PBT, Episode 51; TVUSD Board Meeting, March 2025 (part 1), ft. Cole

An episode I have sat on for months. My apologies to the listeners for the delay, but here you go. Part 2 will drop tomorrow.

Episode Transcript

(00:01):
All right, Temecula. So this is an old episode.
This is the last board meeting that we covered and when I'm not
going to go back. I haven't watched any of the
board meetings. I watched the special board
meeting that we did July 21st onMonday, and then I also watched

(00:25):
the board meeting that we did July 22nd that Tuesday.
I want to move past the Monday meeting.
I don't want to talk about that anymore.
Everybody acknowledges that it was pointless.
I spoke to Cole today and she will be joining me for a recap
of the regular board meeting that we had this last Tuesday.

(00:45):
So that will be coming out soon.But this one is from the March
board meeting. We talked about things that are
already dealt with or addressed.Like for instance, we talked
about the student board member. Well, this was the first meeting
where we had a student board member this July meeting.
So this is outdated, but it's just so good.

(01:08):
I'm really disappointed. I didn't, I didn't put it out
sooner. And yeah, I just, I didn't want
to just hold on to it. I don't know what else to do.
So I'm sharing it with you guys.I hope you enjoy it.
It's going to be a two-part episode.
This is the first part. I call it episode 50, but really
it's episode 51. So yeah, enjoy guys.

(01:29):
You ever wonder what is the truth?
Three things cannot be long hidden, the sun, the moon, and
the truth. All right, guys, Episode 50 and

(01:59):
I'm sitting here with Cole. What's going on?
Cole, how are you? I'm good.
How are you? Good, good.
We just, we've been going over the notes that she has.
She has extensive notes about the previous school board
meeting. What?
It was the March meeting. Yes.
Yeah, the March meeting. The March meeting.
Yeah, That happened 2 weeks ago now.
Two weeks ago. Yeah, two weeks ago.

(02:20):
And yeah, we have some pretty contentious stuff that happens,
some pretty controversial things.
So we're just going to go through the things that we felt
like were important all the way through the entire meeting, so.
To start, I appreciated Melinda's opening statement.
I felt that it was to the point and it was respectful and very

(02:44):
professional. I did notice some contentious
faces on the board. So that was kind of
disappointing because again, we've wanted the elevation of
just being professional and I guess maybe just having a little
bit of a poker face at times. It would be appreciative.
I did appreciate and respect thefact that she is not going to

(03:07):
consider moving public comments simply because of the threats
and all the nonsense that went into that decision.
People don't have to agree with it.
But as she mentioned, her budging on this just means that
she can kind of be walked all over by the public.
And that's not a good precedenceto set as the president when

(03:28):
there's already so much contention like we've talked
about. So I respect it.
I do believe that because she's so direct and she has such a
bold personality that some people may take it as her being
abrasive. But in reality, this is exactly
what we voted for, true professionalism, getting to the
point, being direct and moving on.

(03:51):
So she's conducting business exactly how we expected.
I think it's just because she's the one delivering it that
people have had an issue with her.
Yeah, yeah, it's, it's been interesting.
And and that guy near is on all of the social media sites.
He has been coming for her. It's so it's wild how he, he
basically is accusing her of like violating constitutional

(04:14):
rights, First Amendment rights. And it's like, dude, you're you
get time to speak. There's a time to speak.
It's allotted. Yeah, there's like a structure,
and just because you don't like the specific time frame within
that structure of when you speakdoesn't mean that it's trampling
on your freedom of speech. That's not how that works.

(04:35):
And The thing is, is as a patriot, like I don't appreciate
this is like what he's doing is equivalent to when the left
calls everyone a Nazi, correct? Because you're downplaying the
the Nazi word. He's downplaying the violation
of free speech. Right, because it's it's it's
it's non existent. Yeah.
But yeah, in this case, but we have seen it, of course.

(04:57):
We have. Seen it through COVID, we've
seen them violate free speech ofAmerica and it's been perfectly
accepted. So when it's like this petty
level where you're really stretching the situation to say
it's a violation of free speech,I find it condescending.
I'm actually glad that you brought that up because that has
been one of my biggest gripes throughout the last couple of

(05:18):
meetings is how we are constantly harping on how
freedom of speech is being violated and it's literally not.
There's no case there. It's a business meeting and we
keep forgetting that. So if you were at a corporate
job, which most of these people are, and you're in a meeting and
the president of the company hassaid, hey, if you have an

(05:41):
opinion about XY and Z during the meeting, I would like to go
over those and review them at the end.
You would not step out of place,act out of pocket and throw a
fit and be disrespectful saying you're violating my ability to
contribute to this meeting. Maybe he would.
Though, Well, good point, good point.
You know what? Maybe in that instance, yes, he

(06:03):
would be the exception, but overall it's like you wouldn't
behave that way in an office. Environment after the fact, I'd
like to explain my deep regards for your violation.
We will not consider this meeting so you let me speak.
Shit, man. So yeah, I think it's nonsense.
Of course it's inconvenient, butwe talked about this in the last

(06:23):
episode. It is inconvenient.
I totally see both sides on it, but we can't please everyone in
every single little detail of conducting business.
It's a meeting that we are privileged and have a right to
attend, but we should not be interfering and we also
shouldn't be making false allegations regarding our
constitutional rights because they're not being violated.

