Schools & masks

Carl Bherman has provided copies of 8 letters in which he is fighting the tyranny in schools. You can find letters 1 – 8 here: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/09/challenging-our-public-school-districts.html

Copied and pasted content:

Part I

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment (1 of ?)

Below is my email to our NorCal public school district’s designated contact for questions regarding “health” “orders.” Two weeks ago I wrote our teachers’ union leadership with similar questions, and followed-up yesterday as I received no response (articles 12345678)

My plan is to politely seek an explanation. Without plausible explanation how masks are within limited government, the alternative explanation seems to be that mask requirement is workplace harassment. Importantly, if Governor Newsom and counties have no lawful authority to enforce dictates to We the People, and insist on orders that any reasonable person would conclude are OBVIOUSLY outside emergency conditions, they are violating Federal Article 18 Section 242: DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW:
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

My email to our district contact, teachers union, and school principal:

**

“Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move.”  

~ Dr. King’s 1967 speech that silence is betrayal

Hi (omitted),

As the designated HUSD contact, please explain as our employer how requiring masks is legal, and not a textbook example of unlimited government we teach all students to reject. 

Because HUSD is supporting the county’s “Health Order,” HUSD has a burden of proof to demonstrate how threat of fine and/or imprisonment is within the limits of government power.

If after this reading you agree that masks are a lawful order, please explain the legal authority to me. I will then explain this to families, students, and colleagues. This is a chain of authority we teach to all our high school students. 

If you find that masks are an unlawful order, then please work with me to change the unlawful order back to original county and state language of guidelines.

Please answer the following basic and obvious questions

  • What is the authority the county has to demand wearing masks or be fined and/or imprisoned?
  • If that authority comes from the governor’s emergency declaration in March, what is the definition of “emergency”?
  • How have emergency conditions been demonstrated as real?
  • If required emergency conditions of overrun hospitals never happened, nor need for military field hospitals that were built, nor need for military hospital ships, how do the required conditions for an emergency still exist?
  • Because hospitals have been and are operational (so empty that most laid-off staff), doesn’t that remove emergency dictatorial authority? If not, please explain.

I’m politely, humbly, and professionally asking for HUSD to fulfill their legal obligation to fully explain an extraordinary and unique demand on employees. As I cite below, I’m demonstrating what HUSD expects all of our children to learn and do.

This explanation is especially important and timely given apparent physical and psychological health risks to require everyone to fully cover their mouth and nose or risk removal from one’s family to be locked in a cage.

If I’m wrong, please talk me down.

If I’m right, you have a legal obligation to stand with me to remove this illegal act of dictatorial and unlimited government. With all respect, I remind everyone of our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” 

I ask because of what I see as a National Board Certified Teacher with a background of helping shape and deliver ~300 policy briefs for Congress for domestic and international policies to end poverty, along with networking among other legal experts. Please see abundant documentation here for what we see:

  • California law authorizes governors to declare “health emergencies” if, and only if, there is real or provable threat to overrun local response capabilities. This is exactly what we were told in March: “Flatten the curve to protect our hospitals.”
  • There was no emergency realized: hospitals here were near-empty, military field hospitals weren’t needed, military ship hospitals weren’t needed.
  • Therefore, no emergency exists, and no authority exists for state and local government “emergency orders.”

With all respect, unless you can cite the lawful authority to require masks, then the “order” is a textbook example of “unlimited government” we all teach to reject. Indeed, “unlimited government” “orders” was the foundation to begin the United States of America, and the main reason we all teach the curricular standard of limited government.

Definitions:

The Governor is hereby empowered to proclaim a state of emergency in an area affected or likely to be affected thereby when:

(a)He finds that circumstances described in subdivision (b) of Section 8558 exist; and either

(b)He is requested to do so (1) in the case of a city by the mayor or chief executive, (2) in the case of a county by the chairman of the board of supervisors or the county administrative officer; or

(c)He finds that local authority is inadequate to cope with the emergency.

~ California Code 8625

“State of emergency” means the duly proclaimed existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions such as … epidemic, … which, by reason of their magnitude, are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of any single county, city and county, or city and require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to combat …  ~ California Code 8558 (b) 

emergency: a sudden, urgent, usually unexpected occurrence or occasion requiring immediate action.

WHEREAS I find that conditions of Government Code section 8558 (b), relating to the declaration of a State of Emergency, have been met;…

Proclamation of a state of emergency, Governor Gavin Newsom, March 4, 2020

Supporting documentation to encourage your honest responses: 

I am literally asking the educated professional adults at HUSD to do what all California students are required in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards):

“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”

“Civics is not limited to the study of politics and society; it also encompasses participation in classrooms and schools, neighborhoods, groups, and organizations. . . . What defines civic virtue, which democratic principles apply in given situations, and when discussions are deliberative are not easy questions, but they are topics for inquiry and reflection. In civics, students learn to contribute appropriately to public processes and discussions of real issues. Their contributions to public discussions may take many forms, ranging from personal testimony to abstract arguments. They will also learn civic practices such as voting, volunteering, jury service, and joining with others to improve society. Civics enables students not only to study how others participate, but also to practice participating and taking informed action themselves.”  ~ California History-Social Science Framework, pg. 9

From page 14:

“Teachers are encouraged to have students use the community to gather information regarding public issues and become familiar with individuals and organizations involved in public affairs… Whenever possible, opportunities should be available for participation and for reflection on the responsibilities of citizens in a free society… At each grade level, students can reflect on the individual responsibility and behavior that create a good society, consider the individual’s role in how a society governs itself, and examine the role of law in society.”

From page 15:

“Educators want students to perceive the complexity of social, economic, and political problems. They want them to be able to both comprehend and evaluate an argument and develop their own interpretations supported by relevant evidence. Educators want them to have the ability to differentiate between what is important and what is not. Students need to know their rights and responsibilities as American citizens and have both the capacity and willingness to participate in a democratic system of government. Educators want students to understand the meaning of the Constitution as a social contract that defines a democratic government and guarantees individual rights. Educators want them to respect the right of others to have different beliefs and ideas. Students need to take an active role as citizens and know how to work for change in a democratic society. The value, the importance, and the fragility of democratic institutions must be understood by all students. Only a small fraction of the world’s population now or in the past has been fortunate enough to live under a democratic form of government, and students need to understand the conditions that encourage democracy to prosper.”

From Appendix E on page 780:

“In today’s information age, informed citizens must be prepared to evaluate multiple and often contradictory sources to identify evidence for constructing claims, making arguments, or drawing conclusions about public issues, policy, and political candidates.”

In conclusion: 

I want everybody to win in my obvious and reasonable challenge to a “mask requirement.” A win will be our modeling professional responses to scholarly questions that are accurate. Please help everyone win with honest responses that you would be proud that I share with students, parents, colleagues, and our broader communities.

I am asking deliverance of HUSD’s Mission and Core Values:

MISSION STATEMENT

We draw from our community’s rich diversity in order to create an engaging and equitable educational experience, delivered in a safe and supportive environment.

CORE VALUES

  • Well-Supported Staff: We enhance the capacity of every employee to promote equity and model service excellence.
  • Collaborative Leadership: We develop leaders at all levels who creatively tackle our challenges and communicate with integrity and transparency.
  • Data-Informed Decisions: We use multiple types of data, including stakeholder voice, to inform decisions and monitor progress.

Part II

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment: HUSD ignores questions (2 of ?)

Below is my second email to our NorCal public school district’s designated contact for answers regarding “health” “orders.” Three weeks ago I started by writing our teachers’ union leadership with similar questions, followed-up with them last week, and have yet to receive a response (articles 12345678).

My plan is to politely seek an explanation. Without plausible explanation how masks are within limited government, the alternative explanation seems to be these “orders” are workplace harassment.

My second email to our district contact, teachers union, superintendent, school board members, and school principal:

**

“Students recognize that under the American democratic political system the United States has achieved a level of freedom, political stability, and economic prosperity that has made it a model for other nations: the leader of the world’s democratic societies and a magnet for people all over the world who yearn for a life of freedom and opportunity. Students understand that Americans’ rights and freedoms are the result of a carefully defined set of political principles that are embodied in the Constitution.”  

