Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 38:30 — 53.5MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

Join Lozano Smith attorneys Joshua Whiteside, Jennifer Baldassari, and Haley Fagan in a discussion about special education inclusion following a return to in-person schooling post-COVID.  In this episode they discuss inclusive environments, recent case law, and next steps for the future.  Listen as they delve into inclusion and travel through past and present frameworks to better understand this complex topic.

Show Notes & References

• 1:26 – What is inclusion?
• 2:38 – The history of inclusion and why it matters
• 2:54 – Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
• 7:07 – Inclusion levels in classrooms
• 8:40 – What an inclusive environment should look like
• 10:36 – Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
• 11:38 – Rachel H. (Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H. (9th Cir. 1994) F.3d 1405) and the four-factor test
• 13:08 – D.R. (D.R. v. Redondo Beach Unified School District (9th Cir. 2022) 56 F.4th 636) and grade-level standards (Client News Brief 15 – April 2023)
• 18:40 – Learning recovery and addressing disparities
• 21:45 – Referrals for inclusion programs
• 22:32 – Social Emotional Learning (SEL) curriculum
• 23:15 – Next steps for the future
• 25:14 – Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
• 26:48 – Behavior, discipline, and support for students and teachers in the classroom
• 33:38 – Check-in’s and coming back
• 35:26 – Final thoughts

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 20:49 — 29.2MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

In this Lozano Smith Podcast episode, host Sloan Simmons talks with Lozano Smith special education attorneys Kendra Tovey and Amanda Cordova regarding independent study in the context of special education students in light of the now existing independent study legal framework post-pandemic.

Show Notes & References

• 1:06 – Special education students participation in Independent Study (IS) (Client News Brief 39 – August 2022)
• 2:16 – Transitioning back from distance learning
• 3:45 – Responding to IS requests
• 4:26 – Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
• 6:13 – Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
• 8:34 – Amending Individualized Educational Plans (IEPs) to provide a FAPE during IS
• 9:17 – Changing placement and other considerations
• 10:08 – E. E. et al. v. State of California et al. (N.D. Cal.) Case No. 21-cv-07585-SI (2022 WL 16752080)
• 13:47 – Providing services to students participating in IS
• 15:40 – (Nonpublic Agency) NPA
• 16:24 – District obligations to provide in-home supports and services
• 19:07 – Increase in requests for IS

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 26:59 — 37.7MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

With the ever-growing demand for housing in California, many local governments are turning to Accessory Dwelling Units (“ADUs”). Host Joshua Whiteside joins Lozano Smith attorneys Jennifer Thompson and Kevin Serrano to examine the housing situation in California, benefits and challenges of ADUs to cities and local agencies, ADU requirements, and latest trends.

Show Notes & References

• 1:29 – The housing situation in California
• 2:22 – What is an ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit)
• 3:04 – ADUs and parking
• 6:03 – Lot sizing
• 8:25 – ADU approvals
• 10:04 – Homeowner associations and ADUs
• 12:41 – Benefits to cities and local agencies
• 13:31 – Impact fees
• 15:58 – Zoning and requirements for ADUs
• 22:36 – JADU (Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit)
• 24:44 – Closing thoughts

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 33:01 — 45.9MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

The Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful (“FAIR”) Act became law in 2012 and was enacted with the goal of California schools including a more historically accurate depiction of the contributions of LGBT Americans in the curriculum and to reduce the negative stereotypes and bullying that plague a majority of LGBT youth.  However, in light of national and local controversies regarding discussion of LGBT issues at public schools, some may be confused or unsure about how to be compliant with the FAIR Act and comprehensive sexual health education opt-out requests, and/or avoid parent complaints.  In this episode, Lozano Smith’s San Diego Managing Partner Trevin Sims and Senior Counsel Angelique Cramer will cover the basics of what the law requires and address the interplay between laws that pertain to LGBT issues at schools, as well as how to handle parent concerns regarding the curriculum.

Show Notes & References

• 2:00 – The FAIR (Fair, Accurate, Inclusive & Respectful) Act
• 2:33 – Legislative history of the FAIR Act
• 3:44 – Referenced groups in the FAIR Act
• 5:09 – Curriculum requirements
• 6:33 – Health/sex education and the California Healthy Youth Act
• 7:24 – Exemptions and opt outs
• 11:21 – Implementation and challenges for schools
• 14:31 – CDE FAQs and CDE discussion of interplay of both Acts
• 16:45 – Where disputes occur and how they are submitted
• 20:43 – Spontaneous classroom discussions and guidance for districts
• 25:04 – Takeaways

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 2:26 — 4.0MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

Erin Hamor, Partner and Co-chair of Lozano Smith’s Charter School Practice Group, is back with an important update on the fate of charter school renewals in the state in light of new pending legislation, discussed in our most recent episode, Charter School Renewals – They’re Back!

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 26:04 — 36.4MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

In this Lozano Smith Podcast episode, host Sloan Simmons talks with Lozano Smith Partners and charter school experts Ed Sklar and Erin Hamor regarding the forthcoming return of the charter school renewal process under pre-Pandemic changes in the law resulting from AB 1505.

