grades, and they are anything but a break for young brains. At some point in the last decade, they were foisted upon teachers as a necessary or good educational tool, but they are another example of for-profit tech companies infiltrating teacher training programs and co-opting the language of education wellness to show their own highly addictive products. And it's time for us to correct the record. What was previously a rarity, like a movie
037party once or twice a year, is now part of many youngest learners' daily school routines. Talk to parents in our district, and you'll hear, "My kindergartner wants to be a YouTube star because he watches Danny Go at school." Or, "My child says her favorite part of the day is watching TV." You will learn about hamster videos and slime videos and vlogs and all variety of internet slop. This LAUSD is currently suing YouTube and other gaming and social media platforms for being addictive and harmful to children. The resolution calls for banning student-led use of YouTube on one-to-one devices, but if students are still regularly subjected to YouTube videos via projector or smart board, the same harms remain. Only videos with clear curricular value should be shown in the classroom per the standards outlined in bulletin 145709.
038This bulletin was circulated in 2023 and pertains to digital tools, but at the moment it appears to be largely ignored. It defines instructional materials as materials designed for use by pupils and their teachers as a learning resource that helps pupils acquire facts, skills, or opinions to develop cognitive processes. The language of this bulletin needs to be incorporated into the final technology policy recirculated ahead of the new school year along with communication that makes it crystal clear that the district's guidelines apply to short-form and internet-based content as well as films with MPAA ratings. School administrators and teachers have told SPPS that they are looking to the district for guidance around acceptable classroom video, and this is our opportunity to define and communicate what that looks like. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. The next
039speaker is uh Sandra Martinez Roe. I see you're on the line, Ms. Roe. Please press star six to unmute yourself, and you'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. Sandra Martinez Roe. >> Hi. Hello. >> Hi. Please go ahead. >> Hi. My name is Sandra Martinez Roe, and I am the mother of a fourth-grader in an AISD school, and I would like to talk about the AI task force avoiding conflict conflicts of interest. We have reviewed our four the four AI task force meetings, which convened September 2023, May 2024, and we did not find a single mention of protecting students from the harms of AI or discussion of AI's educational benefit. Indeed, the presentation decks from these meetings read like sales pitches for code.org and the infamous EdTech chatbot program. The resolution clearly identifies
040the need for input from independent experts, yet it also states that the new AI ad hoc committee will collaborate with the superintendent's existing task force to develop recommendations for best practices and guardrails for the use of AI in schools. This is not possible. The existing task force includes representatives from Google as well as code.org, ISTE, and other tech lobby lobbyist groups and trade organizations. Given these representatives obvious financial stake in the outcome of any LAUSD tech policy as well as a federal investigation into the previous superintendent and his relationships with tech vendors, any AI task force convened during the previous administration must be disbanded. Any future task force must not include members with a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest regarding district tech policy. This is how we got here.
041Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for your time. Let's see, Steven and Brenda Ortega, I see you're on the line with us now. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have 2 minutes to speak once you begin. Steven Ortega. >> Hello, can you hear me? >> Yes, please go ahead. >> Good morning board members and interim superintendent Shay. My name is Steven Ortega, alumni from LAUSD, as a volunteer high school and director of youth organizing with Inner City Struggle. I'm here today to demand that the board fully protect Sunny and BSAP funding, fully protect our schools, and stop moving in fear and stand up for our youth. Now more than ever we need our leadership to fully step up and fight against these racist bigots in office who are trying to
042kill our communities. We need you all to fight against this racist, transphobic, xenophobic agenda that should not be reflected in the physical stabilization plan. Since high school I have been organizing and fighting for our schools to have programs and funding so young people can feel safe and seen in their second home. BSAP creates spaces for black students to be seen, fully supported throughout their education journey, and mental health. We had just celebrated 5 years of BSAP and to now hear that this beautiful program will be cut 80% 80% taking away resources from our students and pushing white supremacist agenda. Then he supports our high-need schools to bring in the resources and the staff who know how to support our students for success. Then he is the answer to the inequitable funding that our high-need schools