California History-Social Science Framework, “United States History and Geography: Continuity and Change in Modern United States History,” page 432 (emphasis added)

Dear (name omitted),

Six days ago I requested HUSD to explain how their new and extraordinary work conditions were legal. I asked specific questions I hope all our students would appreciate as consistent with what they’re learning about American limited government. These questions are likely on the minds of thousands of our community members, millions of Californians, and perhaps 100 million Americans.

I haven’t heard from you, and request at least a status-response by the end of this week: by September 11. As these orders direly affect thousands of our community, I’m now including in this email our district superintendent and school board members.

Here again are my obvious questions:

  • What is the authority the county has to demand wearing masks or be fined and/or imprisoned?
  • If that authority comes from the governor’s emergency declaration in March, what is the definition of “emergency”?
  • How have emergency conditions been demonstrated as real?
  • If required emergency conditions of overrun hospitals never happened, nor need for military field hospitals that were built, nor need for military hospital ships, how do the required conditions for an emergency still exist?
  • Because hospitals have been and are operational (so empty that most laid-off staff according to all professional testimony I’ve heard from dozens of expert medical witnesses), doesn’t that remove emergency dictatorial authority? If not, please explain.

For those reading who are understandably confused, perhaps this will help:

  • Our community and state are experiencing the worst economic attack in history to close or limit businesses declared “non-essential.” 
  • Our community members are ordered to never approach within 6 feet of another human outside your home, and “wear a Face Covering when outside and when anyone else other than just members of their Social Bubble is within 30 feet (10 yards).”
  • Our community is threatened by fine and/or be locked in a cage for failure to comply.

As an example of what I’m asking HUSD to do in accepting these “orders,” if a person asked what the law is for drivers to stop at a stop sign, one could be clearly shown the law. 

If HUSD cannot clearly and transparently explain the law along with the emergency conditions authorizing such restrictive orders, then on its face the authority for such orders do not exist. The emergency conditions seem to be “overrun hospitals” according to California law I documented in our first email. If hospitals are overrun, that data must be transparent and independently verifiable. Objective evidence to substantiate claims is exactly what we teach our students to demand for democratic consideration for reasonable public health and safety laws. 

And again, all medical professionals I’ve personally spoken with, as well as dozens going public via video, claim the opposite of emergency conditions.

HUSD should not give the obviously incomplete response that all our Social Science teachers would return to students for further work: “We just follow orders.” 

I also hope I don’t have to emphasize to this community of professional educators how wrong and dangerous blind obedience to authority is in essence and consequences. Indeed, in the first study I’m aware of, three Ph.D professionals with direct academic training and work experience document the “lockdown” will cost Americans ten times more “life years” than the virus. 

Again, all I am asking you to do what California students are required in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards):

“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”

If the authority for “health orders” cannot be shown, then this is outside their authority, and a textbook example of unlimited government. Without such authority, illegal “orders” are void, and therefore seem to be illegal workplace harassment, threat, and intimidation. 

Of course, individuals are free to wear masks and social distance at their choice.

If I’m wrong about this as a teacher of AP US Government and with experience working closely with political leaderships of both parties over 18 years that led to two UN Summits for heads of state (1990 World Summit for Children, and 1997 Microcredit Summit), then please talk me down.

If I’m right, then our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic” requires HUSD to amplify this message to downgrade status from “orders” to “guidance.” 

We all share this Oath. 

I respectfully request that you honor your Oath. 

I cited California law that the limit to the governor’s emergency powers seems clear: 

  • If local hospitals are overrun, then the governor has emergency authority.
  • If local hospitals are operational, the governor has no emergency authority.

Therefore to honor your Oath, it seems you either need to provide an explanation that these are lawful orders along with verifiable data of overrun hospitals, OR to ask county officials to honor their Oaths to downgrade their threatening illegal orders to “guidance.”

All of our students, parents, staff, and community members deserve a clear explanation, especially since thousands of our school families and friends are direly affected by being ordered they are “non-essential” workers, and are forbidden to earn income in those jobs to feed, care for, and house their families.

To emphasize: I’m respectfully and professionally asking HUSD to explain how your support of extraordinary “orders” is lawful with reasonable and obvious questions that likely thousands of our community members also have.

Again, my intention is only and always for win-win outcomes. In this case, we model truthful and professional scholarship for objectively accurate and comprehensive facts. 

Are you aware of the original factual claims at the origin of economic strangling “lockdown”?

  • The Imperial College computer model led by Neil Ferguson predicting over 2 million American dead was both false and so incompetently contrived that it is likely a criminal lie
  • The “official expert” making the prediction at the source of the “lockdown” was caught having an extramarital affair in multiple violations of “ordered” healthy persons’ “quarantine.” 
  • Ferguson predicted in 2009 that 65,000 would die in the UK from Swine Flu (he was off by 64,500+).
  • Ferguson also predicted up to 200 million dead from Avian Flu in 2005 (low hundreds died).

While you’re probably aware that children are relatively safe from infection, did you know that Stanford and UCLA also find our adults are relatively safe? Their findings: even without masks or “social distancing” (an Orwellian term) the risk of death for adults ages 50-64 is just 1 in ~19 million, with chance of hospitalization 1 in 852,000. For magnitude figure of HUSD having 1,000 adult teachers and staff, this means the risk of hospitalization is currently one hospitalized HUSD adult between now and the year 2872.

We teach the principles of Gandhi, a practiced attorney, who used the power of overwhelming factual evidence to demonstrate hypocrisy from his own government. I recommend taking Gandhi’s words to heart:

“One thing we have endeavoured to observe most scrupulously, namely, never to depart from the strictest facts and, in dealing with the difficult questions that have arisen during the year, we hope that we have used the utmost moderation possible under the circumstances. Our duty is very simple and plain. We want to serve the community, and in our own humble way to serve the Empire. We believe in the righteousness of the cause, which it is our privilege to espouse. We have an abiding faith in the mercy of the Almighty God, and we have firm faith in the British Constitution. That being so, we should fail in our duty if we wrote anything with a view to hurt. Facts we would always place before our readers, whether they are palatable or not, and it is by placing them constantly before the public in their nakedness that the misunderstanding between the two communities in South Africa can be removed.”  ~ Mohandas K. Gandhi, Indian Opinion (1 October 1903)

HUSD has the opportunity to model what Gandhi and Dr. King provided in leadership for equal treatment under just laws.

HUSD can continue our Hayward legacy for justice and freedom.

I promise to share your responses to our community so that everyone clearly understands the unprecedented changes to our schools, and why so many of our businesses are being “ordered” under threat of fine and imprisonment to remain closed.

In all respect and support,

Carl Herman

National Board Certified Teacher

National Board Certified Teacher Coach

Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

Part III

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment: HUSD ‘just following orders’ (3 of ?)

I received a response from my school district’s contact person for questions regarding implementing county “health orders” that I print below along with my response. This is my third email requesting that my school district’s leadership defend their support of forcing “non-essentials” into poverty, masking our community, and demanding they never approach another human closer than six feet (articles 12345678).

**

Good morning Carl,

Face coverings are required in the workplace per California mandates.  The face covering requirement is an established policy and employees are directed to wear it, unless they have a medically verified exemption.  HUSD has established this policiy (sic) to protect you, your co-workers, their families, and the community.  We are operating in accordance with state and local safety and health guidelines.

