Carl Petersen (California)
Carl J. Petersen was a candidate for District 2 representative on the Los Angeles Unified School District school board in California. Petersen was defeated in the by-district primary election on March 7, 2017. Petersen participated in Ballotpedia's 2017 school board candidate survey. Click here to read his responses.
Biography
Petersen moved from New York to Los Angeles in 1988. He has worked as the director of logistics at Arecont Vision since 2005. He previously worked as a general manager at J. B. Chemical Company and at Unified Dispatch, LLC. Petersen earned a bachelor's degree in business management from the University of Phoenix. He also has a vocational certificate in percussion from the Musicians Institute. A Los Angeles Unified School District parent, Petersen has five children.[1][2][3]
Elections
2017
Three seats on the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education were up for primary election on March 7, 2017. A general election was held on May 16, 2017, for the District 4 and 6 seats. In her bid for re-election to the District 2 seat, incumbent Mónica García defeated challengers Lisa Alva and Carl Petersen and won another term outright by receiving a majority of votes in the primary. In District 4, board President Steve Zimmer advanced to the general election with challenger Nick Melvoin after they defeated Gregory Martayan and Allison Holdorff Polhill. Melvoin defeated Zimmer in the general election. Six candidates—Kelly Fitzpatrick-Gonez, Patty Lopez, Imelda Padilla, Araz Parseghian, Gwendolyn Posey, and Jose Sandoval—filed to run for the open District 6 seat in the primary. Fitzpatrick-Gonez and Padilla advanced to the general election, where Fitzpatrick-Gonez won the seat. District 6 incumbent Monica Ratliff opted not to run for re-election to the board and instead ran for a Los Angeles City Council seat.[4][5][6][7]
Results
| Los Angeles Unified School District, District 2 Primary Election, 5-year term, 2017 |
||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
 Mónica García Incumbent |
55.68% | 20,710 |
| Lisa Alva | 34.38% | 12,788 |
| Carl Petersen | 9.94% | 3,696 |
| Total Votes | 37,194 | |
| Source: Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, "Los Angeles County Election Results: Consolidated Municipal and Special Elections March 7, 2017," accessed March 30, 2017 | ||
Funding
Petersen reported $3,114.30 in contributions and $3,114.30 in expenditures to the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, which left his campaign with a $0.00 balance in the election.[8]
Endorsements
Petersen was endorsed by the following organizations and elected officials:[9][10][11][12][13]
- Network for Public Education (NPE) Action
- North Valley Democratic Club
- Americans for Democratic Action (Southern California)
- Public Education & Social Justice Advocacy (PESJA) Los Angeles
- Evolve
- Los Angeles Community College District Trustee Nancy Pearlman
- Los Angeles Unified Board of Education District 6 challenger Patty Lopez
Petersen also received endorsements from a number of community members. Click here to see a list of his supporters.
2015
Four of the seven seats on the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education were up for primary election on March 3, 2015. Only one candidate, unopposed District 1 incumbent George J. McKenna III, received more than 50 percent of the votes cast in the primary. Because of this, he won his seat outright, and the top two vote-getters in Districts 3, 5 and 7 advanced to the general election on May 19, 2015.
Incumbents Tamar Galatzan, Bennett Kayser and Richard A. Vladovic from Districts 3, 5 and 7, respectively, received enough votes to advance to the general election. They each faced at least two challengers in the primary. In District 3, Galatzan faced five challengers, Elizabeth Badger Bartels, Filiberto Gonzalez, Ankur Patel, Carl J. Petersen and Scott Mark Schmerelson. She and Schmerelson faced each other again in the general election. Kayser and challenger Ref Rodriguez defeated challenger Andrew Thomas to continue on to the District 5 general election. In the District 7 primary, Vladovic ran against challengers Euna Anderson and Lydia Gutierrez. Gutierrez received enough votes to advance to the general election with Vladovic.
In the general election, both Galatzan and Kayser were unseated by their challengers. Schmerelson won the District 3 seat, and Rodriguez was elected to the District 5 seat. In District 7, Vladovic defeated Gutierrez to secure another term on the board.
