Closed Session (Aug 14, 2025)

Summary

17-minute opening dominated by **Malczewski's motion to remove item 7E (Bylaw 9310 — board policy on creating board policy) from the agenda** as not following the bylaw's own revision procedure. Motion fails 2-3 (per the implied vote). Hills delivers an extended Education Code Section 35010 speech: *"the maxim of all legislative law at the federal, state, and local level is that one legislative body cannot bind another legislative body, a later legislative body."* Hills also flags an alleged "evil" provision in the existing bylaw allowing **majority-vote suspension of board policy or board bylaw**: *"that is, I think that's unconstitutional. I think it's overly broad and vague and violates due process."* Malczewski's substantive critique: *"we haven't identified a need for a new policy of or revision… we haven't gathered fiscal other data, staff and public input, related district policies. We haven't done that… we are proposing it as an action item before we've actually followed the steps."* After the failed motion, Hills makes a separate motion to move student-rep introduction and superintendent report to the top of the agenda, which passes. Closed-session items: **conference with legal counsel — Doe Jane v. LBUSD, anticipated litigation (Gov't Code 54956.9)**, conference with labor negotiators (54957.6).

Key insights (5)

• **Bylaw 9310 (the meta-policy on creating board policy) is the structural starting gun for the 2025-26 governance fight.** Malczewski frames the rushed summer scheduling as procedurally improper; Hills argues the change is needed and accuses the existing bylaw of containing an unconstitutional provision (majority-vote suspension).
• **First on-record Hills "no board can bind a future board" argument** — Education Code §35010 / federal-and-state legislative-law analogy. This argument recurs in 2026 (e.g., Bylaw 9322 fight at Feb 12 / Feb 26 regular session) and is essentially the structural justification for the board majority's procedural changes.
• **First on-record reference to "Doe Jane v. LBUSD" anticipated litigation.** Likely the AB 218 retroactive-childhood-sexual-abuse-claim exposure that drives the **$1,730/hr Morgan Lewis & Bockius contract** approved 3-2 on 2026-04-16 (per 2026-05-12-lbusd-rule-coverage-analysis-and-corroboration-targets).
• **Student board members** are seated (Hills moves them up in the agenda) — early-year administrative housekeeping.
• Notable: Hills challenges the procedural argument by pivoting to substance — Morgan repeatedly has to redirect: *"Mr. Hills, we're not we're not getting into the versions right now. We're just discussing whether we can put this on the agenda or not."* Pattern recurs throughout the corpus.