(06:45):
So let's anyone that's listeningthat feels that way, please do a
little bit of more homework and just take a beat, take a deep
breath. And.
Can you please move on? There's more important things to
be up there talking about and I'll be the first to discuss it
here or physically be there withpublic comments if they are

(07:05):
violating that. But to date, yeah, with the new
board, they have not done that right.
So just stop. Already, And even I mean, you
know, it was the IT was the other side of the political
aisle that was claiming violation of free speech that
also didn't. Happen.
It did not happen. Guys, let's let's live in
reality please. So.
I think it's worth mentioning when purchase orders were

(07:29):
discussed regarding a particularwater bill, I definitely
appreciated that it was a concern to, you know, just get
more questions answered. I think that Lash did an
outstanding job as she always does.
She knows her craft, she does itwell, and she's very good at

(07:50):
explaining things. She more than sufficiently
explained how the purchase orders work and how when a bill
is due, it must be paid. That's how you do proper
business. For Doctor K to be confused
about the purchase order was a little bit concerning simply
because he was our previous president and he also served on

(08:13):
the board for two years. And obviously one of his biggest
responsibilities was fiscal responsibility, right?
So understanding how purchase orders work when we have to
approve things specifically on the board to continue conducting
business and paying our bills ontime.
So the fact that she explained it twice and it was still like,
hey, I still want to, you know, address this.

(08:34):
There's nothing more to address.I do have a lot more respect for
her as I always have. But specifically from this
meeting, because she did clap back.
And she's like, so are we just not going to pay the bill then?
Yeah. Yeah.
And it's like, yeah, let's use our common sense here.
So you're telling me while this is being recorded for all of
Temecula to hear and see not to pay a bill?

(08:56):
Am I hearing that right? You know, also giving giving him
an opportunity to kind of backtrack a little bit.
And I feel like that is where the decorum is getting better
because we are seeing people support each other.
And I think that that probably was missed because it was such a
quick interaction. But I feel like she was actually
being supportive by saying, hey,so is this what you're saying?

(09:19):
And I actually do like having a board that is not in lockstep
because it allows the administration that's up there
on the desk. It makes them more comfortable
to be able to do that right. You know what I mean?
Where we didn't. Really.
See that before, right, They were pretty quiet most of the

(09:40):
time, yeah. It was like they wouldn't speak
unless they were spoken to. Yeah.
I just felt like it was worth mentioning because I think that
one of the reasons we voted the way that we did this last
election season was to have people that have the competence
and the basic understanding of how business needs to be
operating. Again, because a lot of this has

(10:01):
to do with financials. I don't expect them to be
experts in finance. But when the expert speaks
twice, right, Let's freaking listen, K?
She knows what she's talking about.
Pay the bill, end of discussion.You know, so I felt that that

(10:21):
was worth mentioning again, financial, since we're on that
topic, Emil bringing up electioncosts.
I felt like it was very transparent, but also just
really helpful that he's again, going off of campaign promises
by being transparent and honest and open on the things that even
he doesn't understand as a finance guy as well.

(10:42):
The election costs, right? I don't think it's common
knowledge to be able to just come to the immediate
conclusion, oh, it was higher inTrustee Area 3 or Trustee Area 2
rather, because there were threecandidates, right?
Which means more work for everyone and the county in order
to get those ballots accounted and all that.

(11:05):
So even though he was someone that ran and won, even he needed
some clarity. And I just, I respected the fact
that he brought that to the daisbecause he didn't necessarily
have to. He could have just sent an
e-mail to Lash or whomever and said, hey, why are these numbers
this way? But again, it's that
transparency. We need that specifically with
the financials because again, a lot of things have fallen

(11:26):
through the cracks or have been missed or just not been.
They haven't been open and honest about that business that
they're conducting behind the scenes.
So I felt that that was worth mentioning as well.
I love that it was unanimous that they agreed to have read
throughs regarding agenda items so they can talk it out and also
give us, the constituents an opportunity to discuss it as

(11:47):
well instead of it just being like Wham, bam, here it is.
We're voting on it. You can make your normal public
comments on this item, but we'regoing to just have the final
say. You know, I think that, again,
that's in an effort to have moredecorum, but also to have more
transparency. And the fact that they were all
able to agree on that speaks volumes that we are moving in

(12:08):
the right direction and maybe ata snail pace, but it's still
happening. So I thought that was good.
Again on financials, I find it alittle bit ironic and irritating
that we need 4 principles when we technically lost one with the
last board to special assignment.

(12:31):
So it's kind of like, why aren'twe?
We do such a good job with. What assignment was that?
Principal on special assignment.Well, what?
What is? What does that mean?
What is? That so she's going to be
focusing or has been rather because that's been a while now
focusing on how to better implement the way that each
school site is functioning with specific programs because she

(12:53):
has a speed background as well. I see great principal, by the
way, so I have nothing negative to say about her.
She's fantastic. But I did speak out against that
item from inception because I felt like it was a waste of
funds and I broke it down and I.Think I remembered that.
We needed yeah, I even did like a, you know, I'm not a finance
girl, but I did some calculations.

(13:14):
I was like, hey, guys, and I spoke on this on public comment.
We could hire this many aids at a school site that's really
suffering for this one person's salary.
Yeah, they're already on payroll.
They're a principal. Why would we move them into a a
completely made-up position? Because that's what it was.