Results
| Los Angeles Unified School District, District 3 Primary Election, 5-year term, 2015 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Vote % | Votes | |
| Nonpartisan | Tamar Galatzan Incumbent |
40.2% | 15,326 | |
| Nonpartisan | Scott Mark Schmerelson |
20.4% | 7,767 | |
| Nonpartisan | Ankur Patel | 12.8% | 4,870 | |
| Nonpartisan | Elizabeth Badger Bartels | 10.8% | 4,125 | |
| Nonpartisan | Carl J. Petersen | 10.1% | 3,839 | |
| Nonpartisan | Filiberto Gonzalez | 5.8% | 2,213 | |
| Total Votes | 38,140 | |||
| Source: Los Angeles City Clerk's Office, "Primary Nominating Election: Official Election Results," accessed March 23, 2015 | ||||
Funding
Petersen reported $2,770.75 in contributions and $2,533.20 in expenditures to the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, which left his campaign with $237.55 as of February 25, 2015.[14]
Endorsements
Petersen received endorsements from the organizations North Valley Democratic Club and Hemlock on the Rocks.[2]
Campaign themes
2017
Ballotpedia survey responses
Carl J. Petersen participated in Ballotpedia's 2017 survey of school board candidates.[15] In response to the question "What do you hope to achieve if elected to the school board?" the candidate stated on January 19, 2017:
| “ | 1) Improve the ways that special education services are delivered: Parent and teachers should be empowered to design Individual Education programs without interference from bureaucrats. Special Ed centers must remain a choice for parents who children with severe needs. 2) Bring adequate regulation of charters: Poorly performing charters should be shut down. Enrollment policies should comply with the law and governing boards should be democratically elected. 3) Empower all students, not just the ones headed to college: Vocational training should be reinvigorated. Art and music programs must also be made available to all students to inspire creativity. 4) Start working with teachers instead of treating them as adversaries: End the age discrimination that is accomplished through Teacher Jail. Stop punishing teachers for informing parents of their rights.[16][17] | ” |
Ranking the issues
The candidate was asked to rank the following issues based on how they should be prioritized by the school board, with 1 being the most important and 7 being the least important. Each ranking could only be used once.
| Education policy |
|---|
 |
Click here to learn more about education policy in California. |
| Education on the ballot |
| Issue importance ranking | |
|---|---|
| Candidate's ranking | Issue |
| Balancing or maintaining the district's budget | |
| Closing the achievement gap | |
| Improving education for special needs students | |
| Expanding arts education | |
| Improving post-secondary readiness | |
| Improving relations with teachers | |
| Expanding school choice options | |
| “ | Ranking my first priority was easy. If the LAUSD does not stop the exodus of students, the District will end up bankrupt. Rankings two through five was a little like being forced to name my favorite child. If the District is going to achieve their stated goal of 100% graduation, then they need to start paying attention to every student. Every one of these issues is a different variation on this theme. Please consider these a tie for second. Having to rank the teachers was also difficult. I recognize that teachers are on the front line and that none of the other priorities is possible without a good relationship with them. The current relationship is also very bad as shown by the $1 billion lawsuit against the LAUSD alleging age discrimination through the misuse of Teacher Jail. However, in the end, the reason for the existence of the District is to educate the children, so I had to rank those issues higher. The last priority was also easy. I support the NAACP resolution calling for a “moratorium on charter school expansion and for the strengthening of oversight”. The focus of the LAUSD Board should improve the District schools so that they are the first choice of all parents.[17] | ” |
| —Carl J. Petersen (January 19, 2017) | ||
Positions on the issues
The candidate was asked to answer eight questions from Ballotpedia regarding significant issues in education and the school district. The questions are highlighted in blue and followed by the candidate's responses. Some questions provided multiple choices, which are noted after those questions. The candidate was also provided space to elaborate on their answers to the multiple choice questions.
