Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’ of mask requirement and ‘non-essential workers’ forced poverty, or face-fines and imprisonment: HUSD ignores questions (2 of ?)

Perhaps the most helpful communication is a summary of events to the most recent article, the specific updates when they occurred, and preview of coming events (articles 123456789101112131415161718, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32). 


This is my best “shot” to explain, document, and prove the “Covid” + “vaccine” narrative are Crimes Against Humanity: a 4,700-word essay I sent to ~100 teacher colleagues.


Summary (links = full documentation): The California “lockdown orders” we were all told were necessary to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” have lasted since March 3, 2020. The California Emergency Services Act (ESA) is derived from California Government Code 8558 (b) that requires “beyond control” hospitals to authorize emergency dictatorial orders. Because Californians never received comprehensive hospital data, our government and corporate media “leaders” are lying in omission. Because problematic “positive cases” (and here, here) were substituted for “beyond control” hospitals, our leaders lie in commission. All testimony I’ve received from ~20 medical professionals here in NorCal report all hospitals they know of have been fully within their control throughout the “pandemic.”


As a NorCal public school teacher, at the start of our school year in September 2020 I inquired to our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limits to dictatorial authority. I cited our mutual Oath to “support and defend” the US and CA Constitutions. I reminded the district I merely ask them as educated professional adults to perform what we expect from all our Californian Middle School students in our State teaching standards: “Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.” (page 81).

 

After two requests, the district contact person responded by ignoring my questions, and that employees are required to obey “California mandates” “to protect you” under threat of being terminated. I emailed our district superintendent, school board members, my school principal and two interested teachers that we teach all high school students in our US History classes that the district’s position of “just following orders” is an illegal defense, and asked again how ESA limits are being honored.


After continued district silence, I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety to support apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of employment termination, $1,000 fines per violation, and one year imprisonment under Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1).


Our union responded with support to ask the district, and to communicate privately that they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because the working conditions were negotiated in good faith. The grievance process finished with district and union agreement the complaint didn’t qualify as a grievance.


I appealed the district’s answer to our community school board for what the district redefined as a “written complaint.” From October 2 to December 18 2020 the district was silent, despite policy promising a response within 30 days of the board’s receipt. After this December 13 reminder they were out of compliance for a response, the superintendent answered that the school board upheld the district response without comment. 


I also received a “non-response” after nearly 5 months from my complaint to the US Department of Justice regarding unlimited government. My complaint to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint was fielded with a phone call response in December, with their promise to follow-up, and silence since then.


In March 2021, our NorCal public school superintendent sent all staff an email citing county deaths from COVID nearing 1,300 with 80,000 “cases.” He also asked for our professional responses to an upcoming survey. I responded with three basic questions: how many of our staff and students have died of (not with) Covid, what is the data for overall county deaths given controversy over causes of deaths, and how many staff and students have been injured by vaccines. He ignored my questions twice, which I then shared with our school’s ~100 teachers as Chair of a school Professional Learning Community (PLC) on broad educational topics directly affecting our school’s teaching and learning. A few teachers have communicated support, but our Social Science Department found no interest in this topic when I emailed them in inquiry.


Our district superintendent then answered my questions, and concluded with: “If you do not agree with the state and county guidelines or if you believe we are not following them, please pursue your questions and concerns with the appropriate agency.” I responded I would do so, and report my findings. 


I followed up with 14 CA government agencies over 6 weeks, with all ignoring the question of how the limit of “beyond control” hospitals was being honored for “emergency” dictatorial authority, and CA Senator Glazer’s office stating the 60-day limit applied only to “non-safety” related orders. I hadn’t considered an American legislature would surrender forever dictatorial powers to a governor or elected officials without a time limit, as public recourse would be limited to recall (as is happening with Governor Newsom) or electing other legislators.


School district and CA government “answers” are therefore intentional lies of omission to claim they answered a question about ESA to “justify” dictatorial government while leaving out any consideration of crystal-clear letter and intent requiring that our hospitals are “beyond control.” The 14 CA government agencies claim dictatorial power to close businesses, stop social gatherings, force masking, force humans to forever remain no closer than six feet from each other, and with forever power until legislators or governor say otherwise, and while lying in commission that “emergency powers” are authorized by unreliable “positive” “cases.”


At the end of April 2021, I wrote a lengthy and fully documented report of those 14 CA government agencies’ responses, and emailed it with a cover letter to district leadership, school board members, teachers’ union leadership, our PLC members, and school teachers. The district’s Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources immediately responded with threats of disciplinary action for unspecified violations of district policies, as did my school principal. The district has yet to respond to my questions regarding their undocumented complaints as the “foundation” to their threats.


I appealed to our teachers’ union for relief (and here, here). After 4 emails and 15 days of silence from our union President and VP, I sent this email to 14 of the Board of Directors of our teachers’ union. Our President and VP then responded for a next step “to gain clarification regarding matters within our scope and discuss next steps, if any.” We Zoom-met, and our union President met with district Assistant Superintendent of HR on May 25, 2021. The district emailed me claiming my PLC report somehow “harasses or disparages” my colleagues “based on their political beliefs,” yet fails again to provide any documentation or explanation despite the union and my requests.


I filed three employee grievances for apparent contract violations, with our contract requiring my silence of proceedings. On July 8, I spoke by phone with our teachers’ union president, who reported that the district  is again considering my Grievances as employee complaints, with HR Assistant Superintendent admitting failure to address my requests for the district to document and explain their complaints.


On July 9, 2021 our teachers’ union held a Zoom conference with ~100 teachers to explain the tentative agreement for work conditions for 2021 - ‘22 school year for staff, students, and families to obey “the most restrictive health measures” “ordered” by state, county or federal government. I asked the first question for our union to explain how the state has ordering authority given the strict limits of “beyond control” hospitals, with union president, VP, and another union board member responding they are still representing my question, but all legal information they’ve received is that there is no requirement to oppose ordering authority until proven in court. 


My school district’s final answer to my three employee grievances came on July 21, 2021: 

  1. Teachers, staff, students and families will follow “health” “orders” because they are ordered. 
  2. “Health” “orders” are whatever is ordered. We will not respond to requests for documentation of what is ordered as “healthy,” nor even acknowledge the question was asked despite our legal obligation to explain how all policies are within the limits of the law.
  3. If teachers ask further questions how our “health” “orders” are lawful or healthy, they will be disciplined up to termination under the “reason” that such questions “harass and/or disparage other’ political beliefs.”

On July 24 I responded to the district’s formal initiation of “disciplinary action steps” that lead to termination for unprofessional conduct by offering the district choice to finally cite their unsubstantiated complaints against me, withdraw the complaints and censorship, or face my attorney. On July 26, the district’s Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources responded in refusal to substantiate their claims of my unprofessional work; claiming “The District has provided you with the appropriate documentation that has sufficiently responded to your requests. At this time, there is no additional information that can be provided to you that has not already been provided.” Our teachers union President called me with analysis from her conversations with district leadership that the district is unwilling to look beyond their legal orders, and must be forced by court or legislative orders. 


I had a productive first conversation with an America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) connected attorney, who promised to converse with her team to evaluate my case for possible lawsuit support. I have a second conversation scheduled to hopefully initiate lawsuit against my school district (and perhaps other parties).


On September 4, 2021, I reported to my ~100 teacher colleagues my best “shot” to “red pill” them about dozens of game-changing facts corporate media will never report (my published research on corporate media “reporting” lies known to be false as they were told for the many variants of the Wars on Terror). This report to teachers (at “Update 3”) makes a great essay to share with comprehensive facts of our big picture condition (and here).


On Friday September 17, our district superintendent announced the school board will address the question of mandatory student “vaccines” on Wednesday, September 22. I responded to district and teachers’ union leadership with legal notice of their prima facie-crimes, and initiated another employee Grievance for contract violation guaranteeing policies in conformance to law. My attorneys affiliated with AFLDS are watching district and union responses with professional interest, as they choose which cases are best to vigorously pursue.


On Wednesday September 22, the school board voted 5-0 to “mandate” full student “vaccination” for “Covid” (see my essay to ~100 teachers for absolute proofs for quotation marks). The public comment session for 1-minute remarks were ~15 against and ~25 for. Four parents and two employees contacted me, and I’ve initiated our organized work including informing the 3 attorneys paying full attention to these developing cases. I’m also actively engaged in three current employee Grievances, and will give our teachers’ union an ultimatum to honor our contract that all district policies be “in conformance with law” by standing with me against the district’s illegal “mandates” that violate US Codes 21 and 18, and California Government Code 8558 (b) that “emergency orders” authority requires “beyond control” local resources (hospitals in this case). CDC’s latest data seem definitive proof that California and national hospitals are well within control, just as each and every one of the ~20 local doctors, nurses, and other professionals I’ve asked have told me for 20 months.


On October 2, I sent a second email to our teachers’ union President, VP, and district Board Members arguing for their legal and Oath-sworn obligation to stand with me to force the district to explain the legality of their “health” “orders” given the above crystal-clear in letter and intent legal limits (the district’s stated position is “we just follow orders, and so will you”). Parents and employees are organizing. 3 teams of AFLDS attorneys are ready to file suit(s) if this case is considered the next best landmark case to pursue.


