A group of government employees organized to deny children public school services.

1) Is it proper that any person, or group of people, be permitted to block or impede the provision of government services?

2) Is it proper that the State government allows children living in some neighborhoods to be provided far less State public school services than children living in other neighborhoods?

The California State Supreme Court has ruled that public education is a Fundamental Protected Right to be managed by the State rather by local governance.

"[M]anagement and control of the public schools [is] a matter of state[, not local,] care and supervision...." Butt v. State of California (1992) 4 Cal. 4Th 674, 693. citing Kennedy v. Miller (1893) 97 Cal. 429, 431.

The court ruled that public education must be basically equal for all children.

"In sum, the California Constitution guarantees 'basic' equality in public education, regardless of district residence." Butt v. State of California (1992)

However, the California Department of Education (CDE) continues to ignore the Ruling. In 2024, the CDE stated: "California is a Local Control State. This means that your local school district is governed and managed by your elected school board trustees. The Civic Center Act does not specifically authorize enforcement oversight by the California Department of Education or any other agency. Hence, when constituents request clarification on how much districts charge for the use of their facilities, the CDE must direct them to their local school board."

Should the California Department of Education be adhering to the State Supreme Court ruling?

Should the State Governor take action to assure that the law is being followed?

Does disparity in public education service and facilities foster resentment against the government?

Government employed elementary public school teachers earn far more than practicing Physicians, Optometrists and Engineers.  Government public school teachers work 184 days per year as compared to a standard 250 days per year for non-government employees.

Should government employees be compensated basically equal to non-government workers having a similar skillset complexity and experience?

Why should public employees who provide the same State service be compensated differently simply based on the locality where they live and their local cost of living is the relatively the same?

Should government employees and private company employees receive the same pension?

Should competing private businesses provide public services but then the State sets the quality and level of service standards?

The largest school district in northern California (ESUHSD) denies parents and guardians to see their own children participate in public school events open to the public unless the parents/guardians pay a fee.  The amount of compensation paid to government employed school staff to collect the fee appears to far exceed the amounts collected.  Most importantly, however, parents are being denied because of their inability to pay.

The school district continues to ignore a California Public Records Act request to help show that State funds being paid to government employees to collect the fees far exceeds the amount being collected.

It is believed that the collection of funds from parents/guardians violates the intent of State public education. Parents have been seen trying to observe their own children outside of gated events because they don't have enough to pay the public school.

Is it proper for the government to charge families to be involved with their children's public school activities?

Is the purpose of public education to provide even footing for all children regardless of their family economic background?

Would a student develop resentment towards the government because other parents were allowed to attend school events but their own parents/guardians were not permitted?

Is it proper that parents/guardians be prohibited from seeing their own children in public school activities because of their economic status?

School Board members in the largest high school district in northern California (ESUHSD), a recipient of State and Federal funding, accept tens of thousands dollars in "campaign donations" from contractors and then award no-bid contracts to the gifters.  gateio app.

Is it proper for a government official to accept a personal "campaign donation" gift and then subsequently use their official position to provide a targeted government benefit in return to the gifter?