| Should new charter schools be approved in your district? (Not all school boards are empowered to approve charter schools. In those cases, the candidate was directed to answer the question as if the school board were able to do so.) |
|---|
| No. The LAUSD is already the largest charter authorizer in the country. Still, we allow a charter like View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter Middle School to be renewed even though the California Charter School Association ranked them a one out of ten, they were not providing proper services to children with special education needs, the Charter School Division reported that “Hispanic/Latino was not a numerically significant subgroup for the 2014-2015 SBAC” and they had a 0% reclassification rate for English Learners. The District needs to figure out how it is going to perform proper oversight before adding any new charters. |
| Which statement best describes the ideal relationship between the state government and the school board? The state should always defer to school board decisions, defer to school board decisions in most cases, be involved in the district routinely or only intervene in severe cases of misconduct or mismanagement. |
| The state should only intervene in severe cases of misconduct or mismanagement. |
| Are standardized tests an accurate metric of student achievement? |
| No. The test results are skewed by the fact that each student's test taking ability is unique. Furthermore, we have reduced their effectiveness by teaching exactly what will be tested. Finally, we have put so much emphasis on results that they have become sources of extreme stress for our students. For these reasons, I have opted my children out of standardized testing. |
| How should the district handle underperforming teachers? Terminate their contract before any damage is done to students, offer additional training options, put them on a probationary period while they seek to improve or set up a mentorship program for the underperforming teacher with a more experienced teacher in the district? |
| Offer additional training options. Offer additional training options. Set up a mentorship program for the underperforming teacher with a more experienced teacher in the district. |
| Should teachers receive merit pay? |
| No. This question is unanswerable without a specific proposal. In a perfect world, "better" teachers would get paid more. However, the bigger question is how do you decide which teachers are best? Students do not enter classrooms as blank slates. Do you punish teachers whose students are not performing to expectations even if their students were already behind at the start of the school year? How do you ensure that teachers are getting this pay because they are better at teaching and not because they are betting at brown-nosing the principal? |
| Should the state give money to private schools through a voucher system or scholarship program? |
| No. Organizations that receive public funding need to be held directly accountable to the public. |
| How should expulsion be used in the district? |
| Children should never be expelled. Instead, alternative arrangements should be made for students who are disrupting the school environment. |
| What's the most important factor for success in the classroom: student-teacher ratio, the curriculum, teachers, parent involvement or school administration? |
| Teachers This seems again like a who is your favorite child type of question. All of these factors are important. I chose "teachers" because they are on the front line. |
Candidate website
Petersen highlighted the following statement on his campaign website:
| “ | The LAUSD School Board needs a parent's perspective. None of the current Board members has a child enrolled in the District. I am a father of five who has fought the LAUSD to get my children the services that they needed. Now I want to fight for ALL KIDS.
One size education does not fit all. The District must provide opportunities to all students, not just those who are college-bound. We will fight to block the closure of special education centers and return funding to vocational education. I support the NAACP’s resolution. We need a 'moratorium on charter school expansion and for the strengthening of oversight.' Unlike Mónica García's campaign, this campaign will not be funded by the charter industry. I will answer to the parents and students of the district, not corporate donors. CHANGE IS COMING: The Los Angeles local elections are on March 7, 2017[17] |
” |
| —Carl Petersen (2017)[18] | ||
89.3 KPCC survey
Petersen participated in the following survey conducted by 89.3 KPCC. The questions provided in the survey appear in bold and Petersen's responses follow below.[19]
Why do you want to be a member of the L.A. Unified School Board?
| “ | I am honored that Dr. Diane Ravitch, the former Assistant Secretary of Education, author and education historian referred to me as a 'strong supporter of public schools.' My support is driven by the example of my father who grew up in the worst parts of the South Bronx in New York City. Through a public education, including free college tuition at the City University of New York, he was able to raise his family in a middle class neighborhood in the suburbs. I want to pay forward that debt and ensure that all children have the same opportunity to fulfill their American Dreams.[17] | ” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
Superintendent Michelle King is in her thirteenth month in the district’s top job. On an A-F scale, how would you grade her first year? Please explain your answer.
| “ | I would grade Ms. King’s performance in her first year as Superintendent as a C; 'average, simple, common, adequate, but ordinary.' I also believe that she was chosen because she is not the type of person who would stir up the pot and this is exactly the type of performance we have seen. After the fiasco of the Deasy era, it is understandable that the board wanted someone who was more likely to follow the policies that they set. However, given the challenges facing the district, the students deserved better. While the board should have the final say, they should also respect the superintendent enough to let her advocate her positions and to take them into consideration.