Best Regards,

**

My response:

“State of emergency” means the duly proclaimed existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions such as … epidemic, … which, by reason of their magnitude, are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of any single county, city and county, or city and require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to combat …  ~ California Code 8558 (b) 

“WHEREAS I find that conditions of Government Code section 8558 (b), relating to the declaration of a State of Emergency, have been met;…”

Proclamation of a state of emergency, Governor Gavin Newsom, March 4, 2020

Do not conform” is difficult advice in a generation when crowd pressures have unconsciously conditioned our minds and feet to move to the rhythmic drumbeat of the status quo. Many voices and forces urge us to choose the path of least resistance, and bid us never to fight for an unpopular cause and never to be found in a pathetic minority of two or three.” ~ Dr. Martin King, Transformed Nonconformist, November 1954

**

Dear (name omitted), Superintendent (name omitted), HUSD School Board, and other esteemed colleagues,

With all respect, the answer HUSD provides is a version of “just following orders.” 

This is clear to everyone here, right?

We education professionals model and teach our students to reject “we just follow orders” as the answer to why we obey authority. 

We’re all in agreement on this point, true?

The answer HUSD provides ignored my central question that many in our community are asking, along with millions of Californians and tens of millions of Americans:

How is declaring millions of Americans “non-essentials” forbidden to earn a living, forcing people to never get closer than 6 feet, and requiring masks an example of limited government?

As an AP US Gov teacher, I’m only bothering you because I can’t construct any reasonable argument that this “health” policy is lawful, and am asking for your explanation. If you haven’t closely read and understood the written limits to emergency powers I cite from California law to begin this message, please do so.

If your answer is like mine, that you can’t imagine any argument under the limits of emergency powers being “by reason of magnitude, are or are likely to be beyond control,” then here’s my proposal moving forward: 

Please amplify this message by requiring our county to justify their restrictive policies under threat of fine and imprisonment, OR to downgrade to advisory suggestions.

I spoke with another doctor on Wednesday who repeated what dozens of other local healthcare professionals unanimouslyreport: No hospital they know of have any Covid problem outside of normal hospital management.

Because the answer I received from HUSD ignored my central question, I apologize for providing further structure. Please answer in some reasonable way:

“The county’s ‘health orders’ are an example of limited government because the limits to emergency powers are (fill in this blank), and ‘non-essential’ business closures, mask requirements, and ‘social distancing’ are within those limits because (fill in).”

Please provide a reasonable explanation within a week (Sept. 18), or amplify this question to the county for similar answer. Any reasonable explanation seems required to provide objective independently-verifiable data of county hospitals having a Covid problem “beyond control.”

Please model what we expect of all California students in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards):

“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”

Please stand for HUSD’s Mission and Core Values:

MISSION STATEMENT

We draw from our community’s rich diversity in order to create an engaging and equitable educational experience, delivered in a safe and supportive environment.

CORE VALUES

  • Well-Supported Staff: We enhance the capacity of every employee to promote equity and model service excellence.
  • Collaborative Leadership: We develop leaders at all levels who creatively tackle our challenges and communicate with integrity and transparency.
  • Data-Informed Decisions: We use multiple types of data, including stakeholder voice, to inform decisions and monitor progress.

In all respect and support,

Carl Herman

National Board Certified Teacher

National Board Certified Teacher Coach

Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

Part 4

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment: last warning before 3 legal complaints (4 of ?)

The following is my fourth email to my public school district’s leadership. They have yet to answer my one simple question of how their obedience to our county’s “health” “orders” are within the stated limits of emergency powers. I now provide choice for their reasonable answer by Monday, September 21, 2020, or my initiating three legal complaints to force their answer (articles 12345678).

**

§ 8629. Termination of state of emergency; proclamation

“The Governor shall proclaim the termination of a state of emergency at the earliest possible date that conditions warrant.” ~ California Emergency Services Act 

§ 8627.5. Authority of Governor; nonsafety regulations on delivery of food products; pharmaceuticals; and other emergency necessities; form of orders and regulations; effect; duration

(a) The Governor may make, amend, or rescind orders and regulations during a state of emergency that temporarily suspend any state, county, city, or special district statute, ordinance, regulation, or rule imposing nonsafety related restrictions on the delivery of food products, pharmaceuticals, and other emergency necessities distributed through retail or institutional channels, including, but not limited to, hospitals, jails, restaurants, and schools. The Governor shall cause widespread publicity and notice to be given to all of these orders and regulations, or amendments and rescissions thereof.

(b) The orders and regulations shall be in writing and take effect immediately on issuance. The temporary suspension of any statute, ordinance, regulation, or rule shall remain in effect until the order or regulation is rescinded by the Governor, the Governor proclaims the termination of the state of emergency, or for a period of 60 days, whichever occurs first. (emphasis added)

*

Dear HUSD colleagues,

I’ve professionally asked three times for HUSD to explain how your imposition on our work conditions are within the limits of California’s emergency powers. Please allow me to summarize the facts and HUSD’s position that I will begin presenting to legal venues on Monday, unless you’d like to accept my completely reasonable proposal to amplify my question to require an answer from the county. 

If any of the claimed facts are in error, please let me know.

If the county can legally justify their emergency orders with the apparent requirement of transparent hospital data “beyond control,” I will verify their data claims then fully consider their response. If the county provides similar cooperation as HUSD has so far demonstrated, HUSD must force answers in legal venues as I model, and publicly withdraw support of their “orders” to the downgraded “advice to accept or reject.”

Facts unchallenged by HUSD, and HUSD’s position:

  • “State of emergency” means the duly proclaimed existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions such as … epidemic, … which, by reason of their magnitude, are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of any single county, city and county, or city and require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to combat …  ~ California Code 8558 (b)
  • “WHEREAS I find that conditions of Government Code section 8558 (b), relating to the declaration of a State of Emergency, have been met;…”  Proclamation of a state of emergency, Governor Gavin Newsom, March 4, 2020
  • HUSD chooses to ignore my central question of how emergency dictatorial powers are within the above limit of “beyond control” and therefore a legal policy of limited government rather than unlimited, illegal, and void policy.
  • (You can add the citations at the start of this email from California’s Emergency Services Act that seem to show the Governor’s emergency powers legally ended in May. Aren’t you curious enough to demand county answers to all these interesting facts?)
  • HUSD rejects my simple remedy: ask the county to either explain their policy as lawful and supported with transparent hospital data, OR downgrade “orders” to “advice.”
  • HUSD chooses to respond to this central question of limited government we all teach our students to stand for by stating a position we all teach our students to reject, a version of: “HUSD just follows orders.”
  • HUSD’s position is to co-conspire with the county’s “health” “orders” to threaten employees, parents, and students with fines up to $1,000 for every violation, and to be forcibly removed from their families and locked in a cage up to one year: Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1).
  • HUSD supports forcing our community families into economic emergency by “teaching” some of them are “non-essential workers” and must surrender their income, while also “teaching” HUSD will stonewall questions how this is a lawful “health order.” 
  • HUSD’s position to support closing “non-essential” work is an economic emergency of enforced poverty of “non-essentials” (Yelp reports 60% of their businesses communicate they have been permanently destroyed). I can’t imagine a more destructive policy to our community.
  • HUSD’s position is to offer the same flowery “reasons” we teach all students to recognize as a pattern of historical dictatorial regimes: “public safety” without transparent and independently-verifiable data (in this case that hospitals’ Covid response is “beyond control”).
  • HUSD’s position is to ignore our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic” by stonewalling the obvious professional and legal response to either answer the central question of limited government, or amplify it to the county for their answer.
  • HUSD’s position is to refuse to model what we teach all our students to perform beginning in Grade 6 (page 81 of Common Core Standards): “Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”
  • HUSD stonewalls crucial facts I provided that any reasonable party would engage with as further motivation to ask the county to justify “health” “orders” with transparent data of the legal limit of “out of control hospitals”: 
    • The original model of “pandemic” data is from a hypocrite who resigned in disgrace, and with history of at least two previous “death by pandemic” predictions off by 99% and 99.9999% (hereherehere).
    • Stanford and UCLA report that even without masks or “social distancing” (an Orwellian term) the risk of death for adults ages 50-64 is just 1 in ~19 million, with chance of hospitalization 1 in 852,000. For magnitude figure of HUSD having 1,000 adult teachers and staff, this means the risk of hospitalization is currently one hospitalized HUSD adult between now and the year 2872.