043needed. Both BSEP and Sunny were what were what the community has fought for and created and are the district needs to continue on protecting. To see that there are no cuts being made to school police with over 70 million dollars in their budget, including 20 million dollars for central office staff, does not sit well with me. The district should not be spending millions of dollars in ed tech contract contracts that truly does not support our youth um achieving in our schools, but instead arms them and criminalizes them. Now more than ever our schools need Sunny and BSEP. We need the district to protect these programs that add student success. Invest in our students and parents. Right now, we need more resources and support in our schools. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. The
044next speaker is Sophie Ryan. Sophie Ryan, you're listed as calling in, but I do not have you on the line. Are you in the room, Ms. Ryan? No. And Anya Maxon. Anya Maxon, I see you are on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Anya Maxon. >> Hi. Uh my name is Anya Maxon and I'm the director of Schools Beyond Screens. We have been calling for a moratorium on student use of generative AI until the ad hoc AI committee provides its detailed guidance to guidelines to the district. In response to this, we have been told that the district already has an AI policy in place titled guidelines for the authorized use of artificial intelligence or bulletin 151113. We have reviewed this policy in
045detail and want to unequivocally state for the record that this policy is nowhere near sufficient to protect students from serious lasting harm. Our most pressing concerns are as follows. The current AI policy fails to acknowledge any of the proven harms of AI, including cognitive offloading, confidence erosion, cheating, the spread of misinformation, the development of unhealthy emotional attachments attachments to chatbots, intellectual property theft, and identity and image theft. The policy assumes that AI usage in a school environment is a necessary necessary educational tool with no data to support such an assumption, relying instead on tech industry talking points. The policy section lacks specificity and guidance for both student and teacher use of AI. It calls in multiple places for future additions, and yet in the two years since the bulletin was posted, no such additional guidance
046has been provided. Furthermore, all of the IOCs associated with the policy have been removed from the district website and now present as dead links. The policy prohibits students under 13 years old from using AI, but we know for a fact that this prohibition is not being enforced, with many reports of children under 13 being routinely exposed to Google Gemini as well as embedded AI chatbots within programs like Adobe Express and Canva. And we have many reports of AI platforms and apps currently in use at LAUSD which have not been vetted or approved by the district at all, which also violates the policy. In light of these issues and the significant well-documented dangers to children's emotional, cognitive, and behavioral health from using LLMs, a ban on student use of generative AI pending the findings of the
047ad hoc committee is both reasonable and absolutely imperative. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your time. All right, that concludes general public comment. Um Board member Griego, I need to come back to you for your vote on tab one. >> [snorts] >> Yes. Okay, six eyes so far. [clears throat] All right, the board is now going to recess into closed session. The time is 9:42 [cough] >> [clears throat] >> 9:42 a.m. Hello, welcome back. The time is now 3:48 on June 5th, 2026. The board is reconvening closed session. Uh we have a quorum. We've got uh board member Newbill, Dr. Rivas, board president Schmerelson, and board member Grego here for quorum. I'm going to report out on matters upon which the board took action. Tab two, student matters. The Board of Education approved
048the waiver of local graduation requirements. The vote was seven eyes. Uh here's what I'm to read. The board took action to waive local graduation requirements pursuant to education code sections 35160 and 51225.3 for a student who is terminally ill and has met all state graduation requirements. The board directs the school The board directs the school a student is currently attending to issue a diploma to the student in accordance with this action. Under tab three, uh personnel, public employee discipline, dismissal, and release, the Board of Education authorized the demotion of one certificated employee. The vote was six eyes and one no from board president Schmerelson. The Board of Education authorized the dismissal of two classified employees. Uh the vote was six eyes and one no, board president Schmerelson. The Board of Education authorized the dismissal of
049two classified employees. The vote was seven eyes. Under tab four, conference with legal counsel, the Board of Education authorized the settlement in the following cases: Keller v. LAUSD, uh Bennett v. LAUSD, and John BT Doe v. LAUSD. The vote was seven eyes in all matters. Terms and conditions will be available upon the finalization of the agreement. Uh the time is now 3:49, and the board is going to recess this closed session meeting until 6:10 26. That's July 10th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. June 10th. here in this room at 9:00 a.m. Thank you.