The board’s lack of respect for the superintendent was on display immediately after she was sworn in. They had asked for the input of their new superintendent on the subject that they were discussing and she laid out a series of recommended changes. However, instead of discussing these ideas, the board moved immediately to a vote. This did not set the stage for a productive working relationship. I am also concerned that the district has not fully disclosed Ms. King’s role in the mismanagement of the Food Services division. When the Inspector General’s office found — as reported by The Los Angeles Times — 'that the program [was] currently at a minimum being mismanaged and at worst being consistently abused,' David Binkle was set up as the fall guy and forced into retirement. However, Binkle has maintained that his supervisor and Ms. King had approved the actions that he was criticized for taking. Unfortunately, the district has refused to comply with several of my Public Record Act requests claiming that the situation is still under investigation. It is, therefore, impossible to confirm Binkle’s accusations.[17] |
” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
Please name one idea or policy you don’t see Superintendent King, district leaders or the school board discussing often enough that — if elected — you’d work on either implementing or expanding in L.A. Unified?
| “ | I am concerned that there is a singular focus on pretending that every student will attend college after graduating. However, not all students have the ability or desire to attend college. These students should not be made to feel inferior. Their needs should also be met and we should reinvigorate vocational training so that they are prepared to find good jobs after graduation.[17] | ” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
Do you believe expanding “school choice” policies (giving parents more ability to choose the school their child attends) is a force for eliminating or exacerbating the educational opportunity gap between privileged and less-privileged racial, linguistic or socioeconomic groups? Please explain your rationale.
| “ | Magnet schools are the only option that have proven records of improving student performance. Therefore, expanding these programs should be the focus of the district. If Eli Broad really cares about the children of the district, he should abandon his plan to put private money in expanding the “market share” of charters and financially support these efforts.
Choice only sounds like a good idea until you realize that some students have no choices. As long as the district continues to look the other way while charters cherrypick students, the opportunity gap will be exacerbated, especially if these actions force the LAUSD into bankruptcy. If the parents of higher performing students continue to abandon the LAUSD while students with special needs, English learners and children with behavioral problems are forced to stay behind, the district will receive less revenue and face a higher cost per student. This will increase the amount of red ink flowing from the district’s ledgers.[17] |
” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
How, if at all, would you change L.A. Unified’s approach to “authorizing” and overseeing charter schools? (Your answer may touch on any facet of the relationship — from vetting applications to open new charter schools; renewing or revoking existing charters; monitoring charter schools’ performance, governance and finance; handling Prop. 39 campus-sharing arrangements.)
| “ | I support the NAACP resolution calling for a moratorium on new charters until systems are put into place to ensure that charters, as recipients of public money, are following the rules. Charters like View Park Middle School, which the California Charter School Association ranked a one out of ten, should not be allowed to continue in operation. Principals like David Fehte should not be able to place $100,000 in questionable charges on a credit card paid for with public funds and then be able to walk away with a year’s salary as part of his severance package. School board members like Mónica García should not be allowed to accept hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the charter industry and then continue to vote on matters related to these same organizations. If one of these donors, like Vielka McFarlane, then has her charter raided by the FBI, those donations should be immediately returned. This same charter executive should also not have been entitled to a compensation package that topped $438,730.[17] | ” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
L.A. Unified faces long-term financial challenges, including declining enrollment and rising costs for pensions and employee benefits. A blue-ribbon panel in Nov. 2015 also highlighted further issues that cloud the district’s financial future. If elected, what immediate steps would you take to address these financial challenges?
| “ | It is amazing to me that, with a bureaucracy the size of the LAUSD’s, they had to look outside for suggestions that were less than impressive. For example, in the entire discussion of charters, they never mention the problem of cherrypicking. They also did not investigate whether the district is receiving enough funds from the state to cover the cost of oversight or suggest performing an audit to determine if charters are paying enough to cover the cost of district facilities that they use in their operations.
