|
Sacramento, CA (Feb. 14, 2006) - The Hindu
American Foundation (HAF), through its law firm, issued a
letter to the
California State Board of Education (SBE) last Thursday, February
9, 2006, demanding a fair and open process in the ongoing
textbook adoption process. HAF became involved in the process
when it became apparent that the California Department of
Education (CDE), SBE and its staff improperly allowed certain
individuals to undermine the procedures available for public
debate and resolution and failed to adequately address a substantial
number of the Hindu edits.
“We at HAF are asking the SBE to ensure
that the latest subcommittee, formed to assess the Hindu edits
and corrections, act in compliance with all of the requirements
provided by law. Specifically, the committee must fulfil the
mandate of the education code which prohibits the adoption
of instructional materials that adversely reflects on one’s
creed or ancestry,” said Suhag Shukla, Esq., Legal Counsel
for HAF. “We’re requesting that the SBE correct
numerous procedural errors that have already occurred and
consider fairly the views of the Hindu American participants
and practicing Hindus.”
Of key concern to HAF was that the remaining
proceedings of the subcommittee be conducted in accordance
with the provisions of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
The Bagley-Keene Act requires that certain state agency meetings
be conducted openly so that the public may remain informed.
It also requires that the public be given a minimum of ten
(10) days notice of the time and location of such meetings
and that agendas be made available. To date, staff of both
the CDE and the SBE have had several private communications
and closed-door meetings with advocates opposing the Hindu
participants, while denying HAF and the participating Hindu
groups notice or access. These actions, HAF asserts, have
subverted the public process and deny all notions of fairness.
“We believe that the recommendations
made by the Ad Hoc Committee to the SBE on November 8th and
then reaffirmed at a public hearing by the Curriculum Commission
on December 2nd, were based on an accurate understanding of
science, history and the sentiments of those people in California
that actually practice the Hindu faith,” said Ms. Shukla.
“It is patently unfair, and perhaps illegal, for a private,
closed-door meeting between Board members and an advocate
opposing the Hindu participants to undermine these publicly
resolved recommendations.”
HAF has also brought into question the reliance
of the CDE and SBE on a professor of Sanskrit as an expert
on Hinduism and ancient India. “It’s akin to consulting
a professor of Latin about Christianity or Roman history,”
asserted Ms. Shukla.
Attorneys from the law firm of Olson, Hagel
and Fishburn, LLP, met on behalf of HAF with the Chief Counsel
of the SBE on Friday, February 10, 2006, to discuss further
the issues outlined in Thursday’s letter. They will
remain in close communication with the SBE and CDE until an
equitable resolution is reached.
|
