Telepeer

District Attorney clears Orange Unified of Brown Act violations, except for 1 trustee

April 14, 2023

Orange Unified School Board members did not, as a group, violate California’s open meeting laws during a special session in January when it ousted the superintendent, concluded the Orange County District Attorney’s office following a two-month investigation.

But there is “significant evidence” that one trustee, Kristin Erickson, violated the Ralph M. Brown Act by disclosing confidential information from the board’s closed-door session to the Orange County Register, according to letters sent earlier this month from the District Attorney’s office to Erickson and Spencer Covert, Orange Unified’s attorney.

The district attorney requested the entire board undergo “refresher training” on the Brown Act.

In the April 6 letters, Steven Schriver, senior deputy district attorney, disclosed an investigation in response to complaints about a special Jan. 5 school board meeting.

Board President Rick Ledesma had called that meeting a day earlier during winter break, a time when many students and teachers were on vacation. That night, on a 4-3 vote, the board fired Superintendent Gunn Marie Hansen and placed a second administrator, Cathleen Corella, on administrative leave. Both Hansen and Corella were out of the country at the time.

Why did Orange Unified fire its superintendent?
Orange Unified’s interim superintendent gone after just a month on the job
Orange Unified appoints acting superintendent from its own ranks
Westminster School District hires former Orange Unified superintendent

Although the meeting was posted with only 24 hours’ notice, word had spread among teachers and parents who packed the room to decry the board’s actions. In subsequent meetings, many complained of backroom deals and noted that Ledesma had told two educators the day before the meeting that they would be appointed to replace Hansen and Corella.

Since, parents have filed two separate lawsuits accusing the board majority of orchestrating the disciplinary actions while keeping other members of the board — and the public — in the dark.

Schriver said the board met the Brown Act requirements of posting the special meeting with 24 hours’ notice. He said the agenda “identified and described” the topic at hand in compliance with the law. Further, he said, “there is no evidence to support” the allegation that a majority of the board members met privately ahead of time to discuss the matter.

But “evidence gathered during this investigation,” Schriver said, indicates Erickson violated the Brown Act by disclosing information discussed during a closed session.

“In a vacuum, the information disclosed by Trustee Erickson may appear benign or inconsequential; however, the breach of confidentiality could subsequently deter Trustees from speaking with the candor necessary for honest debate, and in turn affect their ability to safeguard and represent the public’s best interests,” Schriver said.

Neither letter, obtained by the Register, offers any specifics on what confidential information Erickson allegedly disclosed.

Kimberly Edds, a spokesperson for the District Attorney’s office, pointed to a Jan. 12 article that focused on how an interim superintendent was appointed to the surprise of some board members and the public.

Ledesma, too, referenced that news report, specifically highlighting how Erickson said at the time that she asked for more information about the interim superintendent and was told by the board president to “Google him.”

Ledesma called it a “blatant Brown Act violation of confidentiality” that will “jeopardize our superintendent search.”

Erickson declined to comment.

Erickson was one of the board members who had said she was surprised by the firing of Hansen and the appointment of a superintendent she had never heard of. The new board majority, whose makeup changed after the most recent election, fired Hansen without any public explanation.

In a subsequent interview, Ledesma had said the board wanted to go in a new direction and focus less on what he called “the social politics of education.” But many parents and teachers, upset about what happened, called out the board majority during public comments at that Jan. 5 meeting and in subsequent sessions.

In his letters to Orange Unified and Erickson, Schriver requested the district provide additional training on the Brown Act to all the school board members.

That training will be provided to the board, said district spokesperson Hana Brake.

Meanwhile, on Thursday night, April 13, the school board was expected to hire a firm to search for a new, full-time superintendent. Hansen has since been hired as superintendent for the Westminster School District.

Local News |

Social media posts with BB gun spark panic at Fullerton school

Local News |

Second lawsuit against Orange Unified filed alleging school board members broke state law

Local News |

New school center gives thousands of Fullerton students access to health services and more

Local News |

In Irvine, students experience what it’s like to have a disability

Local News |

Parents sue Orange Unified alleging transparency issues after superintendent firing

Orange County Register

News Details

District Attorney clears Orange Unified of Brown Act violations, except for 1 trustee

Related links

Related Articles

News

CONTACT INFO

QUICK LINKS

SERVICES

CURRENT NEWS