I am particularly concerned that this report seemed to play into an us versus them point of view that pits special education students against those in general education. The panel came to the conclusion that the district must guard against being 'over inclusive,' especially in the case of 'AfricanAmericans and Latino kids [who] are over represented among special education students.' In reality, too many parents are forced to hire lawyers to make sure that their students receive the proper services. The panel erred by operating under the assumption that all conditions requiring special education are somehow transitional. This let them assume that the district can 'reduce the cost curve which is threatening to grow way out of control' by getting students 'mainstreamed as quickly as possible.' Conditions like autism are not the equivalent of broken bones. A cast is not available that can reset my daughters’ brains and send them on their way to general ed classrooms. Unless we stem the loss of students from the district, bankruptcy is inevitable. To avoid this, the board must start following the law that created charters and start competing so that our LAUSD public schools become the better option for parents. While the incumbent focuses on the charters that fund her campaign spending, I will serve the students who are still enrolled in LAUSD. I will work to shift power away from the bureaucracy so that parents, teachers and staff can design programs that will make our local neighborhood schools better choices than the charters.[17] |
” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
The L.A. Unified board has set a district-wide goal of a 100 percent high school graduation rate. How, if at all, would you change the district’s approach to meeting this goal? (Or would you change the goal itself?)
| “ | If we want all of our children to graduate, we have to pay attention to every one of them, not just the ones who fit our expectations. For some students this means offering college level classes so that they can be challenged. Other students prefer vocational classes. Music and art classes must also be made available.
I also have serious concerns that the district is artificially inflating its graduation statistics. It seems entirely unrealistic that the actual graduation rate last year was 75 percent when in December the district was predicting only 50 percent of students would graduate. While Mónica García hawks “diplomas for all,” they are meaningless pieces of paper if they are not backed by a mastery of knowledge. Social promotion from grade to grade is bad enough; pushing students out the door because they took part in a credit recovery program that did not teach them anything can have devastating results. The high percentage of college freshmen who have to take remedial courses is just one example of problems that our graduates are facing. We owe them better.[17] |
” |
| —Carl Petersen (February 17, 2017)[19] | ||
2015
Ballotpedia survey responses
Petersen participated in Ballotpedia's 2015 survey of school board candidates. The following sections display his responses to the survey questions. When asked what his top priority would be if elected, the candidate made the following statement:
| “ | I am a father of five, with my four school-age children enrolled in the LAUSD. When the District made me fight for special education services that my daughters' teachers agreed they required, I knew that the LAUSD had lost their focus on the students. It was then that I decided that I needed to run for the LAUSD School Board.
As a result of my experience, my first priority is to reduce layers of bureaucracy so that parents, teachers and staff have more say at the local level. The best thing that the district can do for schools is to get out of their way. Massive bureaucracies tend to favor a one-size-fits-all approach, but children are unique individuals, each with different needs. Parents, teachers and school staff know how to best serve their school community. The district has the responsibility to make sure that laws are complied with, to provide guidance, and to ensure that results meet the standards that have been set. Let the local community figure out how to get there.[17] |
” |
| —Carl J. Petersen (2015)[20] | ||
Ranking the issues
The candidate was asked to rank the following issues by importance in the school district, with 1 being the most important and 7 being the least important. This table displays this candidate's rankings from most to least important:
| Education policy |
|---|
|
Click here to learn more about education policy in California. |
| Education on the ballot |
| Issue importance ranking | |
|---|---|
| Candidate's ranking | Issue |
| Balancing or maintaining the district's budget | |
| Expanding career-technical education | |
| Improving education for special needs students | |
| Closing the achievement gap | |
| Expanding arts education | |
| Improving college readiness | |
| Expanding school choice options | |