(13:35):
Allison Barkley was on the boardwhen that when that happened.
Yes, she was. Yeah.
Yeah. Because I think that that was
the meeting when she was like, she said she made a comment to
Jen about like, I know you wish this money can go to the
classroom, but that's just not how it works.
It was like. Right, yeah, because they they
were pulling the funds. I I think it was from COLA, if

(13:57):
I'm not mistaken, maybe not. It was from a specific pot of
money, which gets very complicated.
And I understand that 100%. I did mention that in the public
comments as well. I know that we can't just do
whatever we want with the monies, but there's got to be a
way, a legal way for us to find a loophole where the money

(14:22):
actually does go to the classroom.
And a lot of that too is the accountability at the state
level where they have to show where that money is going and
they have to use it within a certain time frame, right?
So there was a rush with that too, if I'm not mistaken.
So it's like OK, we need 4 principles but we technically
lost one to ourselves with a made-up position that honestly

(14:45):
we don't need because we have anentire speed department, which
is a humongous amount of minds, brilliant minds that have worked
with speed students, other minority groups, and have worked
from the school site all the wayup to their admin positions.
They are more than qualified to resolve this right?
And again, if we or to have taken all of that workload and

(15:07):
spread it across that department, we wouldn't need one
person who's now responsible forgoing to all what, 29 school
sites make that make sense? Yeah.
Yeah, well. How is she going to take on the
workload when an entire department couldn't do it?
You get what I'm saying and thenso you you you overstress 11
employee right, But then you're also pulling her from a position

(15:30):
that now. No, we have to fulfill maybe not
at that school site, but at fourof them we clearly are missing a
principal. It probably would have been more
efficient to leave her as principal and find someone to do
that job. Within the department that we
already have, that exists. Yeah.
That was my argument then. It's still my argument now.
Again, no disrespect to our posa, she's amazing, She knows

(15:54):
her stuff, she's a delight. I just, it was not a necessary
position. So again, we sit here and we
talk about how we're spending our money, but then we're doing
stuff like this and now we need roles to be filled and positions
to be filled for the new school year.
It make it make sense. It doesn't.
I briefly just want to bring up again because it's financials,

(16:18):
the whole raises and bonus moneyand how only like a percentage,
1% is going to our kids and our buses and extracurriculars.
Obviously, again, we don't know everything when it comes to
financials. There's money and certain funds
that can only be used for certain things.
That's understandable when it comes to our Superintendent and

(16:41):
some of the board members requiring a review before him
receiving a well deserved raise.It just didn't sit well with me
because they were the ones that hired him to begin with and they
did acknowledge that during the meeting.
I just felt that it was a littledisingenuous because you're
asking to do a review on something you never set a

(17:03):
precedence for. He did that himself.
He set the bar for himself. So what is there to review?
He's either doing a good job or he's not.
And if you want to have a review, and this is where I do
agree with a meal, then set a precedence so that the next
annual review you have somethingto actually review him on rather
than just what you feel. When you say set a precedence,

(17:25):
you mean like set a standard? Yes, absolutely.
Like give him a guideline, hey, you did this your first year,
here's what we expect from you moving forward, and then use
that as a template for the review the following year.
Yeah, he is well deserving of that.
That's my personal opinion. But also just as somebody that

(17:46):
understands how all of that works as well as a professional
opinion, I do think the timing isn't the best given all the
other financials we've been discussing how we had to save
girls field hockey. You know, money's just not feels
like it's not being spent in theright places.
So again, I know it's an EDCO thing.
They've got to address it because it's an annual review

(18:09):
and they've either got to give raises or not and have, you
know, have that on paper. So that's it I think for now on
financials. You know, I think it's
interesting with the whole, likeI, I, I actually agreed with
Doctor Komorowski and Jen on that just because I feel like

(18:30):
there should be a standard, right?
It's like you're getting a raisebecause of these things.
Right. So like, I totally agree with
that, but they never provided that.
They never provided that. So, so the argument, and I guess
the the argument that e-mail made was like, you can't just
make that up now and then try tohold him to.

(18:50):
That hold him accountable? Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, I wish Doctor K maybe had a better response to that then
like, like maybe it's just, you know, it would have been nice if
he OK my I don't know what Doctor K was thinking or what
Jen was thinking about this, butfrom my perspective, I would
have said I just want to track everything that he did.

(19:12):
Let's just let's interview him and document, let him present us
everything he's done. Let him present why he deserves
the raise. We're not trying to not give him
a raise. And I think he implied that.
Some sort of some sort of reasonlike he got a raise because of
this, because of this XYZ, you know, And like, I get it.

(19:34):
Like if you're working with somebody that you find
professional, you know, like, yeah, you think they're
deserving of a raise. But The thing is, is like the
community that doesn't really know him like that, like I'm
sure, I would not doubt that ourSuperintendent is not worthy of
a raise. Of course I'm sure he is.
But again, I think it's just thetransparency aspect.

