| 
			
			 
			
				03-08-2011, 02:32 PM
			
			
			
		 | 
	| 
		
			|  | SOS Associate |  | 
					Join Date: Oct 2009 
						Posts: 3,057
					      |  | 
	
	| 
				  
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Twoller  What is this bill supposed to address?  What motivates it?  Any particular incidents? |  I was able to obtain this from Mendoza's office at the capitol this afternoon. The PDF is attached at the bottom too
 
	Quote: 
	
		| AS 123 (Mendoza) School Safety
 Summary
 AB 123 would add language to Penal Code 626.8
 addressing disruptive messages where the disruption
 threatens the physical safety of school children in
 preschool, elementary school, or middle school while
 they are coming to, leaving or attending school.
 Background
 On March 24, 2003, at approximately 7:30 a.m., two
 vehicles driven by two members of the group Center
 for Bio-Ethical Reform, drove around the perimeter of
 a middle school as students were walking and being
 dropped off for classes. The two vehicles consisted of
 a truck displaying billboard-sized graphic photographs
 of aborted fetuses and an escort "security vehicle"
 equipped with a security cage, red and amber
 flashing lights, push bars and antennae mounted on
 the roof.
 Between 7:15 a.m. and 7:45 a.m., all 1,900 students
 of the school arrived on campus in the same location;
 the cui de sac where the two vehicles were driving.
 Because of the disiurbing nature of the photographs,
 some students became angry, some began to cry,
 and others stared while standing in the street and on
 the sidewalk, creating a traffic safety hazard. School
 officials contacted the Los Angeles County Sheriff's
 Department. Deputy Sheriff's officers arrived,
 detained the two drivers of the vehicles and
 eventually determined that California Penal Code
 section 626.8 was in violation and asked the drivers
 to leave the area around the school.
 The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform filed a lawsuit
 contending school officials and the sheriffs officers
 violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights. The
 district court granted summary judgment in favor of
 the Sheriff's Dept. and Los Angeles Unified School
 District (defendants), at which point the Center for
 Bio-Ethical Reform (Plaintiffs) appealed. The Ninth
 Circuit Court of Appeals held that Penal Code section
 626.8 does not, as written, permit school
 administrators to contact local law enforcement in the
 event that a person or entity conveys disruptive
 messages on an adjacent street where the disruption
 threatens the physical safety of children where they
 are coming to, leaving from, or attending school.
 However, in that opinion, the Ninth Circuit Court of
 Appeals acknowledged that should the California
 Legislature choose to adopt statutory language to
 address this situation, the outcome may be different.
 Why AB 123 Is Needed
 California schools have the constitutional obligation to
 provide safe campuses to students and employees.
 The right to free expression is also protected by the
 State and Federal Constitutions. However, the right to
 free expression is not absolute, and has been limited
 within the school context by reasonable time, manner
 and place regulations to ensure safety and to
 minimize disruption to educational operations.
 If school administrators are unable to rely on Penal
 Code section 626.8 to address disruptions of schools
 that may result in physical harm to students, schools
 will lose an important tool in ensuring safe campuses.
 This change will help school administrators ensure
 student safety without unduly burdening the right of
 free expression.
 Support
 Los Angeles Unified School District LAUSD (Sponsor)
 AFSCME
 Ocean View School District
 County of Los Angeles Sheriff's Dept
 Opposition
 None on file.
 For More Information
 Gabby Villanueva
 gabriela. [email protected]
 (916) 319-2919
 Office of Assemblymember Tony Mendoza AS 123 Fact Sheet Page 1
 |  |