On October 17, 2021 I sent another Professional Learning Committee (PLC) report to district and union leaderships + Boards, and ~100 teacher colleagues with two central topics. First: HUSD refuses to address limits to state/county/district “health orders” regarding required student and teacher use of Emergency Use Authorized medical products (EUAs), despite :

The second topic of the October 17 PLC report is that our teachers’ union shared their position why “health orders” to “require” EUAs is lawful: the government is not kidnapping and forcibly injecting teachers. Yes, seriously; that’s their “legal” “justification.”


On October 21, 2021, our teachers’ union president emailed me to declare my employee grievance void that requested the district to either cite their legal authority for EUA work requirements given the limits of three definitive laws, or to downgrade “requirements for employment” to “advice.” The “reason” given was the union claims that the district doesn’t have to cite legal authority for policy because any proofs of illegal policies “do not concern violations of the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement)” despite the CBA stating all district policies must be “in conformance with law.” Both HEA and HUSD claim that state dictatorial “orders” are sufficient legal authority to compel obedience, and both have never addressed our mutual STATE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE for We the People to serve as a check on exactly this problem of illegal dictatorial government orders. My three subsequent communications to union President, VP, and Board were unanswered.


On October 28, 2021, HUSD responded to my last employee Grievance of policy violating California Health and Safety Codes § 24171 to § 24176 by unilaterally declaring it “an email request” of an “employee complaint” “against the legality of EUAs” that they then dismissed because we all must “follow orders.” I challenged that stand, as well as challenging district refusal to answer basic questions about “official” exemptions to EUAs.


**


My plan is to politely seek an explanation. Without plausible explanation how masks are within limited government, the alternative explanation seems to be these “orders” are workplace harassment.


My second email to our district contact, teachers union, superintendent, school board members, and school principal:


**


“Students recognize that under the American democratic political system the United States has achieved a level of freedom, political stability, and economic prosperity that has made it a model for other nations: the leader of the world’s democratic societies and a magnet for people all over the world who yearn for a life of freedom and opportunity. Students understand that Americans’ rights and freedoms are the result of a carefully defined set of political principles that are embodied in the Constitution.”  

~ California History-Social Science Framework, “United States History and Geography: Continuity and Change in Modern United States History,” page 432 (emphasis added)


Dear (name omitted),


Six days ago I requested HUSD to explain how their new and extraordinary work conditions were legal. I asked specific questions I hope all our students would appreciate as consistent with what they’re learning about American limited government. These questions are likely on the minds of thousands of our community members, millions of Californians, and perhaps 100 million Americans.


I haven’t heard from you, and request at least a status-response by the end of this week: by September 11. As these orders direly affect thousands of our community, I’m now including in this email our district superintendent and school board members.


Here again are my obvious questions:

  • What is the authority the county has to demand wearing masks or be fined and/or imprisoned?
  • If that authority comes from the governor’s emergency declaration in March, what is the definition of “emergency”?
  • How have emergency conditions been demonstrated as real?
  • If required emergency conditions of overrun hospitals never happened, nor need for military field hospitals that were built, nor need for military hospital ships, how do the required conditions for an emergency still exist?
  • Because hospitals have been and are operational (so empty that most laid-off staff according to all professional testimony I’ve heard from dozens of expert medical witnesses), doesn’t that remove emergency dictatorial authority? If not, please explain.

For those reading who are understandably confused, perhaps this will help:

  • Our community and state are experiencing the worst economic attack in history to close or limit businesses declared “non-essential.” 
  • Our community members are ordered to never approach within 6 feet of another human outside your home, and “wear a Face Covering when outside and when anyone else other than just members of their Social Bubble is within 30 feet (10 yards).”
  • Our community is threatened by fine and/or be locked in a cage for failure to comply.

As an example of what I’m asking HUSD to do in accepting these “orders,” if a person asked what the law is for drivers to stop at a stop sign, one could be clearly shown the law. 


If HUSD cannot clearly and transparently explain the law along with the emergency conditions authorizing such restrictive orders, then on its face the authority for such orders do not exist. The emergency conditions seem to be “overrun hospitals” according to California law I documented in our first email. If hospitals are overrun, that data must be transparent and independently verifiable. Objective evidence to substantiate claims is exactly what we teach our students to demand for democratic consideration for reasonable public health and safety laws. 


And again, all medical professionals I’ve personally spoken with, as well as dozens going public via video, claim the opposite of emergency conditions.