Show Notes & References

• 1:32 – Charter renewals and where we left off (listen to Episode 57 here)
• 2:19 – AB 1505 (2019) and The Charter Schools Act reform
• 5:32 – Removal of the Dashboard and impact on charter renewals
• 8:20 – Other factors impacting renewal
• 9:10 – Data used for renewals
• 12:36 – Examples of Verified Data
• 14:30 – Potential disputes over data
• 16:48 – Governance and fiscal issues
• 18:32 – “Cure and Correct” notices
• 19:01 – Selective enrollment issues
• 19:29 – The Charter Schools Act
• 22:16 – Notice of deficiencies
• 23:15 – Next steps for charter authorizers

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 41:37 — 57.7MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

In this Lozano Smith Podcast episode, host Sloan Simmons talks with Lozano Smith special education Partner Sarah Garcia and special education attorney Kaitlyn Tucker about the nuances and options when responding to student behavior, including imposition of student discipline and other options, in the special education context.

Show Notes & References

• 1:28 – Expedited due process hearings (34 C.F.R. § 300.532.)
• 1:46 – The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH)
• 3:40 – Honig injunction procedure (Honig v. Doe (1988) 484 U.S. 305)
• 5:54 – Differences between expedited and normal due process hearings (34 C.F.R. § 300.507; 34 C.F.R. § 300.510; 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(c); OAH: Due Process; Letter to Snyder (OSEP 2015).)
• 8:00 – Manifestation Determination (MD) (34 C.F.R. § 300.530(e).)
• 12:38 – Correctly counting 10 days (partial vs. full days of suspension) (Questions & Answers: Addressing the Needs of Children with Disabilities and IDEA’s Discipline Provisions (July 2022))
• 15:29 – Patterns surrounding basis of knowledge
• 19:59 – Risks of proceeding with expulsion hearings
• 21:54 – District request for Interim Alternative Education Settings (IAES) (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(b)(2)(ii).)
• 24:38 – IAES process vs Honig injunction procedure
• 26:25 – Stay put during disciplinary challenges (34 C.F.R. § 300.518; 34 C.F.R. § 300.533; 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j).)
• 30:26 – Recent orders from OAH (OAH Case Nos. 2022080223/2022110728)
• 35:04 – Takeaways

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 23:28 — 32.8MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

Effective 2023, the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”) has a new statutory “home” within the Government Code.  (See Gov. Code, § 7920.000 et seq.)  While the Legislature has indicated this reorganization is not intended to change the CPRA substantively, the practical effects of this reorganization remain to be seen.  In this Lozano Smith Podcast episode, host Sloan Simmons engages with Lozano Smith Partner, Manuel Martinez, and Senior Counsel, Alyse Pacheco Nichols, to discuss this statutory reorganization; guesses as to the Legislature’s rationale for the reorganization; and how this reorganization will or will not effect the way public agencies response to CPRA requests.

Show Notes & References

• 2:10 – Statute reorganization effective January 2023
• 12:04 – Status of catch-all provisions (Alphabetical List [7930.100 – 7930.215])
• 13:57 – Impact on public agencies
• 18:30 – Trends in case law and in practice
• 19:15 – Iloh v. Regents of the University of California (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 513
• 19:42 – City of San Jose v. Superior Court (2017) 2 Cal.5th 608 (Lozano Smith Tip Jar – 2017)

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 27:29 — 38.3MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

This episode provides school administrators with the latest legislative changes and developments regarding student matters with Lozano Smith and Student Practice Group leaders Ruth Mendyk and Joshua Whiteside, along with Fresno attorney Nisha Dale.

Show Notes & References

• 1:23 – Governor’s Executive Order: End of State of Emergency (February 28, 2023)
• 2:29 –Student threats and firearms (SB 906) (Client News Brief 41 – August 2022)
• 7:09 – Excused absence for civic or political event (SB 955) (Education Code section 48205)
• 9:50 – Homeless youth (Client News Brief 4 – January 2023)
• 10:21 – McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
• 11:10 – New requirements for districts regarding homeless students (AB 2375)
• 11:41 – CDE Model Housing Questionnaire
• 12:07 – Updates to homeless youth policies (AB 408)
• 15:00 – COVID-19 testing plan (SB 1479)
• 16:40 – MOUs with non-profits for eye exams (AB 2329)
• 19:05 – Including students on LCAP Parent Advisory Committees (SB 997) (Client News Brief 9 – February 2023)
• 21:16 – Graduation dress code and the First Amendment (Waln v. Dysart School District (9^th Cir. 2022) 54 F.4th 1152) (Client News Brief 6 – January 2023)

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 32:15 — 44.9MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

The United States Supreme Court’s June 2022 Opinion in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District marked a potential sea change for the considerations school districts must account for in relation to employee private religious expression in the school context, whether as a matter of constitutional free speech rights vs. regulation of employee speech, free exercise of religion, or the Establishment Clause.  With the benefit of several months and almost half a school year to consider the impacts and ramifications of Kennedy, host Sloan Simmons talks with Michelle Cannon and Kendra Tovey on their understanding of Kennedy’s immediate and anticipated potential impacts, as well as options and challenges for school districts looking ahead.

Show Notes & References

• 2:06 – Kennedy v. Bremerton School District case background (Client News Brief 31 – July 2022)
• 5:09 – Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) 403 U.S. 602
• 8:05 – Facts focused on by Supreme Court in the majority opinion
• 10:42 – Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006) 547 U.S. 410
• 11:16 – Johnson v. Poway Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2011) 658 F.3d 954
• 13:30 – Three clauses of the First Amendment – U.S. Const., amend. I  

 

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.