As you may know, there are hundreds of similar legal challenges across America and the world (perhaps thousands), with Pennsylvania’s “health” “orders” declared void by a federal judge.

Why does HUSD oppose simply asking the county to justify their “orders”?

As nobody I’ve addressed has responded, I ask just once more before I initiate legal action to force HUSD’s response: 

Why is HUSD opposed to such a reasonable and easy remedy to just ask the county about their data justifying “out of control” hospitals?

As a helpful educator, I don’t recommend your current choice of standing for unlimited government, and having to defend against the above facts in legal venues and to our community. But this is your choice, not mine. 

Last chance: either talk me down from my understanding of illegal HUSD policy or you’re welcome to try your current approach in legal venues.

Monday: Grievance, Civil Rights complaint, workplace harassment complaint against HUSD:

Grievance: I will begin a Level I grievance against Superintendent Wayne and whoever else applicable for violating Article 9 EMPLOYEE SAFETY to “make provisions for the safety of unit members in all aspects of their employment. This shall include published District or school procedures on the safety of unit members.”

HUSD’s embraces policy that on its face is outside emergency power limits. This devolvement to unlimited and dictatorial government includes threat of fine and imprisonment. Obviously, HUSD is in egregious violation of our safety to order us to obey, ignoring questions why by simply repeating “Obey,” and under ongoing HUSD support to fine us $1,000 per violation, arrest us, and lock us in cages up to a year. 

This is among the most unsafe and terrifying procedures imaginable. HUSD setting the precedent to support illegal policy under threat of fine and imprisonment is the opposite of safe working conditions.

HUSD’s support of enforced poverty threatening thousands in our community creates conditions for future riots: obviously unsafe.

HUSD’s stonewalling of OBVIOUS and BASIC questions about their policy that many of our students, parents, and teachers are asking as well as millions of Californians creates unsafe conditions of fear, threatintimidation, and harassment

Department of Justice Civil Rights complaint: I will file a DOJ complaint against HUSD for violating at least my 1st Amendment Rights to speak freely without a mask, and to assemble without intimidation of being arrested if I’m within six feet of another human. 

Please be advised that HUSD’s current support of apparently illegal “orders” may violate Federal Article 18 Section 242: DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW:

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

California Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint: Again: HUSD’s stonewalling of an OBVIOUS and BASIC question that many of our students, parents, and teachers are asking about HUSD-supported policy creates unsafe conditions of fear, threatintimidation, and harassment because we’re forced to obey under “color of law” that includes our being fined $1,000 per violation with up to one year of imprisonment. 

How is this not harassment when we’re threatened with fine and imprisonment under HUSD policy, and not allowed to receive any rational explanation why other than “Obey”?

I will complain

Harassment is prohibited in all workplaces.”

Last chance: HUSD has the right to provide their answers in a legal venue if they choose to not respond to an employee’s question.

I’ve emphasized to all of you my intent only and always for a win-win outcome: in this case to amplify my question to the county, and if they will not or cannot answer to demand downgrade from their apparent illegal “Color of Law” threats, intimidation, and harassments.

Won’t you feel much better about your professional responsibility and leadership by accepting my proposal? 

Won’t you regret having to defend “We at HUSD follow orders, stonewall data, and refuse questions!” in legal venues? I really don’t know how you’re going to defend that position, especially as professionals in education after the briefings I’ve provided.

If you choose silence as your answer to this last chance to answer my question of how your support of “health” “orders” is legal and limited government, or provide the remedy I request to support my question to the county, then also please be advised that I will seek monetary compensation for my professional time and energy invested in legal remedies.

If you choose to respond to this last chance, you have until 4AM on Monday September 21, 2020, for at that time I get to work for legal remedy and relief.

In closing, George Washington emphasized limited government as a central idea in the cumulating message of his 45 years of public service in his Farewell Address, an open letter to the American public. Please give George a minute of your attention:

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion…”

In all respect and support,

Carl Herman

National Board Certified Teacher

National Board Certified Teacher Coach

Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

HUSD’s Mission and Core Values:

MISSION STATEMENT

We draw from our community’s rich diversity in order to create an engaging and equitable educational experience, delivered in a safe and supportive environment.

CORE VALUES

  • Well-Supported Staff: We enhance the capacity of every employee to promote equity and model service excellence.
  • Collaborative Leadership: We develop leaders at all levels who creatively tackle our challenges and communicate with integrity and transparency.
  • Data-Informed Decisions: We use multiple types of data, including stakeholder voice, to inform decisions and monitor progress.

Part 5

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment: starting 3 legal complaints (5 of ?)

In our last episode(articles 12345678): Given my school district’s only response to my questions of how their support of county “health” “orders” is legal was to re-order us to “obey,” I promised to file a grievance as well as complain to state and federal levels if they did not respond by Monday, 9/21/2020. The district chose silence, so I delivered my promise.

Here is the summary of status, with a copy of the grievance statement:

Department of Justice Civil Rights complaint: I filed a DOJ complaint against HUSD for violating at least my 1st Amendment Rights to speak freely without a mask, and to assemble without intimidation of being arrested if I’m within six feet of another human.  I also requested enforcement to end apparently illegal “orders” that violate Federal Article 18 Section 242: DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW. DOJ’s automated response reported they will investigate, without promise of any response.

California Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint: I filed a complaint that HUSD’s stonewalling of an OBVIOUS and BASIC question that many of our students, parents, and teachers are asking about HUSD-supported policy creates unsafe conditions of fear, threatintimidation, and harassment because we’re forced to obey under “color of law” that includes our being fined $1,000 per violation with up to one year of imprisonment. Their system scheduled an interview with me in early December.

Grievance: Our teachers’ union contract has three levels of grievance, beginning with an informal conference with my immediate administrator: our school principal. I emailed my principal along with Superintendent, school board, and interested colleagues to request the informal conference. 

I received a phone call from our union’s vice president (and also my department chair, who I greatly appreciate for her dedication to students and teachers) who explained the grievance “won’t go anywhere” because the union negotiated our work conditions. When I asked what happens if a component of the policy is illegal, she replied with broad health concerns. She encouraged me to “go for it,” and perhaps the district will cooperate.

The reality of our contract: the principal will respond to the formal Level I grievance likely punting to the superintendent for Level II. Our union will not support a Level III arbitration, so this seems the end of this legal action.

I will communicate status to our teachers.

Statement of Grievance: (redacted until final determination)

HUSD’s support of county “health” “orders” is outside emergency power limits from prima facie examination of applicable California law. This means that according to all reasonable evidence, HUSD and HEA are mistaken in their support. Absent any reasonable explanation the “health” “orders” are within the limits of California’s documented emergency powers, then further support of HUSD is OBVIOUS dangerous devolvement to unlimited and dictatorial government that includes threat of fine and imprisonment. 

Obviously, HUSD is in egregious violation of our safety to embrace dictatorship to order us to obey an illegal policy (unless proven lawful), ignoring questions by an employee to repeat “orders” to “Obey,” and supporting the illegal threat to all our community members to fine us $1,000 per violation, arrest us, and lock us in cages away from our families and work up to a year. 

This is among the most unsafe and terrifying procedures imaginable. 

HUSD, unless they provide immediate removal of support, is setting the precedent to incorporate illegal policy under threat of fine and imprisonment! This is the opposite of safe working conditions.

HUSD’s support of enforced poverty connected to the orders threaten thousands in our community with conditions for future riots: obviously unsafe.

HUSD’s stonewalling of OBVIOUS and BASIC questions about their policy that many of our students, parents, and teachers are asking as well as millions of Californians and tens of millions of Americans creates unsafe and illegal conditions of fear, threatintimidation, and harassment

Date: On or about 9/21/2020

Informal conference: declined by Principal (name omitted)

Specific contact provision alleged to have been violated (cite source):

Article 9 EMPLOYEE SAFETY to “make provisions for the safety of unit members in all aspects of their employment. This shall include published District or school procedures on the safety of unit members.”

