Opponents of a ballot measure that would dismantle the state’s bilingual education law yesterday filed a second lawsuit to try to derail the initiative because of wording in a summary that will be sent to voters.
A week after a separate challenge was rejected by a Supreme Judicial Court justice, activists opposed to the November referendum sponsored by California millionaire Ron Unz claim the summary written by the Attorney General’s office is misleading.
The language fails to reflect the proposed law and is counter to the experience of school districts in California, where the Unz-backed Prop. 227 replaced transitional bilingual education with an English language immersion system, the plaintiffs claim in their suit.
Beth Stone, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Tom Reilly, said the office is confident the summary is accurate and legal.
“Our summary was circulated in draft form to opponents of the petition last summer, and none of the opponents suggested any change,” Stone said.
Also yesterday, the House and Senate agreed on a bill designed to overhaul bilingual education, sending the final version to acting Gov. Jane M. Swift.