Positions on the issues
The candidate was asked to answer 10 questions from Ballotpedia regarding significant issues in education and the school district. The questions are in the left column, and the candidate's responses are in the right column of the following table:
| Question | Response |
|---|---|
| "Common Core was originally proposed as a set of standards that districts and teachers would have to meet. The method of getting there was left to the individual teachers. We need to return to this proposal instead of it being a profit center for testing companies and textbook manufacturers." | |
| "The district needs to improve public schools to make them the better option." | |
| "No" | |
| "They are ONLY a measure of student achievement." | |
| "The district needs to expand educational opportunities so that a full education is available for those off and on the college bound path. This includes increased opportunities for art, music and vocational education. There are also not enough opportunities for gifted students." | |
| "Students with behavior problems should be sent to alternative schools to remove them from their current environments rather than being expelled." | |
| "Parents, teachers and other school staff need to be given more control at the local level. They should be empowered to find ways to improve their schools, whether they are failing or successful. The district bureaucracy should be asking how they can help instead of issuing top-down mandates." | |
| "I would have to see a specific proposal to decide if I supported it. For example, I need to know how performance is being evaluated." | |
| "The local school leadership should be handling these situations. Each school has unique situations which can not be handled with a one-size-fits-all approach." | |
| "Most importantly, I will be a Board member who listens to his constituents. Unlike the incumbent, I will not stare at my iPad while parents speak before the Board with suggestions on how to improve the district. I will also put together advisory boards to make recommendations and to keep me apprised of problems that are happening.
Board meetings should be moved to times when more working parents, teachers and students can participate. The location of these meetings also needs to be rotated throughout the district. Board meetings must also be held in locations where stakeholders are not forced to wait for hours outside for the opportunity to participate." |
Candidate website
Petersen highlighted the following issues on his campaign website:
| “ | The LAUSD Is Broken.
Will you join me in my quest to fix it? As a father of five, I have seen the best and worst in the LAUSD. Since two of my daughters are on the autism spectrum, I also have insight into the needs of educating students with IEPs and how the district is failing these students. Serving on the School Board is a chance to put this experience to use and give back to my community. My professional experience in planning, logistics and accounting and my degree in Business Management provide me with the qualifications that are needed to contribute to the mission of the board. My priorities will include: 1) Giving stakeholders more access to the decision making process. The fact that board meetings are held during the day when working parents, teachers and students cannot attend is indicative of a board that has insulated itself from the community that it serves. 2) Moving control away from a bureaucracy downtown so that school communities have more input. Breakfast in the Classroom is an example of a program that many parents do not want but is still imposed on them by the district. If this type of control in not relinquished, many more schools are going to seek the charter school route. 3) It is important that we recognize the programs that work and duplicate them where practical. We must also become more innovative in finding solutions to the problems that plague our system. To do this, we must reward teachers who consistently show that they know how to get their students to excel and make sure that they are not burdened with rules that only serve to stifle creativity. 4) High stakes standardized testing is forcing teachers to teach our students how to take tests instead of giving them the skills that they need to compete in the global economy. These tests have become the goal instead of one of many ways to measure progress. Additionally, rules must be put in place so that any district employee that puts pressure on a student to do well on these tests is severely punished. 5) Tenure provides important protections to teachers. At the same time, we have all sat in classrooms where teachers have lost the drive that they once had for teaching. I would work with the UTLA to update the existing tenure system, find different assignments for teachers who need a change and end the wasted resources of “teacher’s jail.” 6) While the STEM fields are important, so is a well rounded education. If there is not enough time in a day to adequately expose students to all subjects, then we will have to look at ways to expand the school day. Adequately funding art and music programs is also essential for a complete education. 