Remedy sought: 

1. HUSD either:

  • Immediately explains how support of county “health” “orders” is lawful given the limits of California Code 8558 (b) of hospitals “beyond control,” and § 8627.5. (b) of the California Emergency Services Act that “emergency necessities” are for a maximum of 60 days and therefore expired in May 2020. Or:
  • Amplifies this question to at least the level of the county for an answer within one calendar week.

If neither HUSD nor the county provide a reasonable and prudent explanation, HUSD either:

  • Makes an immediate public statement withdrawing support of “health” “orders” because applicable law seems to prove such “orders” are void. Or:
  • Immediately does whatever is legally required with prima facie evidence that HUSD and county policy are illegal (you are welcome to include state-level). This will be fully transparent in all aspects except explicitly excluded by law. This begins by immediately answering if the district has a responsibility to explain if a policy is legal when asked by an employee (if no responsibility to explain, cite relevant law).

2. HUSD reaffirms our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic” 

Part 6

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: meeting with Assistant Superintendent (6 of ?)

 Perhaps the most helpful communication this time is a summary of events to now, an update, and preview of coming events (articles 12345678).

Summary: The California “lockdown” to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” has lasted over 6 months, despite statutory limit for emergency powers due to “beyond control” hospitals lasting only 60 days and despite hospitals being in full control of patient numbers at all times.

As a NorCal public school teacher, I inquired to our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limits to dictatorial authority. 

Three emails were met with silence, then a fourth promising legal action was met with silence. I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety to support apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of $1,000 fines and imprisonment. 

Our union responded with support to ask the district, and to communicate indirectly that they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because the working conditions were negotiated in good faith. 

Update: (written, and redacted until final determination)

The first of three grievance levels was the school principal escalating to the district. The superintendent appointed the Human Resources Assistant Superintendent to Zoom-meet with me “in order to resolve the issue.” We met Friday afternoon.

A person with expertise in health and safety regulations emailed me earlier to give me a heads-up for a point I added for the school district’s legal response due Friday October 2.

My email to this top-level administrator after the meeting:

Thank you for our Zoom meeting, Ms. (omitted) 

To summarize our current status, and Ms. (omitted) please communicate anything in need of correction:

  • HUSD is attempting good-faith compliance with county and state guidelines.
  • The two areas of California law that apparently ended emergency powers in May 2020 (60 day maximum power), and that require “beyond control” local hospitals raise important questions that HUSD must research and answer. The apparent crystal-clear letter and intent of the law to limit emergency powers seem to mean there is no lawful authority to require compliance, especially under threats of fine and imprisonment.
  • HUSD is required under law to be compliant with CFR (Code of Federal Regulations), OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration), Cal/OSHA, and perhaps other agencies. The “orders” of “face coverings” are not compliant with those agencies for health protection. This raises an obvious problem that HUSD must address to resolve.
  • All HUSD employees are under Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

If I can be of further service for information, please ask.

“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”  ~ Benjamin Franklin, (variations from 1738, 1755, 1775)

I followed with this email today:

I was trying to confirm that OSHA and any other federal agency have supremacy over California state and county, and I think they do. I’ll be surprised if it’s the reverse. If so, that means California state and country policies of “whatever face coverings” are void because of obvious non-compliance with OSHA. 

“State Plans are OSHA-approved workplace safety and health programs operated by individual states or U.S. territories. “

https://www.osha.gov/stateplans 

“The California State Plan also applies to state and local government employers. It does not apply to federal government employers including the United States Postal Service. Federal OSHA covers the issues not covered by the California State Plan.”

https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/ca 

Thank you, Ms. (omitted), for your professional consideration.

The truth shall set us free,

Carl

Next up: This public school district will give me their response to my grievance by Friday October 2, 2020.

Part 7

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: district + teachers’ union declare grievance void; I appeal to community School Board (7 of ?)

 “In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice – and always has been.”  ~ Mark Twain, Notebook, 1904.

Perhaps the most helpful communication is a summary of events to now, an update, and preview of coming events (articles 12345678).

Summary: The California “lockdown” to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” has lasted over 7 months, despite statutory limit for emergency powers due to “beyond control” hospitals lasting only 60 days and hospitals being in full control of patient numbers at all times.

As a NorCal public school teacher, I inquired to our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limits to dictatorial authority. 

Three emails were met with silence, then a fourth promising legal action was met with silence. I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety to support apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of $1,000 fines and imprisonment. 

Our union responded with support to ask the district, and to communicate indirectly that they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because the working conditions were negotiated in good faith. The grievance process finished with district and union agreement the complaint didn’t qualify as a grievance.

I appealed the district’s answer to our community school board for what the district now defines as a “written complaint.” 

Updates: 

(1 of 5): HUSD’s Assistant Superintendent’s response to Level II grievance (10/2/20)

This serves as the HUSD written response to the safety concerns brought forward originally as a Level I grievance of the HEA CBA. On September 23, 2020, you made the request to appeal the Level I grievance. Upon review of your concerns, the District and HEA do not feel there is a contract violation that would follow the grievance process, but does consider it a written complaint to be addressed in writing per Board Policy 4144.

The District still recognizes your concerns for safety and compliance with current federal, state and county regulations, and has the obligation to address and respond to the concerns you have brought forward. We met on September 25, 2020 to further discuss the specific concerns you raised regarding the conflicting information between federal regulations of the Emergency Services Act and the declaration of the “State of Emergency” made by the Governor of California, and subsequent county public health orders based on the state declaration.

In review of the information discussed, I was unable to locate the exact language of the Federal regulations that were referenced, however, I did consult with our District’s school insurance legal counsel in an effort to identify the conflict in legal language as we discussed. Below is our legal counsel’s response.

The federal law only “preempts” conflicting state laws when the federal government controls the entire subject matter across the nation (called “occupying the field”). HOWEVER, there are some areas where states are expressly granted rights to control their own laws, as long as they are at least as protective as the federal government. Public safety, workplace safety, employment laws, education law, insurance, workers’ comp and a host of other areas may be regulated by the state. When the state regulates it may provide broader rights to employees and more stringent compliance requirements.

Public health and safety is one of the primary areas where the state can regulate more stringently, which is why many of the CAL OSHA requirements for workplace safety are more stringent than Fed-OSHA. Result: the California executive orders, regulations and forthcoming legislation with COVID restrictions and compliance mandates controls over the federal law across the board.

At this time, the District is following governing protocols as referenced in our Board Policy 5141.22 and Education Code 32282 and 49403, which direct the District to cooperate with local health officer measures necessary for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in school age children specific to influenza pandemic episodes.

As you are aware, our county public health officer has issued public health orders in accordance with the Governor’s declarations of state of emergency as a result of a local health emergency. The health orders as discussed outline “Shelter in Place” and “Face Coverings” in the prevention of the spread of COVID-19.

The District believes it is properly following education code provisions to ensure health and safety for students and staff, as directed by local governance bodies appropriately.

(2 of 5): My escalation to Level III grievance (10/4/20)

Request for Level III Grievance:

I respectfully request HEA submit this grievance for arbitration because HUSD’s response to my Level II grievance continues to willfully ignore the one reason for the grievance: HUSD supports an illegal policy

Supporting a prima facie criminal policy under threat of $1,000 fine and a year torn from our families and work for one-year imprisonment is neither a legal nor safe condition for our employment.

Please answer my repeated questions HUSD so far ignores:

  • § 8627.5. (b) of the California Emergency Services Act states “emergency necessities” are for a maximum of 60 days, and therefore expired in May 2020. This is the one definitive legal document that OBVIOUSLY puts in writing how long an emergency declaration will last, and BASIC law to prevent unlimited government powers. HUSD: How does the county or Governor still have emergency authority given this 60-day limit???
  • How is HUSD’s support of county “health” “orders” lawful given the limits of California Code 8558 (b) of hospitals “beyond control”? What is the objective and independently-verifiable evidence for that requirement being met? I ask because I’ve found zero reports of hospitals “beyond control,” along with unanimous testimonies of ~20 testimonies of physicians, nurses, and other health professionals.

