San Francisco, chairman of the school board, is under intense pressure in several areas, including the reopening of the school, and a recent decision to suspend admission to earnings at Lowell High School.
In an opinion piece published on SFChronicle.com on Sunday and in Monday’s print editions of The Chronicle, Gabriela López acknowledged mistakes in the process that led to a possible lawsuit and revocation attempts directed at several board members, including López. .
“There were many distracting public debates as we worked to reopen our schools,” she wrote. ‘School renaming was one of them. It was a process started in 2018 with a timeline that did not anticipate a pandemic. I acknowledge and take responsibility that mistakes were made during the renaming process. ”
According to López, the council’s ‘only focus’ will be on reopening schools, and the renaming of committee meetings will meanwhile be canceled. She said the council intends to make the process more “deliberative” by involving local historians.
“Meanwhile, this is the last time I will publicly comment on the renaming until schools reopen,” she wrote. “We will not take precious time out of our board agendas to discuss them further, as we need to prioritize reopening.”
Other board members declined to comment.
On February 10, San Francisco Attorney Paul D. Scott filed a lawsuit against López alleging that it violated the Brown Act, California’s public assembly law. He argued that the board had not properly informed the public that it was making a final decision to rename the school grounds, and had given prior notice that it was deciding on a list of “potential” schools to be renamed .
He said that families and the public are being denied the right process, and that the matter should rather be handled by school for school. The letter gave the council 30 days to reverse the decision, otherwise legal action will be taken. On Tuesday, the board held a closed special seven-hour meeting that presumably addressed the legal issue and the renaming of the issue.
In response to the opinion piece, Scott said he was pleased that the board “apparently saw reason”, but he wants details in writing before deciding whether to proceed with any legal action.
“Changes of this magnitude should not be made high on our local communities,” he said. “Parents, students, teachers, alumni and others connected to each school are the real stakeholders. They should be trusted to make a good judgment for their particular school and to respect their point of view. ”
On January 27, the school board voted 6-1 to rename 44 schools because they bear the names of historical figures allegedly linked to racism and oppression, from Dianne Feinstein Elementary School to Jefferson Elementary to Abraham Lincoln High School.
Critics of the renaming made mistakes by the committee appointed to rename schools on the basis of connections to slavery, oppression, racism and colonization. In several cases, the committee members relied on Wikipedia to decide whether a name met the criteria.
In the case of Alamo Elementary, the committee cited the Battle of the Alamo and the connection with the occupation of Mexican land during the Texas Revolution. But in reality, the school was more likely named after the Spanish word for cottonwood tree, based on the tree that identified a traveler’s rest station in the city, which is currently Alamo Square.
“I am delighted to hear that the school board understands how flawed the process was,” said Terence Abad, executive director of the alumni association for Lowell High School, which was also on the list for renaming. “Like most people, I think the process of renaming is important, and I’m welcome to do so in an orderly and appropriate manner.”
Abad noted that because of the renaming process, additional research has shown that Lowell was probably not named after James Lowell, the poet, but only Lowell, perhaps based on Lowell, Mass., Given a letter from the district overseer in 1894 referring to word. to the school’s new name as ‘Highell High School’ only.
The decision received national attention and was criticized by leaders and parents for being poorly drafted while families struggled during the pandemic. In October, Mayor London Breed rejected the renaming plan.
Meanwhile, pressure was put on school officials to reopen classrooms, which had been closed for almost a year. At a news conference Wednesday, United States Superintendent Lopez and San Francisco Vincent Matthews said officials are trying to get back into learning as soon as possible, but refuse to guess when the first students may be back. The district recently said the goal is to have six weeks of partial direct tuition before the school year ends by June 2nd.
San Francisco’s city attorney has sued the school district, claiming that officials did not draft a specific reopening plan as required by state law, and violated the state constitution and equal rights laws by failing to give personal instructions, despite the ability to do so. to do.
The controversy helped spark a signature, which began Friday, recalling three board members. To date, more than 1,200 city residents have signed a petition calling for the recall of President López, Vice President Alison Collins and Commissioner Faauuga Moliga.
The effort will require 70,000 signatures for each of the three members to get the recall on the ballot. Organizers Autumn Looijen and Siva Raj, who are parents of five children, said they “wanted to get politics out of education”.
San Francisco Chronicle staff writer Lizzie Johnson contributed to this report.
Kellie Hwang and Jill Tucker are staff writers for the San Francisco Chronicle. Email: [email protected], [email protected] Twitter: @KellieHwang, @jilltucker