FUEL Newsletter – January 22 LBUSD Board Meeting Recap

Jan 25

Dear FUEL Community,

Thank you to everyone who showed up in person, watched online, and submitted comments. The outcome of this meeting raised serious concerns about governance, conduct, and the direction of the current board majority.

Watch the Meeting Here | Read Public Comment Here

High Level Recap

Board Majority denied motion for the second time to restore public comment to the start of the meeting.
Howard Hills proposed draft language for Board Policy 9322 taking all school board meeting agenda setting authority away from the superintendent, against Dr. Glass’s professional recommendations and in opposition to the top performing districts in California and nationally. The revised language is also not in line with the California School Board Association’s model language, the state standard.
Trustee Howard Hills publicly undermined and disrespected Superintendent Dr. Glass (02:59:00) during the meeting. Similar patterns appeared in emails released through public records requests from October 2025. Seeing this behavior play out publicly raises serious concerns about how professional staff may be treated when discussions are not happening in full public view.
Around 04:18:00, the meeting devolved into nearly 20 minutes of procedural chaos during discussion of Board Bylaw 9322, with President Sheri Morgan unable to clearly state the motion, maintain order, or guide the board through a coherent vote.

Highlights from the January 22 Board Meeting

Closed Session – Motion at the Start of Closed Session

At the start of closed session, similar to his motion at the December 16th Special Board meeting, Dr. Kelly motioned and seconded by Dr. Malczewski to restore public comment on non-agenda items to the start of the meeting. The motion failed on a 2–3 vote, with the board majority voting against it.

No further public explanation was provided regarding the reason for opposing the motion in the face of dozens of public comments calling for the restoration of non-agenda items to the beginning of School Board Meetings. This second motion comes after President Morgan’s statement “It worked” admitting that moving public comment to the end of meetings was intended to silence community voices. (January 8th, 04:44:57)

Agenda Item: Intentional Use of Technology - Board Update

Staff presented an update on the intentional use of technology in the classroom from a meeting in the Fall. It can be viewed starting at 01:32:00.

FUEL’s View:
We are aligned with the district's goal to use technology intentionally while reducing reliance or overuse. We also support the district's goal to balance AI use while cultivating critical thinking in our students. This is an important and ever evolving landscape given the speed of technology development and requires ongoing research and discussion.

Agenda Item: Board Bylaw 9322

Dr. Glass provided the Board with a detailed memo and presentation analyzing the proposed revisions to Board Bylaw 9322, regarding agenda setting. The following were the two proposed changes by the board's counsel:

granting the Board President unilateral authority to resolve agenda disputes with the Superintendent
prohibiting contracts over a fixed dollar amount from being placed on the consent agenda.

In both cases, Glass recommends against adoption and emphasizes that the existing bylaw aligns with best practices and top performing California and national public school districts. He also warned that the proposed changes would make LBUSD an outlier, weaken shared governance, and introduce unnecessary risk to board and district operations, Ed Code compliance, and public trust. Full presentation starts here.

Dr. Glass ends his presentation with this: “Based on the analysis above and counsel’s guidance, I do not recommend adoption of either change as drafted. If the Board elects to proceed with revisions to agenda-development authority, careful consideration of the governance and operational mitigations outlined in this memo may help reduce foreseeable risk. Even with such safeguards in place, the revised structure represents a set of tradeoffs rather than a clear improvement over current practice.”

Dr. Glass reiterates this position here, “Overall, I do not think this is wise”.

Key concerns raised by Dr. Glass included:

Concentrating agenda-setting authority in a single board officer rather than preserving shared governance
The lack of comparable policies in high-performing California districts or state governance models
Increased operational, compliance, and transparency risks
The fact that a mechanism currently exists for any board member to pull any value contract for board discussion before approval

Despite these professional recommendations, Trustee Hills went on to propose language overriding the board counsel language. Hills’s proposal would rest agenda-setting authority solely with the board president.

As Dr. Malczewski put it, this policy revision lets the board president take things that are not board topics and board decisions and could use this power to start questioning what teachers are doing in their classrooms. That means a single board president, who is not an educator, could decide they don’t like what’s being taught and simply “agendize it,” which Dr. Malczewski rightly called a “fundamental misunderstanding of what the board is supposed to do.” (View Dr. Malczewski’s comments starting at 04:05:01.)

FUEL’s View:

Hills’s proposed language is the definition of a power grab. We are deeply concerned that this item will come up for a second reading and therefore final approval at the next meeting, significantly undermining the Superintendent’s ability to carry out the role for which he was hired. In other words, what is at stake is the ability for a Board president to meddle in our classrooms. Ignoring Glass’s guidance while attempting to weaken his role undermines stability, transparency, and trust.

Not one written or in-person public comment supported revising Bylaw 9322 in any way. This board continues to counter the expressed concerns of the community and students it serves.

FUEL’s View: Board Dysfunction and Treatment of Staff

Openly undermining the Superintendent, especially in a dismissive or disrespectful manner, disregards professional norms and weakens the leadership structure the board itself put in place. This pattern is emerging into a culture where focus is diverted from student-centered priorities.

The board majority consistently accuses and confronts the District’s expert staff in ways that undermine expertise and erode trust and morale. Blaming staff from the dais while seeking expanded power reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of governance and creates a chilling effect on the professionals who serve our students every day.

FUEL’s View - Worth a Watch - Public Comment on Board Bylaw 9322

Public comment on Bylaw 9322 extended late into the evening. Parents, educators, retired staff, labor representatives, and community members unanimously opposed revising Bylaw 9322.

A standout moment came from Laguna Beach High School sophomore Warren R., who stayed until nearly 11:00 p.m. to speak. Warren thoughtfully connected Animal Farm, the book his English class is studying, to what he was witnessing from the dais. He reminded the board that Animal Farm is the allegory to the Russian Revolution, that both the Revolution and Animal Farm descended into chaos and it seemed to him that if we are not careful, the District could suffer the same fate.

We are proud to see our student’s critical thinking skills in action. Watch Below (04:57:00)