I respectfully request our School Board Members to consider that for over one month, HUSD has evaded, obfuscated, and now openly refused to get legal counsel to respond to our laws’ crystal-clear text in letter and intent that all our students, teachers, and family members will understand in time: no government should be given unlimited powers. A 60-day limit and only under conditions of hospitals being “beyond their control” with patients are reasonable limits to allow emergency powers. Because the 60 days have expired, and no evidence is in consideration for overrun hospitals, HUSD is in violation of several laws to continue their support. I, for one, honor our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and invite all of you to do so in good-faith effort.

HUSD’s Level II grievance response raises further questions of employee safety:

  • HUSD responds, “the District and HEA do not feel there is a contract violation that would follow the grievance process” without explanation. Given I’ve provided prima facie evidence with the definitive California law that emergency power is both terminated in May (60 day strict limit), and conditions of “beyond control” hospitals never occurred, how is this embrace of dictatorial government a safe working condition? I say dictatorial in its academic definition that government power outside of limited government becomes dictatorship: authority for whatever is said when it’s said. HUSD’s support of dictatorial government under threats of $1,000 fines and a year imprisonment if employees are within 6 feet of another human, fail to wear a “face covering” within 30 feet, and “teaching” that hundreds or thousands in our community are “non-essential” and therefore not permitted to earn a living is not a safe employment condition.
  • HUSD responds, “I was unable to locate the exact language of the Federal regulations that were referenced…” What Federal regulations are you referencing? I, as a principal in the conversation, have no idea what you’re talking about. If you’re referencing federal safety standards all employers are required to know and follow, then obviously this is your responsibility. I did ask your explanation how generic “whatever face coverings” met federal and state safety standards, and we were in agreement that obviously California’s “whatever” rule meets zero standards for safety and protection. 
  • HUSD responds that states can “control their own laws, as long as they are at least as protective as the federal government.” We specifically discussed in agreement that California’s “whatever face coverings” seem to be the opposite of protection. Please explain how generic and untested face coverings are at least as protective as applicable federal and Cal/OSHA protections with their cited texts. I cannot imagine how generic and untested “whatever face coverings” is found to be of greater protection than OSHA and Cal/OSHA tested standards, and very curious to see the data and expert analysis informing that conclusion. You made this claim, so please substantiate it. If you can’t or won’t substantiate, please withdraw that claim. I hope you recognize such a statement is ridiculous on its face.
  • HUSD responds again that they are following orders while ignoring the specific and definitive California laws that make those orders void: the authority granted by the governor only exists for 60 days, and certainly any further declaration of emergency would fail the primary test of “beyond control” hospitals. The county had emergency authority only for those 60 days, not magical forever dictatorial powers. How is HUSD cooperation with prima facie unlawful orders lawful? How is prima facie illegal policy safe for employees? You advocate what we expressly teach against in US History classes.
  • How is HUSD fulfilling their obligation to explain to employees how their policies are legal when HUSD ignores the cited, specific, and definitive California laws that appear crystal-clear in letter and intent to limit emergency power to 60 days, and only applicable now with “beyond control” hospitals? No reasonable person would accept an “explanation” that ignores the central concern requiring explanation. 
  • Because HUSD ignores the option to escalate obvious and basic questions to the county or state, and prima facie evidence of definitive California laws demonstrating “health” “orders” as illegal, how is HUSD not in violation of our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic”?
  • How is HUSD fulfilling its Core Value to “communicate with integrity and transparency” when HUSD ignores the central question of how their policy is legal given explicit and definitive California law crystal-clear in letter and intent that emergencies only last 60 days, and only occur in a pandemic with “beyond control” hospitals? Each and every HUSD student learns that limits are placed upon governments exactly like these two examples clearly limiting time and conditions as protections from unlimited and dictatorial government.

All I am literally asking the educated professional adults at HUSD to do is what all California students are required in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards): 

“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”

The messenger’s friendly advice:

You can accept or reject this subjective advice at will, of course. I’m a powerless messenger pointing to future events. I fully understand that HEA and HUSD have contractual authority to issue a joint statement that they have no further comment than the Level II response, and close the grievance. That said, I offer my observations:

  • HUSD’s basic choice so far is to continue covering-up an illegal act that is outside the 60-day limit of all emergency powers, and outside the limit of “beyond control” hospitals. I say “illegal” in prima facie confidence in all available evidence of California law that is both definitive and crystal-clear. I’m sure if you could refute this summary of applicable laws, you would; instead, you ignore the questions for over a month. You can safely ignore me, but you won’t avoid the power of truth. Eventually, everyone will know of the choice I’ve offered, and your response for dictatorship or freedom. Please consider who you most want to be, and take action. Ignoring this prima facie argument might violate several state and federal laws.
  • There is no way for HUSD to look good on its current path to ignore questions our students will be asking, millions of Californians are now asking, and tens of millions of Americans will successfully demand to have answered. Our community might ignore your pathway and me now, but will not later. Hundreds of American lawsuits are in process, and thousands around the world. For example, Michigan’s Supreme Court just declared their governor’s “forever and unlimited” “emergency powers” as unconstitutional. What side of history do you choose?
  • The right choice is so easy! Just tell the truth that California law seems clear on two deciding points: the emergency was over in May given the 60-day limit, and that the requirement of “beyond control” hospitals was never met. With the truth, issue the same challenge to the county and/or state to either explain legality or to downgrade their “orders” under threat of fine and imprisonment to “advice.” Please do not be tools to those choosing illegal dictatorial control. We all have a choice.This choice of truth fully allows distance learning, as I see no conflict there.

(original grievance from 9/23/2020 for reference):

Statement of Grievance: 

HUSD’s support of county “health” “orders” is outside emergency power limits from prima facie examination of applicable California law. This means that according to all reasonable evidence, HUSD and HEA are mistaken in their support. Absent any reasonable explanation the “health” “orders” are within the limits of California’s documented emergency powers, then further support of HUSD is OBVIOUS dangerous devolvement to unlimited and dictatorial government that includes threat of fine and imprisonment. 

Obviously, HUSD is in egregious violation of our safety to embrace dictatorship to order us to obey an illegal policy (unless proven lawful), ignoring questions by an employee to repeat “orders” to “Obey,” and supporting the illegal threat to all our community members to fine us $1,000 per violation, arrest us, and lock us in cages away from our families and work up to a year. 

This is among the most unsafe and terrifying procedures imaginable. 

HUSD, unless they provide immediate removal of support, is setting the precedent to incorporate illegal policy under threat of fine and imprisonment! This is the opposite of safe working conditions.

HUSD’s support of enforced poverty connected to the orders threaten thousands in our community with conditions for future riots: obviously unsafe.

HUSD’s stonewalling of OBVIOUS and BASIC questions about their policy that many of our students, parents, and teachers are asking as well as millions of Californians and tens of millions of Americans creates unsafe and illegal conditions of fear, threatintimidation, and harassment

Specific contact provision alleged to have been violated (cite source):

Article 9 EMPLOYEE SAFETY to “make provisions for the safety of unit members in all aspects of their employment. This shall include published District or school procedures on the safety of unit members.”

Remedy sought: 

1. HUSD either:

  • Immediately explains how support of county “health” “orders” is lawful given the limits of California Code 8558 (b) of hospitals “beyond control,” and § 8627.5. (b) of the California Emergency Services Act that “emergency necessities” are for a maximum of 60 days and therefore expired in May 2020. Or:
  • Amplifies this question to at least the level of the county for an answer within one calendar week.

If neither HUSD nor the county provide a reasonable and prudent explanation, HUSD either:

  • Makes an immediate public statement withdrawing support of “health” “orders” because applicable law seems to prove such “orders” are void. Or:
  • Immediately does whatever is legally required with prima facie evidence that HUSD and county policy are illegal (you are welcome to include state-level). This will be fully transparent in all aspects except explicitly excluded by law. This begins by immediately answering if the district has a responsibility to explain if a policy is legal when asked by an employee (if no responsibility to explain, cite relevant law).