7) The current adversarial relationship between the district and the parents of special education students must end. We must also recognize that the process of educating these students in islands located within neighborhood schools is not working or even meeting the goal of giving them access to mainstreaming. Instead we need campuses that specialize in giving these students access to a cutting edge education. I would like to see these campuses combined with a magnet for “typical” students who would like to pursue a career in special education and related fields.[17] |
” |
| —Carl J. Petersen's campaign website (2015)[21] | ||
See also
- Los Angeles Unified School District, California
- Los Angeles Unified School District elections (2017)
- Los Angeles Unified School District elections (2015)
- Clean sweep for school board incumbents... (March 4, 2015)
- Embroiled incumbents see differing outcomes in May 19 school board elections across five states (May 21, 2015)
External links
- Los Angeles Unified School District
- Campaign website
- Campaign Facebook page
- Twitter page
- 2015 Smart Voter profile
Footnotes
- ↑ Change the LAUSD, "Meet Carl," accessed February 3, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Smart Voter, "Carl J. Petersen: Candidate for Board Member; Los Angeles Unified School District; District 3," accessed February 3, 2015
- ↑ Carl J. Petersen for LAUSD School Board District 2, "Resume," accessed January 18, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles City Clerk, "2017 Primary Nominating Election Candidates: Nominating Petition Filing Status," accessed December 13, 2016
- ↑ 98.3 KPCC, "Crowded field for Los Angeles primary election in March, but no serious threat yet for Garcetti," December 8, 2016
- ↑ Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, "Los Angeles County Election Results: Consolidated Municipal and Special Elections March 7, 2017," accessed March 8, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles City Clerk, "Election Night Results (Unofficial): May 16, 2017," accessed May 17, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, "2017 City and LAUSD Elections," accessed August 1, 2017
- ↑ Abbey Smith, “Email communication with Carl Petersen," January 29, 2017
- ↑ Network for Public Education Action, "NPE Action endorses Lisa Alva for LAUSD School Board," accessed January 19, 2017
- ↑ Evolve, "Endorsements: LA County Municipal Elections," accessed March 2, 2017
- ↑ Carl J. Petersen for LAUSD School Board District 2, "Welcome to the fight for the children of the LAUSD," accessed March 2, 2017
- ↑ Carl J. Petersen for LAUSD School Board District 2, "PRESS RELEASE: Patty Lopez and Carl J. Petersen Announce Mutual Endorsements," February 16, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, "2015 City and LAUSD Elections," accessed April 13, 2015
- ↑ Note: The candidate's answers have been reproduced here verbatim without edits or corrections by Ballotpedia.
- ↑ Ballotpedia School Board Candidate Survey, 2017, "Carl J. Petersen's responses," January 19, 2017
- ↑ 17.00 17.01 17.02 17.03 17.04 17.05 17.06 17.07 17.08 17.09 17.10 17.11 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Carl J. Petersen For LAUSD School Board District 2, "Home," accessed January 16, 2017
- ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.7 89.3 KPCC, "KPCC's LA school board candidate survey: Carl Petersen, District 2," February 17, 2017
- ↑ Ballotpedia School Board Candidate Survey, 2015
- ↑ Change the LAUSD, "Platform," accessed February 3, 2015
| Los Angeles Unified School District elections in 2017 | |
| Los Angeles County, California | |
| Election date: | Primary election: March 7, 2017 • General election: May 16, 2017 |
| Candidates: | District 2: • Incumbent, Mónica García • Lisa Alva • Carl Petersen District 4: • Incumbent, Steve Zimmer • Gregory Martayan • Nick Melvoin • Allison Holdorff Polhill District 6: • Kelly Fitzpatrick-Gonez • Patty Lopez • Imelda Padilla • Araz Parseghian • Gwendolyn Posey • Jose Sandoval |
| Important information: | What was at stake? • Additional elections on the ballot • Key deadlines |
| 2015 Los Angeles Unified School District Elections | |
| Los Angeles County, California | |
| Election date: | Primary election - March 3, 2015 General election - May 19, 2015 |
| Candidates: | District 1: • Incumbent, George J. McKenna III District 3: • Incumbent, Tamar Galatzan • Elizabeth Badger Bartels • Filiberto Gonzalez • Ankur Patel • Carl J. Petersen • Scott Mark Schmerelson District 5: • Incumbent, Bennett Kayser • Ref Rodriguez • Andrew Thomas District 7: • Incumbent, Richard A. Vladovic • Euna Anderson • Lydia Gutierrez |
| Important information: | What was at stake? • Key deadlines • Additional elections on the ballot |