HUSD should not give the obviously incomplete response that all our Social Science teachers would return to students for further work: “We just follow orders.” 


I also hope I don’t have to emphasize to this community of professional educators how wrong and dangerous blind obedience to authority is in essence and consequences. Indeed, in the first study I’m aware of, three Ph.D professionals with direct academic training and work experience document the “lockdown” will cost Americans ten times more “life years” than the virus. 


Again, all I am asking you to do what California students are required in Grades 6-8 (page 81 of Common Core Standards):


“Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.”


If the authority for “health orders” cannot be shown, then this is outside their authority, and a textbook example of unlimited government. Without such authority, illegal “orders” are void, and therefore seem to be illegal workplace harassment, threat, and intimidation. 


Of course, individuals are free to wear masks and social distance at their choice.


If I’m wrong about this as a teacher of AP US Government and with experience working closely with political leaderships of both parties over 18 years that led to two UN Summits for heads of state (1990 World Summit for Children, and 1997 Microcredit Summit), then please talk me down.


If I’m right, then our Oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic” requires HUSD to amplify this message to downgrade status from “orders” to “guidance.” 


We all share this Oath. 


I respectfully request that you honor your Oath. 


I cited California law that the limit to the governors emergency powers seems clear: 

  • If local hospitals are overrun, then the governor has emergency authority.
  • If local hospitals are operational, the governor has no emergency authority.

Therefore to honor your Oath, it seems you either need to provide an explanation that these are lawful orders along with verifiable data of overrun hospitals, OR to ask county officials to honor their Oaths to downgrade their threatening illegal orders to “guidance.”


All of our students, parents, staff, and community members deserve a clear explanation, especially since thousands of our school families and friends are direly affected by being ordered they are “non-essential” workers, and are forbidden to earn income in those jobs to feed, care for, and house their families.


To emphasize: I’m respectfully and professionally asking HUSD to explain how your support of extraordinary “orders” is lawful with reasonable and obvious questions that likely thousands of our community members also have.


Again, my intention is only and always for win-win outcomes. In this case, we model truthful and professional scholarship for objectively accurate and comprehensive facts. 


Are you aware of the original factual claims at the origin of economic strangling “lockdown”?

  • The Imperial College computer model led by Neil Ferguson predicting over 2 million American dead was both false and so incompetently contrived that it is likely a criminal lie
  • The “official expert” making the prediction at the source of the “lockdown” was caught having an extramarital affair in multiple violations of “ordered” healthy persons’ “quarantine.” 
  • Ferguson predicted in 2009 that 65,000 would die in the UK from Swine Flu (he was off by 64,500+).
  • Ferguson also predicted up to 200 million dead from Avian Flu in 2005 (low hundreds died).

While you’re probably aware that children are relatively safe from infection, did you know that Stanford and UCLA also find our adults are relatively safe? Their findings: even without masks or “social distancing” (an Orwellian term) the risk of death for adults ages 50-64 is just 1 in ~19 million, with chance of hospitalization 1 in 852,000. For magnitude figure of HUSD having 1,000 adult teachers and staff, this means the risk of hospitalization is currently one hospitalized HUSD adult between now and the year 2872.


We teach the principles of Gandhi, a practiced attorney, who used the power of overwhelming factual evidence to demonstrate hypocrisy from his own government. I recommend taking Gandhi’s words to heart:


“One thing we have endeavoured to observe most scrupulously, namely, never to depart from the strictest facts and, in dealing with the difficult questions that have arisen during the year, we hope that we have used the utmost moderation possible under the circumstances. Our duty is very simple and plain. We want to serve the community, and in our own humble way to serve the Empire. We believe in the righteousness of the cause, which it is our privilege to espouse. We have an abiding faith in the mercy of the Almighty God, and we have firm faith in the British Constitution. That being so, we should fail in our duty if we wrote anything with a view to hurt. Facts we would always place before our readers, whether they are palatable or not, and it is by placing them constantly before the public in their nakedness that the misunderstanding between the two communities in South Africa can be removed.”  ~ Mohandas K. Gandhi,  Indian Opinion (1 October 1903)


HUSD has the opportunity to model what Gandhi and Dr. King provided in leadership for equal treatment under just laws.


HUSD can continue our Hayward legacy for justice and freedom.


I promise to share your responses to our community so that everyone clearly understands the unprecedented changes to our schools, and why so many of our businesses are being “ordered” under threat of fine and imprisonment to remain closed.