2. HUSD reaffirms our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” 

(3 of 5): HUSD + teachers’ union declare grievance void (10/7/20)

Mr. Herman,

The District has received your written request to appeal the response provided to you on October 2, 2020.  The response to your concern was processed as a District formal complaint due to the nature of your concerns, and as there was no labor contract violation.  Through the complaint process, the District attempted to adequately address your concerns. Per board policy 4144 you may request an appeal to the response received. I have attached the full policies for your reference.

BP/AR 4144 Appeal to the Governing Board

If a complaint has not been satisfactorily resolved at Step 3, the complainant may file a written appeal to the Board within five working days of receiving the Superintendent or designee’s response. All information presented at Steps 1, 2, and 3 shall be included with the appeal, and the Superintendent or designee shall submit to the Board a written report describing attempts to resolve the complaint and the district’s response.

The Board may uphold the findings by the Superintendent or designee without hearing the complaint or the Board may hear the complaint at a regular or special Board meeting. The hearing shall be held in closed session if the complaint relates to matters that may be addressed in closed session in accordance with law.

Please confirm if you wish to file an appeal through this process.  I have now included (redacted), Administrative Assistant to the Board of Education/Superintendent, who will acknowledge receipt of your appeal once confirmed.

Kind regards,

(4 of 5): Appeal to our local school board (10/11/20)

Dear (omitted), HUSD colleagues, and Board Members,

Thank you all for your engagement with these important ideas for basic political freedom with safe working conditions. I appreciate all your thinking and reflection during these game-changing times. I know we’re all together in support of creative and intelligent responses for the best educational outcomes for our community.

Please consider this communication as my appeal.

Request for Appeal to the Governing Board:

I appeal: 

  • HUSD’s current position to ignore central and obvious questions to their apparent illegal policy. After three levels of grievance and four previous emails, HUSD still refuses to address OBVIOUS and BASIC questions of cited California law that seem definitive to prove California emergency powers only last 60 days and therefore ended in May 2020, and that such powers REQUIRE local hospitals with Covid cases “beyond control.” The Board must either answer or demand the county answer. Without such answer, the Board must withdraw support of illegal policy.
  • HUSD’s claim they’ve explained how their support of county “health” “orders” is legal while ignoring OBVIOUS and BASIC questions. HUSD admits they are legally required to explain how their policies are legal. HUSD cites their obligation to “conduct any necessary investigation.” To claim they’ve done so while refusing to respond or even acknowledge California law text limiting emergency power to 60 days and “beyond control” hospitals is obviously not an explanation or investigation, but a tragic-comic, cringe-worthy, and illegal avoidance. The Board must admonish HUSD’s failure to avoid answering obvious questions. 
  • HUSD’s claim that embrace of dictatorial government policy is a safe working condition. By all prima facieevidence provided, the county’s authority to order anything based on an “emergency” expired in May 2020, and cannot be renewed because stated conditions for an emergency thankfully never materialized. Threatening to enforce $1,000 fines and a year ripped from work and family for jail if employees do not submit to whatever government says outside clear limits of law is the opposite of safe, hypocritical to what we teach, and an embarrassment to our entire community. The Board must declare dictatorship as obviously an unsafe LIVING condition that includes working conditions.
  • HUSD’s claim that declaring human beings “non-essential” is a safe working condition. This claim is evil: an intense separation among our Brothers and Sisters that some must go without earning a living “for our safety.” HUSD ignores perhaps the greatest government crime since Segregation and forcing Japanese-Americans into WW2 internment camps. The Board must stand that where we go one, we go all. No human being is “non-essential.”
  • HUSD’s failure to uphold our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” All HUSD employees sign this Oath. HUSD is in violation by ignoring crystal-clear limits to emergency powers of 60 days maximum, and “beyond control” hospitals to authorize dictatorial government. The Board must remind us of our Oath, and reject dictatorial illegal polices.
  • HUSD’s apparent claim that California “whatever face coverings” are “at least as protective” as OSHA and Cal/OSHA safety standards for “pandemic” response. HUSD ignored my request to provide the data and analysis to support their conclusion. Untested “whatever” quality is not demonstrated as protective as tested OSHA and/or Cal/OSHA standards. The Board must demand HUSD’s evidence or force the withdrawal of such an apparent ridiculous claim.

The messenger’s friendly advice:

Again, I’m a powerless messenger without support of HEA, and acting almost alone except for a few interested teachers. My mission is to offer choice, and without personal interest or power to move on this issue outside of receiving everyone’s choice.

Throughout these communications I’ve made the case of HUSD/HEA’s error to embrace apparent illegal policy, and now their willful cover-up of this mistake. 

HUSD is intentionally ignoring California legal text, refusing to engage legal counsel specific to the limits of emergency powers, and are on a pathway for embarrassment.

HUSD is wrong to lie about how their policy is legal while intentionally ignoring questions and data in apparent demonstration their policy is illegal. Saying you’ve explained something while ignoring the central data is a lie. 

The Board has an opportunity and choice whether to correct this lie, or attempt to enforce it.

Be proud of your choices; you will have and be known for what you choose.

In all respect and professional support,

(5 of 5) Superintendent’s receipt + my response (10/12/20)

Dear Mr. Herman,

We are in receipt of your appeal and will follow up accordingly. Have a good week! 

Thanks,

**

Thanks, (omitted)!

I know such an appeal might come across as oppositional, and in these crazy times please know I’m taking actions in good-faith professionalism for truth and support for our declared “non-essentials.” I know people are frightened, and that causes lapses in critical thinking and judgement. I appreciate everyone’s good-faith work for factual consideration along with different subjective preferences of what we should do.

Together we’ll all do our best to de-crazy this 🙂

Thanks, and yes, a great week with clean air to all,

Up next: The school board meets on October 14, 2020. According to the information I was provided, HUSD then has until November 14, 2020 to issue their decision.

Part 8

Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: School Board’s illegal (?) silence since October 2, so I offer final choices with warning of lawsuits (8 of ?)

 Perhaps the most helpful communication is a summary of events to now, an update, and preview of coming events (articles 12345678).

Summary: The California “lockdown” to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” has lasted since March 3, 2020, despite statutory limit for emergency powers due to “beyond control” hospitals lasting only 60 days. Thankfully, our local hospitals have been in full control of patient numbers at all times.

As a NorCal public school teacher, I inquired to our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limits to dictatorial authority. 

Three emails were met with silence, then a fourth promising legal action was met with silence. I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety to support apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of $1,000 fines and one year imprisonment. 

Our union responded with support to ask the district, and to communicate indirectly that they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because the working conditions were negotiated in good faith. The grievance process finished with district and union agreement the complaint didn’t qualify as a grievance.

I appealed the district’s answer to our community school board for what the district now defines as a “written complaint.” Since October 2, the district has been silent, despite their promise to respond within 30 days of the board’s receipt. Below is the update of today’s email.

Update:

“We draw from our community’s rich diversity in order to create an engaging and equitable educational experience, delivered in a safe and supportive environment.”  ~ HUSD Board of Education Mission Statement

Dear Board Members and Colleagues,

On October 12, Superintendent (omitted) promised follow-up to my appeal to our School Board asking how HUSD can support apparent dictatorial and illegal “health” “orders” as working conditions for teaching and learning. 

Are we in agreement that HUSD is out of compliance by failure to respond?

I factually assert that Alameda County’s “orders” are illegal dictates because of your collective silence to § 8627.5. (b) of the California Emergency Services Act that “emergency necessities” are for a maximum of 60 days and therefore expired in May 2020. In addition, California Code 8558 (b) requires hospitals “beyond control,” which according to all testimony I’ve heard from ~20 local health care professionals never happened, and is not happening now despite what corporate media “report.” A reasonable person independent from this situation would assume that HUSD is in tacit agreement that the county has no authority, and chooses evasion for an undisclosed purpose. An independent mind would expect HUSD to explain, “Even though emergency dictatorial authority lasts 60 days, the county can still order us because … (a, b, c).” As we’ve discussed, there are thousands of lawsuits on these issues. I am unaware of any defense other than tragic-comic, “We are order followers!”