(19:55):
And this seems like, again, likea tug of war of like, e-mail
always thinks Doctor K has bad intentions.
So like, whenever Doctor K presents something, that's how
e-mail defends it. I think they do that a lot to
each other. Yeah, they go back and forth.
They really do. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
They've done that with Melinda as well, and we'll discuss that

(20:16):
a little bit later from the meeting.
Regarding the Title 9, you know,it feels like there's certain
plugs to be defensive, right? So it's like it's listening to
respond, not listening to understand, right.
And I do think that Doctor K doesn't speak that much.

(20:37):
So that doesn't help the whole situation either.
Like you mentioned, you know, you wish he had said this or
that. I think he implied it and he
just assumes we know that. Yeah, right.
Because he did say, hey, I don'tthink he doesn't not deserve a
raise, but like, can we give himlike a normal review like
everybody else before we do that?
And it's like, well, absolutely.What did you put in place so

(20:59):
that you could review him a yearlater?
Yeah, yeah. All from what we're being told,
nothing. So yeah, you can't really hold
something against someone who's been doing their job and doing
it well because now you want to set a standard.
So moving forward, I completely agree with that too.
It's like, set it up, then let the community know, hey, we came

(21:19):
up with this template. It's gonna change, it's gonna
shift, it's gonna evolve. This is what we're expecting
from him, so that next year we absolutely demand and require a
review before giving him anotherrace.
I mean, and honestly, that should be something simple that
the board can put together. Literally just put together a
list of expectations that you have for the Superintendent and

(21:41):
then rate them on a scale of oneto five.
Yeah, and all the board members do it, scale of one to five, and
then that's it. You can make it anonymous.
And based off of our review, this is where he's at, right?
He scores this out of this. And in this instance, it really
is that simple. Yeah, this isn't.
Like all the teachers getting indealing with the union, this is
one person. I think we can handle that.

(22:04):
But I, I guess that the, I hope that Doctor K, since he did
bring this forward and it got shot down, I hope he, he
presents something now, you know, because it's, you know,
it's like. I would respect that and
appreciate that. Totally.
It's like part of the solution. If this is what you want, this
is what you want to bring forward, then do that,

(22:24):
absolutely. But you need to do it in a
manner that he knows he's being reviewed on that.
So hopefully, hopefully we get some follow through on that.
I don't really know though. Yeah, we'll see.
Let's see what else. The student board member
position that's still not filled.
Our students demanded that they have a voice and a seat on the

(22:48):
dais. And now we're at a point where
nobody wants to apply now because of all the backlash they
feel they're going to experiencewith colleges that they are
going to apply for. That's embarrassing to say the
least. And Steve is the one that
brought up this point. I think where again, we do have

(23:11):
to harp a little bit on the past, is he, along with other
veteran board members, contributed to the polarization
that occurred prior to the new board.
No. Totally, to give that
reputation, essentially there are.
Students, there were lies spun about our district in the

(23:32):
national news, Correct. And Steven Schwartz was one of
the many people who could have corrected the record, who could
have said something but didn't because it met his desired
agenda to recall Joe, Jen and Danny at the time And yeah, and.
That's unfortunate. No.

(23:53):
Totally. I would have appreciated him
positioning it when discussing that he received that letter
regarding the the worry of backlash of hey, I didn't always
contribute to the best reputation for our district and
for our board, but I would like to make a change moving forward.
I think I would have respected that more and him being the one

(24:15):
to present how our students don't want to fill that position
anymore. Yeah, but instead he seems to
think because he brought this forward, it can absolve him of
any responsibility. It does come off that way and.
It's like, no, that's not how this works and that's not how we
view it. Those of us who know what
happened and have been involved and have seen it all, like what
happened was that is totally yes, yeah, that's you.

(24:39):
Contributed to that. Yeah.
And you contributed to that. So as much as you want to try to
point the finger. You got to point it back.
You got to. Yeah, you got to own it.
And that's, that's what it's about.
If we just had more accountability and transparency
in that manner, I feel like we'dalready be making leaps and
bounds because there's so much more respect there.
Even though we don't agree with most of the things he says and

(25:00):
does. I would respect him if he was
like, hey, I didn't. I didn't do the best of
contributing to this narrative, but I want to change it.
And and just so, just so I can, because maybe some of our
listeners don't really know specifically what I'm talking
about in regards to Steven Schwartz specifically, right?
He participated in the recall. There were pro recall things

(25:20):
that happened that were illegal within our district that there
were no repercussions of or for that happened because they were
comfortable in doing it, becausethey knew they had a board
member on their side. The way students feel and have
felt is a result of the rhetoricbeing spewed by pro recall staff

(25:41):
members, including Stephen Schwartz.
So it's like you can't just point the finger.
Like, let's be honest and transparent.
There are also students who probably are conservative and
probably do stand with Doctor K and Chen and, and they are also
afraid. They're maybe they're also
afraid of the backlash from the left.

(26:03):
Yeah, or even their peers. Or even their peers.
My goodness. Can you imagine going to school?
Yeah. Having to answer to the being on
the dais. Or or having to deal with an
activist teacher that heard your.
Opinion. Oh, my gosh.
Why would you want to put yourself through that?
That's fair. Yeah.
So it's it's like he brought it up, but as soon as he heard, as
soon as I heard it, I immediately gave him as much if

(26:25):
not more blame. Right.
Unfortunately, because of the way that he presented it
exactly. And again, the whole point of
what we've been discussing sincewe had have had this new board
is transparency, honesty and accountability.
And part of that is reflecting inward and acknowledging what
they as board members, as veteran board members

(26:46):
specifically, have learned from and understood in retrospect,
hey, that wasn't the best way toapproach that.
And I've learned from it. And they have, I'm not going to
discredit Jen or Doctor K because they have, they have
said that many times in the daisand they actually did it during
this meeting as well. But again, what it comes down to
is if we can't own our stuff, how can we represent an entire

(27:11):
community of people? And I think that's where he kind
of dropped the ball. I appreciate that he presented
this information because I was wondering too, like, when are we
getting the student? This is really lagging.
Well, This is why, right? The behind the scenes.
And that is a political thing too.
They don't want to deal with thepolitics behind it.
Which actually is the perfect segue into the comments that

(27:35):
Jen, Doctor Anderson, and DoctorKay mentioned regarding this.
I do agree with Jen's statementsabout how she understands that
life is messy and that they haven't all done it right.
Again, acknowledging, hey, I'm part of that, but students
should still apply because they need to understand that if they

(27:56):
have aspirations of whatever kind, because it's it's a
political position, no matter how you want to spend it, it's
supposed to be non partisan. But the reality is it doesn't
work that way. Debate as messy as she said.
And that's true. And it actually would strengthen
their skills for the workforce or simply just for their college
classes, right? It is good preparation because
they're dealing with real life, grown up issues in real time and

(28:20):
feeling the weight of it and theresponsibility of it.
And I think it's important for them to still step into it.
As long as we buffer that, and as long as we set a precedence
on how to protect them. You bringing this up makes me
actually look at this completelydifferently now.
Oh really? Like why would Stephen Schwartz
even bring that up? Who?
Who are the adults that are encouraging that thought
process? That's fair, I didn't.

(28:42):
Actually, think of that such a ridiculous perspective, right to
for us to allow children to have, right, because you took
part in your local politics, right, in a contentious
district, right? That's gonna impact it.
Shouldn't your college, right? If that's the case, that sounds
like discrimination. That sounds like discrimination.
So if if that's what Stephen Schwartz believed, then he is

(29:06):
basically saying that certain colleges are discriminatory.
Right. Is that the position that we're
taking as ATV, as a district, asTVUSD?
I didn't think of it. Like, but I didn't think of it
either until you started explaining what a good idea
would be to have these students up there.
Yeah, that's true. So then we are dealing with a
whole other. Yeah, it's, it is.

(29:29):
It is, but exactly. And it is purely activism in our
district, right? That's what that is.
It is. There's no other reason for it.
That's true. Wow.
Yeah, you, we have to operate from the assumption that schools
are going to do the right thing and they're not going to
discriminate. You can't hold it.
That's like holding a child accountable because you came
from the Columbine High School during the shooting, right?

(29:52):
You know, you can't do that. You can't.
So that is interesting. I actually would like to know
more on it now. Whereas before I kind of just
processed it and I was like, OK,we'll find a way to to protect
these students. But now I am curious who is
feeding into this narrative? Yeah, who is?
Who is? That's bizarre, legitimizing
that concern. Yes, and and.
Because that's fear mongering. Yes, it is.

(30:14):
And that's literally the opposite of what we've been
trying to do. Yeah.
So OK. Wow.
We're gonna need to know more. I'm.
Totally. I'm listening to you and I'm
like, hold. On yes, you're right.
This is a great opportunity, whythe fuck are we making the kids
scared to do it? Yes, why they should feel safe
that should be the safest place in the district for them is on

(30:36):
the day it. Almost makes me feel like
because certain people see the children and see their positions
and their perspectives and the ones who are interested in
politics and maybe they're concerned that these people
don't align with me. So we got to keep them away from
this. You know?

(30:57):
I mean, I just, I mean, I'm assuming and I know.
Of course, you're being presumptuous, but it's it makes
you think, yeah. But now we're talking about
this, and now this surfaced and we're like, oh, wait, hold on.
Yeah, what the hell? I didn't even think of that.
That gives it a whole other meaning, and a whole other
demand for more transparency. Yeah, cuz I want, Yeah, we, I
want to know like, who is? Cuz Stephen Schwartz has no

(31:20):
problem legitimizing that fear, Right, Right.
So. So who else is jumping on that
train? Yeah.
You know, cuz as a dad in the district I have AI have a
problem that you're doing that to students.
One, he did mention, yes, and hedid mention that this came from
a teacher, a few teachers that said that students.
Were saying this I'm sure. You're right.

(31:40):
Yeah, I can. I can guess what some of the
schools were for that occurred as well.
No offense, but it's just the facts.
You want to go. Maybe a little.
I appreciated Doctor Anderson, you know, keeping it short and
sweet and just simply saying that we need to do better and be
more professional to create an environment where students feel

(32:02):
safe because like I mentioned previously, that should be the
safest place for them surroundedby adults that are running the
entire district. If you don't feel safe on the
dais, that brings up a whole other realm of insecurity and
being uncomfortable. Because if you don't feel safe
being there, then how safe are you feeling in the classrooms?

(32:26):
If you don't feel OK, you get what I'm saying?
Like it's just this domino effect.
Yeah, imagine Americans saying like, I don't want to run for
government because I'm scared how the world will view me as a
racist. You know what I mean?
It's like, shut up, dude. You know what I mean?
What? What are we talking about?
Yeah. Yeah, I, I really didn't see it

(32:47):
that way until we were talking about it just now and I went,
wait a minute, That's why. These podcasts.
Are so important. We have to, I want to hear, I
want to hear from the public too.
If you guys have any insight on this or maybe a a more
contextualized perception or youare more involved with it and

(33:08):
maybe you've actually heard fromstudents.
I would like to hear more about that because now I have more
questions than I had answers. Before this, well, I think that
we should know like right away, we should know what are the list
of colleges that are going to bediscriminative towards.
And how did they get that information to begin with?
Or was it simply just a negativeidea that came from an adult

(33:34):
that just pretty much poisoned their minds and then made them
nervous and anxious about it andthen they just, it just spiraled
out of control? I would like to think that it's
that not to, to, to rag on our teachers because I love our
teachers. I would rather it be that
scenario than actual colleges orpeople that handle admissions

(33:57):
that said these things because that's a whole other legal.
Issue. And that is something that needs
to be addressed immediately because I don't want any of our
students being worried about being accepted to a freaking
college that they've worked so hard for throughout their their
grade school career to get into.Yeah, for the fear of being

(34:20):
rejected because they participated in a very wonderful
civic duty and process. That's insane because that's
also showing the climate of whatwe've been dealing with and
where it's obviously continuing to go is we are trying to
control a narrative and control people on a massive scale to the
point where they are fearful of doing the right things and

(34:43):
serving their community. That's insane.
So we definitely need to get more on that.
I do want to acknowledge Dr. K stating that it is an honor
because it is. It's an honor and it's a
privilege, and I appreciated himacknowledging that the past two
years has been a cultural battlethat is as genuine as it gets

(35:05):
because that's a very polite, professional way of saying all
the crap that our community has gone through and how polarized
everything has been and how we've been attacked by the
governor on top of it because ofthose very things.
It is a political process and it's good for them to be exposed
to that so that they can also understand how they need to vote

(35:27):
moving forward. Obviously, we have classes for
that, but not all of the kids take those and they don't always
interact with it in a way where they enjoy consuming that type
of interaction and information as they would if they were on
the dais. I did appreciate him saying that
iron does sharpen iron because Ihave noticed, like I mentioned

(35:49):
earlier, it's at a snail pace, but the decorum is shifting.
They're being more professional and in the most like minute and
you know, kind of it just goes over your head if you're not
paying enough attention. They really are trying to help
each other little by little. It just, I think it just gets
clouded by some of the argumentsthat happen or, you know,

(36:10):
sensitive topics. With that being said, more
financials that I thought was worth mentioning.
Again, it's Ed code, so that's why we reviewed giving increases
in salary across the board, right?
Specifically with the Superintendent and then with our
board members. I thought it was a little bit

(36:32):
ironic and hypocritical for Jen to support a silly pay raise,
you know, a $10 and change pay raise every month, but be
harping on all the funds that aren't going to kids and buses
and all of that with the other funds that are being used to
give our Superintendent a raise.So I just was like, that seems a

(36:54):
little, I think it's very misplaced and I don't really see
how there could be a good intention of receiving a small
raise. You know that I think it's like
a 600 bucks a year increase. That's not why we voted for them
to get paychecks. That's just a legality that has
to be in place, either health insurance or a small paycheck.

(37:18):
So I don't see why that's even athing.
You don't need to be compensated, but because it's
the law, you are being compensated to get an increase
in compensation seems really outlandish and wild to me
because you're taking away from our students to do that or
giving someone else who has merit and deserves a raise

(37:39):
versus somebody that was voted into the position, right.
So I, I didn't appreciate that very much, but maybe there's
some context that's missing because that was a very quick
conversation. And obviously it was a four to
one vote. She was the only one that
supported that. But I just don't see how that
would be necessary. That's not why you guys are
there. And if you want to be

(38:00):
substantially compensated, applyfor an administrative position
within the district if you wanted to get paid more.
So that's kind of where I'm at with that one because these
financials are really interesting.
It's it's weird where we where some of the community goes with
having that physical responsibility and
accountability and then that just goes out the window with
other topics. It's really strange to me.

(38:21):
Just be consistent across the board.
Yeah, Yeah, that's true. Yeah.
The, and The thing is, cuz we'rein such a deficit right now, you
know, so it's just, it's, it's tough, you know, and I think
our, our budget is looking better than a lot of the other
districts. Thank God.
You know, but I don't know, we just got to get through this
year and then see what happens next year.

(38:42):
Absolutely. So much can change too,
especially with funding. You know, it was another topic
that was brought up and I think it's it's worth mentioning here
because it's across the nation with dismantling the Department
of Education. I know we'll go into some public
comments later on regarding thatparticular topic, but we have to
remember that we're still abiding not just by federal law,

(39:04):
but state law. So the state is still intact and
there are still things that the state is legally obligated to
provide our school districts. So it shouldn't be a panic
thing, but it's something to consider regarding money.
Yeah, what else do we got? A huge win, I think, for the

(39:28):
community was the very sensitivetopic of supporting AB 89, which
ultimately is just a forward of Title 9, which is federal law.
Obviously, I'm jumping ahead that it was unanimous, which I
think is incredible. And I think that all the board
members deserve some praise and some respect for that because

(39:49):
that's not something I think with past board members and the
previous board that that would have been a unanimous vote.
I could be wrong, but just giventhe climate of everything, I
just don't see that that would have been unanimous.
The public comments regarding this item were very concerning

(40:09):
because. Specifically, some of the things
that were said about oversimplifying a complex issue
really rubbed me the wrong way, because it's not a complex
issue. When we're dealing with two
different genders in the same locker rooms and playing in the
same sport, that's not complex. Boys play with boys and girls

(40:33):
play with girls. End of story.
If there's a concern that it's not as inclusive now, which it
is because biological boys can play with biological boys and
biological girls can play with biological girls.
And I think that's actually to quote Doctor K directly because
he did say that it's not complex.
And even regarding the data thatwas mentioned, how it was quote

(40:55):
UN quote misleading and and the decision to do this was cruel. 1
is too many point blank period. So obviously community members
and constituents aren't going toagree across the board on this
topic, but if there's so much resentment and a feeling of
being victims, why aren't these very people that are saying

(41:19):
these things not presenting A viable solution for inclusivity
for this particular people group?
That's my first question. Yeah, yeah.
It seems like every time they have something to say, it's just
against what's bringing what's being brought forward.
It's like if you're going to complain about it, then present

(41:39):
an alternate solution, but that's not something that they
want to do because the solution that currently doesn't work for
everybody is the only one that works for them, which I think is
inappropriate. I think that, and we were
talking about this a little bit earlier, I think that we really
need to deal with the true issue.
And the true heart of the issue is we are allowing our

(42:01):
biological boys to put on dresses and instantly
classifying them with the women because we don't want them to
deal with the reality of what happens in the men's locker
room. And that's unfortunate.
We're doing our boys an injustice.
We should deal with the bullying.
We should tell our boys, hey, this is Jenna now, not Johnny.

(42:23):
Jenna's going to wear a dress, but she's on the football team
with us. That's her locker.
See you guys out there. And we need to let our society
evolve in that way. We can be accepting and opening
and open in that way. You know, this whole thing with

(42:45):
biological boys competing against girls, and it's deeply
unfair, right? Like that's what Gavin Newsom
said. Like wow, way to switch up Gav.
And The thing is, is like, I don't think that that's really
disputable, right? You know what I mean?
It's like it's, it's common sense.
And we think that we can just put a Band-Aid over.
Well, we want the transgender woman to not be bullied.

(43:10):
Like, no, you don't get to live a life free of judgement from
others. That's.
Not nobody else does. Right.
Nobody else does. So the real thing that needs to
be addressed is making cisgendered boys comfortable
with transgender women. That is the real thing that

(43:30):
needs to be addressed, and the left doesn't want to do it.
And what, what's so unfortunate about it?
What's what the truth is, is that you will only inspire my
dog daughter when there is a transgender athlete playing
first base for the Yankees, for the Padres.
That's the only time, right? That's the visual They'll have
my daughter, my my young daughter doesn't care that

(43:52):
that's a biological boy. She sees a large person out
there with long hair, walking feminine with breasts, playing
baseball. That is the way you elevate
women's sports. If that's the intention, if
that's feeling like that's not the.
Intention. No, it's not.
The intention is to come in and take over and dominate.
And I'm telling you right now, like a lot of the parents, well,

(44:13):
a lot of the people I know, I don't know if they're all
parents, one of them ran for school board and it, and it's so
funny how David Sola spoke to memultiple times.
Follow the law, follow the law. And now California doesn't want
to follow the law. So when our board chooses the
stand with the law, his comment was like, what are we doing?

(44:33):
You guys are way out of line. Oh, so you don't want to follow
the law when you feel like it's violated moral values, But when
the other side of the aisle was living like that, they were
bigots and now you can do it. And now you just want to turn a
blind eye and just tell the board stay in your lane.
Just stay in your lane. No, no, no.
What happened to follow the law?So like.

(44:57):
This is the. Thing, and that's the thing that
frustrates me is like I actuallyhave a daughter that plays
contact sports. I have a daughter that plays
flag football. She plays softball.
These are two sports that if a biological boy joined, I will
not be standing on the sideline while my daughter's playing

(45:17):
third base and a six foot 7 transgender girl is at bat.
Yeah. That will not.
That's not happening, yeah. So the important thing here is
that these boys, these biological boys, these
transgender women girls are competing and they're winning
everything. And then the second place, girl,

(45:38):
look at if you just go, there was a video I seen of this
transgender athlete running track and he smoked.
Smoked. These girls but the girl in
second was smoking everyone elseand it just broke my fucking
heart. It makes me emotional because
like the amount of work that girl probably put in with her

(46:01):
parents, with her dad, with her coaches, waking up early and
running and hitting the gym. Doing everything right.
Every yeah, everything she can and it got stolen from her.
Yep. It tells her she doesn't matter.
It tells our girls they don't totally.
You have to accept this. It tells them we'll accept the
defeat as well. And it's like, no.

(46:21):
And, you know, and I think it's even worse.
I. Think it's even worse.
It's not just telling them they don't matter, it's telling them
that don't forget, men come first.
Right. That's what it's doing.
Right. You know, and it's just, yeah,
I'm sorry, our boys and our girls are not the same.
You can put your son in a dress and that does not bother me.
I will make sure my child isn't bullying your child, right?

(46:43):
But that child is going to be onthe boys team, right?
That's how this works. Yes, Biological male, biological
female. That's it.
End of story. Yeah.
And I think it even got brought up, like, are you going to check
for every birth certificate? It's like, if that's what it
takes, then yes, let's pass policies where we do that.
It's not discriminatory. We're trying to protect.

(47:04):
It's a safety issue, right? These kids aren't safe playing
against a biological male. And we've already seen it.
We've seen cases of it where these these girls get injured.
There was that high school volleyball player that got
spiked in the head and she got like.
She was, I think she got, she's disabled now.
Yeah, she got some serious neck injury or something.
Yeah, that's crazy. How is that OK?

(47:26):
Yeah, that's not a normal, normal injury where something
just unexpected happens between 2 girls.
I also feel like I have less of an issue with it if we're
talking about like, playing chess, right?
Playing pool. It's non contact.
Yeah. That's an intellectual thing at
that point, and that's fine. And I seen an article recently

(47:48):
where these two transgender poolplayers were the finalists in
like some tournament in England or something, you know?
And like, I get it, it should gothose that should, that award
should go to a biological woman.But at the same time, I think a
woman can beat a man in. Poor.
Absolutely. You know.
That's that's strategy, yeah. That has nothing to do with

(48:09):
their physical capabilities, where they're already at a
disadvantage. Totally.
Like if we're talking about swimming, right?
Talking about softball. Yeah, you're gonna get fucking
creamed every time. Yeah, yeah, totally.
It doesn't matter how hard you work like that little girl.
It's like that was another thingthat was mentioned in those
comments on how that's cruel. And it's like, what about the
other side? You don't find that cruel?

(48:29):
That a young girl who's literally put her blood, sweat
and tears and had a huge team behind her to help her make
those goals a reality and your son just comes in and fucking
swipes it all away. How is that OK?
That's cruel as well. We have to be able to see it
from both lenses. And again, where is the solution

(48:51):
for that minority group? Because I'm all for inclusivity
to a point point. That's why we have Co Ed sports,
Co Ed hobbies. So then demand, if it's that
much of A high demand issue where there is a need for
inclusivity because there's a huge group of LGBTQ kids who

(49:14):
want to play a certain sport, advocate for that, bring it to
the board, bring it to the school sites and say hey, we
have enough kids to make this a team.
It'll be a Co Ed thing or a trance thing or however they
want to contextualize it and andlabel it and they're still going
to have those opportunities. We have clubs where we allow

(49:36):
that kind of inclusivity. And not to like poke fun, but
like it's kind of true. Like the the problem with, I
agree with what you're saying, but the problem with that is
like a lot of the people standing on trans rights aren't
athletes, have never been athletes.
They don't. Unfortunately, they don't feel
compelled. That's an afterthought when the
athletic career is not going well.

(49:58):
There have been cases, so this isn't me just blowing smoke.
People have come out and said yeah, I wasn't doing well.
So I switched teams. Yeah.
What? Yeah.
How about just accepting the defeat?
You've given it your all. You're not good enough.
Yeah. Why do you have to make all the
other girls not good enough? And that and.

(50:19):
To suit your ego and the the mental instability that you have
within yourself to achieve that goal in that sport.
And, and I seen somebody talkingabout how like, well, once they
got on hormones, it was no longer fair compared to the
other boys. And it's like, yeah, that's the
point. You either want to be the best

(50:39):
player in the world or you want to be a woman biologically.
Decide which one you want. Exactly.
You can't have both. You can't have both.
It's not how it works 'cause it doesn't work for the other folks
that are staying in their lanes.Yeah, it does.
So why would it work for you? 'Cause you're you're much
larger, your bone structure is different your bone.
Density is. Different yeah, it don't matter

(51:01):
Yep. That the the testosterone you
had until you were 15 was enough, right.
It's enough to bring you throughand correct.
Win a tennis tournament, something a woman's USO.
Yes. You know, So, Yeah, Well, I'm
happy that our board stood with it and Schwartz even voted for
it. So that was.
That's incredible. Yeah, Kudos, Steve, cuz that's

(51:23):
incredible. It just goes to show though,
that not only are we having accountability and transparency,
we're also being able to find that common ground that we have
been working so hard towards as a community, right?
Mending those fences and being able to hear each other out.
And I respect the fact that he was like, I resent this.

(51:45):
There's no solution. And I don't like that our kids
in that particular people group aren't being represented in
this, in this letter specifically, right?
So come up with a solution, maybe ask if you can do a
subcommittee, and if that's not possible, then take all the
concerns of that community and present it to the board and say

(52:07):
we need to have a solution. Here's our thoughts.
Yeah, I'm OK with that. I'm OK with hearing what the
solution is. But we can't continue to
complain and have no solution. We would.
That means that we're just beingpart of the problem and that's
not serving anybody, including the people that feel that
they're no longer being included.
Yeah, and you can't constantly attack somebody who's standing

(52:29):
up for their morals, right, Whenyou choose to never do it
yourself, right? You know what I mean?
I mean, where you stand, where your morals align compared to
their morals are irrelevant at that point.
Exactly. But like, if you're going to
complain, then bring bring an alternative to the table.
Be a part of the solution, yeah.I agree with that.