In all respect and support,


Carl Herman

National Board Certified Teacher

National Board Certified Teacher Coach

Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

Comments

  1. Hello! Wondering if you have received any responses to your inquiries? I am dealing with a similar issue and have not gotten any responses so I was hoping you were having more success.
    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. I have another communication coming tomorrow with my promises to escalate into legal actions.

      Delete
  2. Thank you for your efforts Mr. Herman, have you had any response yet?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only avoidance of the central question how the policy is legal. Here's the latest: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/10/challenging-our-public-school-districts.html

      Delete
  3. Hello and thank you for the work you’re doing to help others reclaim sovereignty. Can you please recommend a professional in Florida near Sarasota that could assist in dissenting against a private school’s newly issued policy requiring Covid testing for students on their return to campus following the Thanksgiving break? No symptoms. Healthy teenagers. Required testing. I’m incensed. The school already requires mask wearing on campus and students are temperature screened everyday. It’s ludicrous. My sons will likely be asked to leave school or quarantine should we choose not to comply. Quarantining because they refuse to test would be punitive - and also unacceptable. I would prefer my children not have to leave the school. I would rather effectively change school policy - or at the very least see my children exempt from the policy. Thank you for any direction or recommendation. I sincerely appreciate it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're welcome. Perhaps to network with Peggy Hall's people, or local Patriots, as I have zero contacts at any other school.

      All I have is what you've read, along with updates (latest with School Board not responding with my plan to check status on Monday: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/10/challenging-our-public-school-districts.html ) If you're serious about forcing the district to demonstrate how their policy is legal, ask them for a full explanation similar to what I did (you're likely to get back BS same as me). If you'd like to escalate, see if you can discover some lawyers working on these issues, or at least one who would like to.

      This is a path made by the walking :)

      Delete
  4. So appreciate your response. Will continue making a path - by walking!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Do you know of any law suit for Los Angeles, LAUSD I can join or what I can do? LAUSD has announced it's Hybrid plan and it looks like a Prison and also the way it will be conducted including restriction of breathing with mask. This is troublesome being that its traumatizing for children that are still mentally developing and irreversible mental impact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. Invent something to do, like I did :) The top sentence of the article has a link to the latest episode.

      Delete
  6. The biggest thing is to learn that the U.S. is a corporation and it is legally defined as the ten square miles surrounding Washington D.C. You are Americans, not US citizens. Remember to never show cops your ID. IF you do, you are implying that you are a US citizen traveling to that state to do business. So anytime on an application, paperwork, w-4, cross out the are you a US citizen and put American.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You may be interested to know that a mask is a EUA product per the FDA. I had to find the page on the webarchive website - https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-situations-medical-devices/faqs-emergency-use-authorization-face-masks-non-surgical

    In CA they cannot mandate EUA products per CA law - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=24172.&lawCode=HSC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting and helpful, Rebecca; thank you. Have you tried to leverage this info?

      Delete
  8. I am just seeing this now 3/15/21. What was the outcome?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Still in process. Go to the top of the article and click on episode 10 for the latest.

      Delete
  9. You should try a FOIA request or if Mass. has a public Records Request Act use that instead. Start demanding proof of any peer reviewed and published scientific communications that they had prior to enacting their policies. They have to reply or face fines, sanctions and legal action. They may try the redaction trick but it won't work.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Can a school district override a county health department's order on mask requirement in schools? Up until today our school district was starting the new school year with mask wearing being an option for students. Today our county health department made an order for all districts to require masks in all of their schools, regardless of being jabbed or not. The first day of school is tomorrow. Is this legal? Does a county health department hold that much power over all school districts in the county? Thank you in advance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In California, school districts are legally required to follow health orders. That said, my case is all about my question for the district to legally demonstrate how those "health" "orders" are lawful given the requirement of "beyond control" hospitals has NOT been demonstrated. The district (and likely your district) has the same authority as I do to ask the county to answer that question, and to withhold consent until legal authority is demonstrated. My district refuses to ask, and hence my current conversations with attorneys. At the top of the article are links to the latest status.

      I'd get an attorney to run with the concept that all health orders MUST be within the law, and that "just follow orders" is an illegal source of ordering authority (obviously).

      Go for it :)

      Delete
  11. Does anyone have any appeal letters for testing. they excepted my relgious exemption for shot but not for testing.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Continuity of Government under Insurrection Act active with DEFCON 2 and Trump/military in charge? Corrupt USA Inc. dissolved? Powerless Biden/Congress/Media targeted for removal? Gene Decode videos +

Ready for another game-changer? Tartaria was a global civilization with free energy, healing centers, classic architecture that our Evil .01% ‘reset’ ~200 years ago then claimed as their own (mud floods, World’s Fairs, star forts, and more)