I remind you how easy my requested remedy is for you to say, “Yes!”  

  • HUSD withdraw support of county health communications beyond “expert advice” because threatening $1,000 fines per violation and a year in jail is prima facie illegal. This is the remedy, unless:
  • The county and/or governor fulfill their burden of proof to explain how their authority is valid when emergency powers are both expired and do not meet required conditions of “beyond control” hospitals. 

It’s certainly not reasonable for HUSD to ignore dictatorship beyond 60 days, AND provide silent agreement with authoritarian government. By not providing one word about this obvious and necessary limit for government to order We the People under life-destroying threats, HUSD becomes complicit to replace American limited government with unlimited dictatorship. As a National Board Certified Teacher who has taught AP US Government, and worked directly with both political parties’ Leaderships over 18 years up to two UN Summits for heads of state, I’ve repeatedly asked HUSD to address the 60 day limit to dictatorship, and have received only silence on this point. I promise to shine increasing light on this crucial condition for limited government until you specifically answer. 

I also remind you that from the beginning I’ve offered my help because the pathway you’re on directly contradicts what all HUSD and California Social Science teachers teach, and all HUSD and California students learn: 

  • Limited government means government can never ever ever ever impose authority beyond written statutory limits. In this case, most Californians would be comfortable with the Emergency Services Act limit of 60 days’ emergency powers if local hospitals have “beyond control” conditions. At this moment, most of our HS teachers are aware of my questions to you, the status of your answers, with a few gaining passion because they reject your answers. Your current support for dictator policy puts HUSD at risk of receiving Dr. King/Gandhi demonstrations forcing you to answer how and why you support illegal orders. Will you tell students and families that dictatorship keeps them safe? Will you threaten to fire teachers who respond to HUSD, “Sure, I’m totally willing to be a good employee with safe working conditions upon your demonstration that these working conditions are lawful. Answer Carl’s questions, please.” HUSD’s current path risks lawsuits likely to cost millions over time. If you haven’t considered this likely outcome to promote dictatorial “orders,” you should.
  • Workers are promised safe working conditions. HUSD officially states “whatever masks” are superior to OSHA and CalOSHA safety standards for viruses and therefore allowed to be “ordered”! This perilous condition you’ve placed yourself in is more complicated, but much worse because I can’t see any other explanation a reasonable person would conclude other than you’re lying. Because you haven’t responded to my obvious questions about your statement which are your legal minimum, I ask again: please provide the cited relevant texts of OSHA and CalOSHA, names of the experts providing this conclusion you claim, and the data to support this conclusion. Really, colleagues, can you see how ridiculous your claim is on its face: whatever coverings, including a SpongeBob or Homer Simpson t-shirt secured by rubber bands, provides superior safety protection to OSHA and CalOSHA safety protocols. That’s what you wrote to me, and I tried to read as generous as I can imagine to your intentions. Correct me if I’m wrong, citing your text.
  • All school employees take an Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” I’ve provided the exact legal text proving county “health” “orders” are dictatorial and illegal, and therefore un-American and unconstitutional by definition. Please correct me if I’m mistaken in this conclusion. Please answer with how someone with our Oath should respond to their employer promoting dictatorial policy.
  • HUSD promises a Core Value to “communicate with integrity and transparency” but ignores the central question how their policy is legal given explicit and definitive California law crystal-clear in letter and intent over this 5th detailed email, 3 Levels of Grievance, and an appeal to School Board apparently out of compliance to respond. All districts have similar language, so please know every public school district currently is, or soon will be facing your choices. A prudent and independent observer would admonish that HUSD’s failure to answer the three basic questions I repeat in conclusion means zero integrity and transparency. If you insist on your current pathway, HUSD officials are likely to meet such independent observers as jurors. This is not a threat, but a prediction of your actual position that you may not recognize. 

Allow me to encourage your truthful answers to the concluding 3 questions with additional data:

  • Harvard’s Medical School documents that so-called “lockdowns” cost 13 more years of life than CovidAnother studydocuments ten times more life-years lost from lockdowns. More documentation hereherehereherehere.
  • HUSD’s failure rate has now more than doubled. I’ve read reports this is the “new normal” with no reports that students benefit (herehereherehere, hereherehereherehere).
  • Lockdowns are the greatest economic attack in US history, and fundamentally immoral to declare some of us “non-essential” workers. Some data how dire this poverty has become, and likely affecting thousands of people in our direct community: herehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere, here.
  • 1000s of lawsuits, with governors forced to stop dictatorship. You passed a high school US Government class, know what limited government is, and why it’s central to a Constitutional Republic. Please stand for basics that American government is limited by law. You would stand with the majority of Americans, including law enforcement (hereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere).
  • Hypocrisy of political “leaders” violating what they demand of We the People under threat of fine and imprisonment. I’m sure you’re aware, but please answer at least to yourself: do our “leaders” really believe what they tell us, or are rules just for peons? Just some of the documentation: herehereherehere
  • Expert medical opinions refute Covid claims. Perhaps our “leaders” know something different from what they “order” us to obey. Just a sample: herehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere.

In conclusion, this nation is founded upon Natural Rights guaranteed by government, and that no government can violate. The Declaration of Independence beautifully voices what Americans are most proud of, and why people around the world throughout modern history look to the US for genuine leadership. 

Therefore, will HUSD provide this leadership to declare the Emperor’s New Clothes obvious of an illegal “health order,” and ask that it be justified? 

I ask HUSD educated adults to do what all California students are required in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards): 

“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”

And you don’t even have to do this work: just ask the county who issued the orders.

Will you continue your current pathway for arrests, to fire employees, suspend or expel students, or even call those standing for limited government as domestic terrorists or enemy combatants?

I promised to help you look good with all of this. I can only fulfill that promise if you either provide the remedy I request that HUSD suspends enforcement of any threat of fine or punishment because prima facie facts show these as illegal “orders,” or provide reasonable answers that HUSD has so far evaded:

  1. How are county “health” “orders” under threat of $1,000 fines and imprisonment lawful, given the Emergency Services Actlimit of 60 days of emergency powers?
  2. How are emergency orders valid given cited California Code that hospitals must be “beyond control”? If you argue this is a valid emergency condition despite the 60-day limit, please provide hospital data that your employees can verify. Again, consider.
  3. How is a Homer Simpson or SpongeBob t-shirt secured by rubber bands safer for employees than OSHA and/or CalOSHA standards for this virus, as you claim? Please provide reasonable evidence how you know this is true that at minimum include applicable OSHA and CalOSHA standards, the experts who provided this conclusion with their explanation, and the data that support this conclusion.

Please provide your promised, and now late response, by Friday, December 18, 2020. 

I am just a messenger: if you do not agree to my offered remedy, or provide reasonable answers to all three above questions that are a minimum to explain how your employee safety requirements are legal, then you will answer in other venues by awakening HUSD families, students, and employees.

Again, you can make me go away by accepting this remedy:

HUSD suspends enforcement of any threat of fine or punishment because prima facie facts show these as illegal “orders.” Please go through the motions to ask Alameda County to explain how our conclusions are wrong with definitive answer within one business week (bet they ignore you).

In all respect and support for your wisest choices,

**

Up Next: I requested our school board respond by Friday, December 18. I’ll report what develops.

**

I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History (also credentialed in Mathematics), with all economic factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences (and here). I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.

**

Carl Herman worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu 

Note: My work from 2011 to October 2017 is on Washington’s Blog, which the owner closed from Internet censorship in 2019, and here since. Work back to 2009 is censored by Examiner.com (blocked author pages: herehere). This means that some links in essays are inactive. If you’d like to see those articles, go tohttp://archive.org/web/, paste the expired link into the search box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive.

%d bloggers like this: